Middle East

Pro evolution Soccer 2012 PS2

2012-03-09T10:46:00.002-08:00

Pro evolution Soccer 2012
PS2

النسخه الانجليزية

اللعبة عبارة عن ملف ISO
اصدقائي الاعزاء
كل مطلوب منك انك تنسخ اللعبة علي دفيدي
دي نسخة PAL
اللعبة شغالة 10000000000%
انسخها علي سدية ركبها في جهاز PlayStation 2

تحياتي

Single link

http://zero10.net/2936391

OR

http://zero10.net/2936418

OR

http://zero10.net/2936419

Links , 200 MB

HotFile
http://zero10.net/2936382
http://zero10.net/2936383
http://zero10.net/2936384
http://zero10.net/2936385
http://zero10.net/2936386
http://zero10.net/2936387
http://zero10.net/2936388
http://zero10.net/2936389
http://zero10.net/2936390

DuckFile
http://zero10.net/2936249
http://zero10.net/2936250
http://zero10.net/2936251
http://zero10.net/2936252
http://zero10.net/2936253
http://zero10.net/2936254
http://zero10.net/2936255
http://zero10.net/2936256
http://zero10.net/2936257

EnterUpload
http://zero10.net/2936258
http://zero10.net/2936259
http://zero10.net/2936260
http://zero10.net/2936261
http://zero10.net/2936262
http://zero10.net/2936263
http://zero10.net/2936264
http://zero10.net/2936265
http://zero10.net/2936266

Filekeen
http://zero10.net/2936267
http://zero10.net/2936268
http://zero10.net/2936269
http://zero10.net/2936270
http://zero10.net/2936271
http://zero10.net/2936272
http://zero10.net/2936273
http://zero10.net/2936274
http://zero10.net/2936275

FileServe
http://zero10.net/2936276
http://zero10.net/2936277
http://zero10.net/2936278
http://zero10.net/2936279
http://zero10.net/2936280
http://zero10.net/2936281
http://zero10.net/2936282
http://zero10.net/2936283
http://zero10.net/2936284

iFile
http://zero10.net/2936285
http://zero10.net/2936286
http://zero10.net/2936287
http://zero10.net/2936288
http://zero10.net/2936289
http://zero10.net/2936290
http://zero10.net/2936291
http://zero10.net/2936292
http://zero10.net/2936293

i-Filez
http://zero10.net/2936294
http://zero10.net/2936295
http://zero10.net/2936296
http://zero10.net/2936297
http://zero10.net/2936298
http://zero10.net/2936299
http://zero10.net/2936300
http://zero10.net/2936301
http://zero10.net/2936302

JumboFiles
http://zero10.net/2936303
http://zero10.net/2936304
http://zero10.net/2936305
http://zero10.net/2936306
http://zero10.net/2936307
http://zero10.net/2936308
http://zero10.net/2936309
http://zero10.net/2936310
http://zero10.net/2936311

MediaFire
http://zero10.net/2936312
http://zero10.net/2936313
http://zero10.net/2936314
http://zero10.net/2936315
http://zero10.net/2936316
http://zero10.net/2936317
http://zero10.net/2936318
http://zero10.net/2936319
http://zero10.net/2936320

MegaUpload
http://zero10.net/2936321
http://zero10.net/2936322
http://zero10.net/2936323
http://zero10.net/2936324
http://zero10.net/2936325
http://zero10.net/2936326
http://zero10.net/2936327
http://zero10.net/2936328
http://zero10.net/2936329

RapidShare
http://zero10.net/2936330
http://zero10.net/2936331
http://zero10.net/2936332
http://zero10.net/2936333
http://zero10.net/2936334
http://zero10.net/2936335
http://zero10.net/2936336
http://zero10.net/2936337
http://zero10.net/2936338

SendMyWay
http://zero10.net/2936339
http://zero10.net/2936340
http://zero10.net/2936341
http://zero10.net/2936342
http://zero10.net/2936343
http://zero10.net/2936344
http://zero10.net/2936345
http://zero10.net/2936346
http://zero10.net/2936347

SendSpace
http://zero10.net/2936348
http://zero10.net/2936349
http://zero10.net/2936350
http://zero10.net/2936351
http://zero10.net/2936352
http://zero10.net/2936353
http://zero10.net/2936354
http://zero10.net/2936355
http://zero10.net/2936356

UpFile
http://zero10.net/2936357
http://zero10.net/2936358
http://zero10.net/2936359
http://zero10.net/2936360
http://zero10.net/2936361
http://zero10.net/2936362
http://zero10.net/2936363
http://zero10.net/2936364
http://zero10.net/2936365

Need FOR Spessa The Run

2012-03-09T10:43:00.000-08:00

Need for Speed
The Run

Screen Shots

Minimum System Requirement

OS: Windows Vista SP2 or Windows 7
CPU: 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo or equal AMD
RAM: 3 GB
HDD: 18 GB free disk space
Graphics: 512 MB Graphics Memory
DirectX: Version 10

Recommended System Requirements

OS: Windows Vista SP2 or Windows 7
CPU: 3.0 GHz Intel Core 2 Quad or similar
RAM: 4 GB
HDD: 18 GB free disk space
Graphics: 1 GB Graphics Memory
DirectX: Version 10/11

Do a Check whether the game will work on your PC or not
Check the games requirement by this SITE

اللعبة عبارة عن ملف ISO
يتم التسطيب عن طريق برنامج DAEMON Tools

DAEMON Tools

http://zero10.net/1040923
Or
http://zero10.net/2926122
Or
http://zero10.net/2926136

Direct X

http://zero10.net/1040924
Or
http://zero10.net/2926123
Or
http://zero10.net/2926135

Games For Windows Live

http://zero10.net/1040925
Or
http://zero10.net/2926128
Or
http://zero10.net/2926130

++Microsoft Visual C

http://zero10.net/1040926
Or
http://zero10.net/2926125
Or
http://zero10.net/2926132

Open AL

http://zero10.net/1040927
Or
http://zero10.net/2926126
Or
http://zero10.net/2926133

AGEIA PhysX By Nvidia

http://zero10.net/1040928
Or
http://zero10.net/2926127
Or
http://zero10.net/2926131

AGEIA PhysX By AGEIA

http://zero10.net/1040929
Or
http://zero10.net/2926124
Or
http://zero10.net/2926134

RIP
6GB

One Link
http://zero10.net/2958746

Crack Only

RELOADED

http://hotfile.com/dl/135201535/76ab5fa/MaZiKa2daY.CoM.N.F.S.R.Crack.ZOKA.rar.html

RELOADED

14GB

DVD 1
http://zero10.net/2955267

DVD 2
http://zero10.net/2955281

Links , 400 MB

HotFile
http://zero10.net/2955282
http://zero10.net/2955283
http://zero10.net/2955284
http://zero10.net/2955285
http://zero10.net/2955286
http://zero10.net/2955287
http://zero10.net/2955288
http://zero10.net/2955289
http://zero10.net/2955290
http://zero10.net/2955291
http://zero10.net/2955292
http://zero10.net/2955293
http://zero10.net/2955294
http://zero10.net/2955295
http://zero10.net/2955296
http://zero10.net/2955297
http://zero10.net/2955298
http://zero10.net/2955299
http://zero10.net/2955300
http://zero10.net/2955301
http://zero10.net/2955302
http://zero10.net/2955303
http://zero10.net/2955304
http://zero10.net/2955305
http://zero10.net/2955306
http://zero10.net/2955307
http://zero10.net/2955308
http://zero10.net/2955309
http://zero10.net/2955310
http://zero10.net/2955311
http://zero10.net/2955312
http://zero10.net/2955313
http://zero10.net/2955314
http://zero10.net/2955315
http://zero10.net/2955316
http://zero10.net/2955317
http://zero10.net/2955318
http://zero10.net/2955319
http://zero10.net/2955320

أحدث باتشات أسطورة كرة القدم pesedit 2012 الاصدار الثالث

2012-03-09T10:37:00.001-08:00

SCREENS

INFO

= - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - =
New Features
= - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - =

New ball: adidas Comoequa
New boots: adidas adipower Predator, adidas adizero F50, adidas adiPure 11Pro, adidas Copa Mundial, Diadora DD Eleven GX 14, Joma Total Fit, Lotto Fuerzapura II L100, Lotto Futura 100, Nike CTR360 II Elite, Nike MV Superfly III, Nike Tiempo Legend IV Elite, Puma Powercat 1.12, Puma v1.11 i, Puma King Finale
New faces: More than 450 new faces added in faceserver, in total more than 1100 faces in faceserver
New kits: Austria, Brazil, Chile, Classic England, Classic Germany, Classic Netherlands, Czech, Denmark, England, France, Germany, Greece, Las Palmas, Manchester City, Middlesbrough, M?nchengladbach, Murcia, Netherlands, Olympiacos, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Spain, Switzerland, Ukraine, Wales
New scorebaords: ESPN12, Lig TV
New team: Zambia
Selecto Updated switches slightly, now possible to add own stadiums and scoreboards to it
Transfers: Even more tranfers completed
Updated European national teams' squads

التحميل
Mediafire

http://zero10.net/3063238

http://zero10.net/3063239
http://zero10.net/3063240
http://zero10.net/3063241
http://zero10.net/3063242
- = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - =
One Link

Letitbit
http://zero10.net/3063773

Meddling in Africa

2012-03-08T11:00:00.001-08:00

All signs indicate that Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman remains keen on implementing his ministry's strategic priorities as set out from his first day in office, including pouncing on Africa. Lieberman's interest in Africa revives former prime minister Golda Meir's outlook in the 1950s and 1960s. She visited most non-Arab states on the continent. Israel's current intensified moves mainly target the Horn of Africa, which includes Kenya, Sudan, Ethiopia, Eritrea and Somalia.

While the Israeli Foreign Ministry is in theory in charge of Israel's policies in Africa, there is no doubt that the party that is playing the greater role is Mossad. It maintains active agents in many African capitals, as recently revealed by Haaretz newspaper. Assigning Mossad this task is directly connected to this organisation's routine attempts to undermine the national security of Arab states in Africa and on the Red Sea.

Indeed, there is a direct relationship between recent efforts to nurture Israeli-Ethiopian ties and threats by the government of Addis Ababa to re-channel Nile waters to the disadvantage of Egypt and Sudan. According to Israeli sources, the relationship between Tel Aviv and Addis Ababa went to a new level when Tel Aviv showed dexterity in abandoning its former ally Eritrean President Isaias Afewerki for the sake of closer ties with the Ethiopian regime. Israel and Ethiopia have signed many arms deals and are involved in training programmes whereby Israeli military units train Ethiopian forces.

Some make a connection between Tel Aviv's cooperation with Addis Ababa and Ethiopia's victories over Eritrea in battles that took place two years ago. Meanwhile, no one expects Israel or Ethiopia to reveal what may have been planned against Egypt behind the scenes. Lieberman once threatened to destroy Egypt's High Dam. Meanwhile, Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz insists that Egypt is an "enemy state" despite the 1978 Egypt- Israel Peace Treaty.

It is widely known that Israel uses its relations with states and political movements that are hostile to Arab countries to undermine Arab national security, and distract influential Arab states with secondary issues. This way, the role of these Arab states in the Arab-Israeli conflict is curtailed. In a recent and unprecedented admission, Shlomo Nakdimon, adviser to former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, stated that Israel had manoeuvred since the 1950s to strengthen ties with the Kurds in northern Iraq in support of their separatist agenda to undermine the Iraqi regime and influence the priorities of Baghdad. For the same reasons, Israel drew closer to the Shah of Iran as well as the military leadership and secularists in Turkey because of their animosity towards the Arab world. Israel also built an alliance with the Maronites in Lebanon to target Palestinian resistance and Lebanese nationalist movements.

In his book Periphery Alliance, Nakdimon noted that the same reasoning was behind Israel's move to nurture ties with the separatist Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM), whereby they supplied the movement with arms and training. It is also no secret that Tel Aviv encouraged Jewish lobby groups in the US to draft agendas for expatriate Coptic groups, which are then presented to the US Congress and the US administration, specifically to include claims of discrimination and oppression of Copts.

Regarding Ethiopia, there was a time when Eritrean President Afewerki had strong ties with Israel, which had convinced him to undermine the security of Yemen by occupying Yemeni islands in the Red Sea using superior weapons supplied by Israel. But since that time Tel Aviv has felt it more beneficial to nurture relations with Ethiopia -- Afewerki's arch nemesis -- and did not hesitate in cutting the Eritrean president off. In particular, Tel Aviv wants to sidetrack Egypt since it continues to be the major challenge for Israel's regional strategy, as stated by Israel's deputy prime minister and minister of strategic threats in Netanyahu's government, General Moshe Yalon, who previously served as chief of staff of the armed forces.

Israel's interest in the Horn of Africa is not limited to meddling in Egypt's national security by interfering with Cairo's quota of Nile waters, but also serves higher Israeli goals. The Horn of Africa overlooks the straits of Bab Al-Mandab, through which passes 20 per cent of Israel's foreign trade. The growing power of Al-Qaeda and other groups associated with it in the region, especially in Somalia, has encouraged Israel to establish a presence in the area. As a close ally of Israel, Ethiopia's interference in Somali affairs has facilitated Israel's job. There are indications that Israel has used Ethiopia's occupation of large areas in Somalia to give Mossad a foothold.

Zvi Bar expressed a widely held fear in Tel Aviv when expressing concern about the rise of Islam in Africa since it would lead to an anti-Israel atmosphere on the continent. Some analysts believe this is why Israel is redoubling its efforts in the region. When Israel approaches regimes that are in power struggles with Muslim opponents, they encourage them to rely on Israel's experience in confronting Islamic movements. Hence, Israel has exerted much effort in drawing closer to Nigeria, and signed an agreement to supply it with military equipment.

There is also a long list of Israeli interests in Africa that it wants to protect, including controlling oil mining on the continent, whereby Israeli companies -- under European cover -- are in charge of oil exploration in several African countries. Israel has taken great interest in Africa's oil reserves after UN reports confirmed them at more than 80 billion barrels. Israel also mines natural resources in African states, including uranium. In his book With the Power of Science, Israeli nuclear scientist Ariel Bakhrakh revealed that Israel had stolen uranium from African states under the pretence that its scientists were carrying out geological tests.

Third, Africa is a vast market for Israeli products, especially military products. Also, Israel monopolises many industrial and economic sectors in a number of Africa states. For example, Israeli companies have a strong hold on food products in Ethiopia. Finally, producing and exporting diamonds is a major source of revenue for Israel, and these diamonds are mined in Africa.

Historically, Israel has used several tools to strengthen ties with African countries, at times by exporting technical know-how in agriculture and at others through military training, discreetly providing medical treatment for African rulers at Israeli hospitals, and hosting African students at Israeli universities. Israel has not hesitated to participate in military coups in some African states. As confirmed by Yossi Melman, an Israeli commentator on intelligence issues, it is certain that Mossad assisted in coups that took place in Uganda and Zanzibar.

What is remarkable is that Israel is moving freely on the African continent without any Arab reaction. Arab states are failing to utilise the many tools they possess to not only stop Israel's manoeuvres, but more importantly to halt Tel Aviv's efforts to undermine Arab national security

Society must be defended

2012-03-08T10:59:00.003-08:00

For six years, the killing of Amr Abu Setta, one of the leaders of a Palestinian resistance group in southern Gaza, remained a mystery. While there were many tales about how he died, there was consensus that Israeli intelligence was in one way or another behind his murder. The Israeli army accused him of being responsible for the deaths of a large number of occupation soldiers. A few months ago, the mystery was solved.

It became apparent that the person who placed the explosives under Abu Setta's car is Mohamed Ibrahim Ahmed Ismail, a Palestinian working for Israeli intelligence. Ismail detonated the explosives via remote control upon orders from Israeli intelligence, killing Abu Setta and one of his aides. Ismail used his connections with some people in Abu Setta's circle to place the explosives that ended the life of this highly respected leader in Gaza. Ismail confessed to his involvement and received a death sentence from the military court in Gaza. He was executed 15 April.

This was not the only crime to which Ismail confessed. Other than collaborating with occupation forces, he admitted causing the death of a number of wanted Palestinian resistance activists by placing stickers on their vehicles to enable unmanned Israeli planes to target them.

According to a statement of the Ministry of Interior in Gaza, Ismail confessed to plotting the assassination of Hossam Hamdan, the son of prominent Hamas leader Ahmed Hamdan. Israeli intelligence killed the younger Hamdan in another operation. The collaborator also revealed that he assisted the Israeli army by going to Rafah, deep in southern Gaza, to defuse explosives placed by the resistance targeting Israeli forces that had penetrated the area.

This was the first time that an execution was carried out since Hamas began governing Gaza single-handedly in the summer of 2007. Another man, Salama Mohamed Abu Freh, who is a resident of Gabalya, was also executed after confessing to collaborating with the Israeli occupation forces. Abu Freh admitted that upon orders from Israeli intelligence he specialised in monitoring the border between Gaza and Israel and reported anyone who approached it.

Since 2002, Abu Freh began participating in military invasions after receiving military training in the occupied territories in 1984. Abu Freh further revealed that during the last war on Gaza, he participated in the Israeli invasion of Gabal Kashef, the Ottoman region and the recent invasion of eastern Gabalya, where a large number of civilians were killed. In return, Abu Freh received sums of money.

A senior Palestinian security source told Al-Ahram Weekly that the confessions of these two agents revealed the type of missions that are assigned to Israeli agents in Gaza. "Without these agents, occupation forces would not be able to succeed," he asserted. "Accordingly, espionage must be stamped out. We have decided to invest a lot of energy to curtail the damage done by collaborators with Israel." The source revealed that Israel manipulates economic and social conditions, as well as its control of the borders, to convince as many young Palestinians as possible to conspire with it.

Khalil Al-Hayya, a prominent Hamas figure, defended the death sentences asserting that the incumbent government will continue executing Israeli agents as part of its legal mandate. "Society has a right to defend itself against this danger," Al-Hayya argued. "We cannot ignore the issue of agents any longer; they were given an opportunity to mend their ways and rejoin their people. We cannot tolerate this issue anymore." He suggested that the education system should play a pivotal role in shielding young Palestinians from the manipulations of Israeli intelligence.

But lawyer Mustafa Ibrahim criticised the executions as beyond the basic mandate of Palestinian law, explaining that the law states that no execution can be carried out without the approval of the Palestinian president, and this did not happen. Ibrahim believes that the executions could negatively influence national reconciliation because Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas will consider them a signal that Hamas is not serious about ending inter-factional divisions.

Nonetheless, like others who are critical of the execution orders, Ibrahim understands the gravity of the issue of Israeli agents and the need to neutralise them. In fact, harsh measures against collaborators are popular among Palestinians, to the extent that 94 per cent living in Gaza support them. According to the Palestinian Human Rights Centre, Palestinian courts issued 17 death sentences over the past year -- three in the West Bank and the rest in Gaza. Minister of Interior in Gaza Fathi Hammad stated that his cabinet decided to carry out death sentences against Israeli agents regardless of opposition from human rights organisations.

But despite these executions, the Israeli general intelligence agency, the Shin Bet, continues to develop new methods to recruit Palestinians to spy on its behalf. One day before the executions took place, the Gaza Ministry of Interior announced that it uncovered an espionage network that uses Internet websites. It revealed how Israeli intelligence uses the needs of the people under siege to recruit agents, and that the ministry has undertaken a massive awareness campaign to confront this.

Spokesman for the Gaza Ministry of Interior Ehab Al-Ghassan warned against "falling into the trap of collaboration through the misuse of social Internet websites such as Facebook, Twitter and others." Al-Ghassan stated that Israel uses these websites to gather information about citizens and blackmails them into becoming agents. "Unfortunately, some citizens write everything about themselves on these websites, which include all their circles of friends and family, giving the occupation a wealth of information for free," he said.

Al-Ghassan continued that according to the security apparatus it is apparent from monitoring the activities of the Shin Bet and the confessions of agents that Israeli intelligence uses social websites extensively to recruit agents. Among its methods is "easily accessing these websites and gathering information, added to what intelligence they already have, and then blackmailing their targets and attempting to recruit them." The spokesman added that, "the target feels the Israelis know everything about him and quickly complies out of fear that they will retaliate against him with the information they have.

Sometimes, the Israelis do not directly recruit agents but obtain information surreptitiously. Some Gazans have reported that Israeli intelligence have called their landlines and cell phones using overseas numbers, posing as researchers from international or Palestinian research centres overseas, polling them about sensitive security issues pertaining to domestic Palestinian security.

Gamal Sarha, 28, from Al-Nossayrat Refugee Camp in central Gaza told the Weekly that he was surprised to receive a call recently from someone claiming to be from an Arab research centre based in London. The caller quizzed him about resistance movements and how Palestinians view them, which made Sarha certain that the caller was connected to the Israeli intelligence. One question asked was: "What would you do if resistance fighters stood by your house, would you tell them to move away or protect them?"

Another young man said that a woman speaking Arabic called claiming to be from an agency in the West Bank, and wanted him to respond to a questionnaire over the phone. All the questions revolved around the resistance and how the people respond to it; he refused to answer the questions after suspecting that the caller was connected to the Israeli intelligence.

All signs indicate that despite the fierce campaign underway against Israeli collaborators, Israel's intelligence apparatus is determined to continue developing new methods and tools to acquire vital information about the Palestinian resistance. This means that the issue of Israeli agents will remain on the Palestinian political and social agenda for a long time to come.

Whistling in the wind

2012-03-08T10:58:00.004-08:00

The anger was clear on Ahmed El-Geshi's face as he listened to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas explaining on Palestinian TV why his government had postponed voting on the Goldstone Report.

"I can't listen to these lies anymore," El-Geshi said, turning off his television. "We've been waiting for him to say something new, but it's the same old broken record. He refuses to take responsibility for the crime of delaying the Goldstone Report. He will not act to finalise a comprehensive national reconciliation deal."

Disappointment that Abbas's speech betrayed a lack of will to achieve reconciliation was widespread. Political analyst Nehad El-Sheikh Khalil cited several portions of the speech which he said demonstrated that Abbas was "not serious" about ending inter-Palestinian divisions. These included the statement that his only goal in entering dialogue was to hold legislative and presidential elections and an allusion to his hope that elections would result in toppling Hamas from power in Gaza.

"When Abbas attacks Hamas and talks about the 'emirate of darkness' in Gaza, it is clear any reconciliation agreement will not end internal strife," argues Khalil. "Abbas believes elections will remove Hamas from power and therefore he is keen on holding elections." He told Al-Ahram Weekly it was "regretful" Abbas had attempted to explain Palestinian anger following the Goldstone incident as a conspiracy by Hamas.

"This shows that the man does not realise the magnitude of his mistake."

Khaled Meshaal, head of Hamas's Political Bureau, blamed the Palestinian leadership for the failure to reach a comprehensive national reconciliation accord. In an address to the Golan Forum in Damascus on Sunday, Meshaal said the leadership of the Palestinian Authority (PA) was incapable of signing a national reconciliation agreement because of its vulnerability to Israeli and US blackmail. He added that the PA remains unable to release a single political detainee without clearance from General Keith Dayton, US security coordinator to the PA and the effective head of the security apparatus in Ramallah.

Dawoud Shehab, spokesman for the Islamic Jihad Movement (IJM), argues the Abbas's address has further eroded any ability to make decisions on a national level. He described Abbas's reasoning as "baseless", and called on the president to apologise to the Palestinian people for his actions.

Taher Al-Nunu, spokesman for Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh's Hamas-run government in Gaza, told the Weekly that Abbas's speech was a blow to Egyptian efforts to reconcile Palestinian factions. "His words do not demonstrate that he is ready for reconciliation or its requisites," said Al-Nunu.

Abbas's address came after Hamas and Cairo agreed to the postponement of a reconciliation deal. An informed Palestinian source told the Weekly the Egyptians agreed to delay the agreement until after Eid Al-Adha in December. Egypt explained to Hamas it would not be possible to reach agreement by 26 October given the anger among Palestinians over the Goldstone episode. At the same time, Cairo rejected Hamas's suggestion to delay for only a few days so as not to appear as if Hamas is in control of the national dialogue.

According to the source Egypt wants Hamas to sign the agreement without objecting to any clauses, and agree to hold elections on 28 June 2010. Hamas has said it will consider the suggestions.

Ghazi Hamad, a leading Hamas official and the point man in contacts between the group and the Egyptian government, said that Hamas is committed to signing a reconciliation deal regardless of the Goldstone crisis. Hamad warned, however, about over-optimism in ending divisions with a stroke of a pen. He described the Egyptian-brokered document as a skeleton agreement, allowing each party to interpret it in a way that best serves its interests.

"The deal contains broad outlines, leaving it open to further negotiation to agree on how to move forward," Hamad told the Weekly. Putting pen to paper does not necessarily mean turning over a new leaf, he noted, citing several problematic issues, including the creation of a security force in charge of law and order in Gaza. "After the signing ceremony is over, several rounds of talks will be needed. There's also the issue of whether the security overhaul will include the West Bank, as per Hamas's request, or only the Gaza Strip, as demanded by Fatah."

The proposal to create a multi-factional committee to administer Gaza until elections are held is, says Hamad, devoid of detail, stipulating neither the mandate of the committee nor its relationship with Haniyeh's government in Gaza or with President Abbas. He believes the article pertaining to elections could alone derail the agreement since it remains contingent on the good will of the parties. It stipulates holding legislative, presidential and Palestinian National Council (PNC) elections "although it is almost impossible for the parties to agree on the mechanism of electing the PNC because of the large numbers of Palestinian refugees around the world."

Hamad doubts any reconciliation agreement will be worth the paper it is printed on because each party will only try to implement aspects that serve their own interests.

Abbas will attempt to push for legislative and presidential elections in the hope that although the people are critical of him and his aides, the siege of Gaza will convince voters not to re-elect Hamas. Meanwhile, Hamas will seek to delay the elections, and, together with other factions, demand a revision of the PA's political agenda, especially regarding negotiations with Israel in light of continued settlement building. It will also make other demands which it knows Abbas will reject.

The general sense among Palestinians is that any end to divisions is contingent on regional developments which might change the balance of internal Palestinian politics.

Meanwhile, on Tuesday, the Israeli daily Haaretz reported that Washington had informed Egypt that it rejects any reconciliation agreement sponsored by Cairo between Fatah and Hamas. George Mitchell, US Envoy to the Middle East, was said to have told Egyptian Chief of General Intelligence Omar Suleiman and Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul-Gheit that a reconciliation deal between Fatah and Hamas would undermine efforts to reach a political settlement of the conflict with Israel. Haaretz added that Mitchell stressed any future Palestinian government must comply with Quartet conditions, which includes rejecting resistance to occupation and recognition of agreements already signed between the PA and Israel.

Al-Jazeera reports that the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) will hold a special session in Geneva, as requested by the PA, in which the Goldstone Report is expected to be addressed. The session is expected to begin today. The PA request was co-sponsored by 18 member states of the UNHRC: Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Gabon, Indonesia, Jordan, Mauritius, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Senegal

Back to square one

2012-03-08T10:58:00.000-08:00

Head of Israel's Mossad Meir Dagan leant on a small staff in the company of his top aides as they waited in the room that opens into the Defence Ministry office of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu for permission to enter. This scene used to repeat itself every Thursday at noon, but recently the meetings between Netanyahu and Dagan have intensified, with them now meeting as often as three times a week, the Israeli media reports. One reason for their hectic schedule is that Dagan is in charge of coordinating Israeli policy on the Iranian nuclear issue, and is required to present evaluations of Israeli responses to the Iranian nuclear programme. Yet the increase in the number of meetings also reflects how seriously Israel is taking Iran's nuclear endeavours, a fact that was expressed in Netanyahu's recent speech at Bar-Ilan University, where he said that the Iranian nuclear threat was currently the top threat facing Israel.

Despite the apparent satisfaction among Israeli intellectuals and media professionals over the protests that have followed the presidential elections in Iran, Israeli decision-makers have warned of their possible consequences, and Israeli strategists agree that the election of Mir-Hussein Mousavi as Iran's president would have formed an even more serious threat for Israel than Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's rule. Mousavi's rise, they argue, would lead to toppling the mounting international pressure currently placed on Iran to stop its nuclear programme. Israel's second largest paper Maariv has reported top Defence Ministry officials as saying that it would be difficult for Israel to justify attacking Iranian nuclear facilities if Mousavi became Iran's president, even though Israel's decision-makers concur that Mousavi wouldn't differ from Ahmadinejad with regard to continued interest in the Iranian nuclear programme.

To a great extent, what's worrying Israel about the Iranian nuclear programme is the fear that the Israeli public has of it. Many Israelis tie their continued residency in Israel to developments in the Iranian nuclear programme, and the angry response of Netanyahu's government to a public opinion survey published by Israeli papers late last month is understandable -- about a quarter of Israelis say they will leave the country if Iran succeeds in developing nuclear arms. This survey tore down the myths upon which Zionism is based and which stress the spiritual, historical, and religious ties between the Jews and this land. Now many in Israel are raising difficult questions over these myths, and a quarter of them say they'll abandon the country if a neighbouring state develops nuclear arms.

As Israeli public opinion polls suggest, the number of those wanting to flee Israel would increase if Iran actually did develop nuclear arms. And these poll outcomes also confirm the fears expressed by former Israeli defence minister General Ephraim Sneh, who said two years ago that Israel would fall apart on its own accord if Iran developed nuclear arms because most of the Jews would simply leave Israel. These polls also explain why Israel considers any neighbouring Arab or Islamic state developing nuclear arms to form an existential threat.

Of course there are also other reasons why Israelis are terrified of the possibility of Iran or any other Islamic or Arab country in the region developing nuclear arms. Decision- makers in Tel Aviv are trying to keep silent over these reasons so as not to increase motivation for joining the nuclear arms race. Yet according to comments Israeli security experts made before the Knesset's foreign affairs and security committee, there is a list of reasons for the concern Israel is trying to hide over the possibility of Iran or any Arab country in the region developing nuclear capacities, even if they are considered moderate countries. These reasons include the following:

Firstly, should an Arab or Islamic state in geographic proximity to Israel develop nuclear capacities, that would greatly decrease Israel's ability to strike at the Palestinian resistance. Israel would then have to take into consideration the possibility of a confrontation in which the use of nuclear arms are a threat. These fears were expressed in a report submitted by Israeli military intelligence to the government a year ago. Netanyahu, for example, held that Israel wouldn't have been so bold in its last war on the Gaza Strip and conducted such wide-scale operations of killing and destruction if the Arabs had possessed nuclear arms. As such, decision- makers in Israel hold that the development of Arab or Iranian nuclear arms would allow the Palestinian resistance a greater margin of flexibility and an effective strategic reach. This would in turn increase the threat to Israeli security while Tel Aviv would remain incapable of firmly responding.

Secondly, Israeli strategist Shalom Gutman holds that Iran and the Arabs developing nuclear arms would undermine Israel's role in the region which, he argues, benefits the West. Israel has always claimed that the West and especially the United States are not doing it any favour by supporting it with arms, for it plays the role of the region's "police force" that disciplines "outlaws". This role was recognised by former Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, who several years ago told the American CNN network that "you Americans are not doing us a favour by offering us aid, for Israel plays the role of a permanent American jet carrier in the Middle Eastern region." It is certain that if Iran or the Arabs developed nuclear arms, Israel would lose this role, for the arms of the "police" would become outdated and wouldn't frighten anyone anymore, at which point Israel would need the West rather than the other way around. Former defence minister Shaul Mofaz warns that the Arabs' success in developing nuclear arms would allow them to develop relations with the West on different bases than those currently governing Western-Arab relations.

Thirdly, Arab development of nuclear arms would make Israel's traditional arsenal lose its value in future military confrontations. It would also harm many of the Israeli security institutions whose accomplishments have become legendary, in particular Mossad, which is currently charged with undermining Arab attempts to develop nuclear arms. This mission is based on Menachem Begin's principle established following the 1981 bombing of the Iraqi nuclear reactor by which Israel is obliged to prevent "enemy states" from developing nuclear arms by any means, including attacking facilities that are suspected of being part of future plans to develop nuclear arms.

Additionally, Israel would be economically strained by the need to allocate a large budget for building shelters and facilities to deal with the outcomes of a war in which nuclear arms are used. Despite the exorbitant cost of building such shelters, the Israeli government would be forced to do so in order to reassure residents and convince them to stay. It knows how terrified the public is of Arabs and Muslims developing nuclear arms and that their doing so might result in a mass exodus from Israel.

And finally, much of Israel's elite hold that the development of nuclear arms would put an end for good to the most important pillar of the Zionist project, that being Jewish immigration to Palestine. If a large percentage of Jews living in Palestine want to leave, it is almost certain that Jewish immigration to Palestine will end.

All of this reveals how fragile the Zionist entity is despite its military and technical superiority and its victory over the Arab armies. None of these achievements prevent Israel from sensing that it could return to square one at any moment. Changing the nature of the conflict is largely dependent on the ability of the Arabs to develop nuclear arms. Even those who believe in reaching a political settlement with Israel must also realise that without a significant change in the strategic power balance, Israel won't ever be convinced to change its current positions on a settlement to the conflict

Birth of a new alliance

2012-03-08T10:47:00.005-08:00

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk was surprised when his Greek counterpart George Papandreou cut short their meeting at government headquarters in Warsaw last December, asking if he could have a private room to make "important calls" with his cabinet in Athens. When Tusk asked about the emergency, Papandreou's aides told him that Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has asked for Greece's assistance in putting out the wildfires ablaze on Mount Carmel surrounding Haifa, and that the Greek premier was keen on sending help.

This is perhaps one of the few times when the leader of a country stopped a meeting with another world leader merely to oversee coordination of assistance to a third country. But the incident demonstrates the immense transformation in the relationship between Israel and Greece, as well as other Balkan states, despite the fact that Greece was the last European country to establish diplomatic ties with Israel, in 1992.

Ironically, Greece is the European state that saved Israel from the repercussions of Freedom Flotilla II setting sail towards the shores of Gaza, and blocking a nightmare scenario that Tel Aviv feared -- namely a confrontation between the Israeli navy and activists aboard the vessels. It is a scenario that Netanyahu's government tried to avoid at all cost. The irony is that until very recently, Greece was one of the strongest advocates of Arab causes among European states and supportive of the Palestinian people. In fact, support of Palestinian resistance against occupation was a uniting issue even among sparring political players in Greek politics.

The Greek Socialist Party, Pasok, especially under the leadership of Giorgios Papandreou and Andreas Papendreou -- the incumbent prime minister's grandfather and father, respectively -- who were also prime ministers, was the strongest supporter of the Palestinian cause. The late Palestinian president was a personal friend of Andreas Papandreou.

Since the beginning of June 2010, Israeli- Greek ties were significantly transformed and culminated in a declaration by Papandreou and Netanyahu, during the latter's visit to Athens a few months ago, that the two governments have agreed to cooperate in the fields of intelligence and security. They decided that a joint committee would coordinate strategic cooperation, and to expand cooperation in political and economic fields. This partnership was quickly translated into critical strategic services for Israel, such as allowing the Israeli Air Force to conduct extensive war games over Greek territories. So far, Israel has held two such military exercises, in 2010 and 2011.

The agreement came at a difficult time for Israel, since it loosely followed a decision by Turkey to ban the Israeli Air Force from using Turkish airspace for military exercises in response to the events of Freedom Flotilla I at the end of May 2010. Israel's small geographic size required it to seek Turkey's assistance to hold important air exercises; especially that Israel's leadership at the time was plotting to attack Iranian nuclear facilities as a top option in dealing with the Iranian nuclear programme. In recognition of the importance of ties between the two sides, Israel appointed a veteran diplomat, Arye Mekel, as ambassador in Athens -- he is known in Tel Aviv as one of the best experts on international and diplomatic relations.

Turkey, once one of Israel's closest allies, is the archenemy of Greece, which is why leaders in Tel Aviv and Athens took the opportunity to forge new bonds amongst themselves. The Israelis were looking for alternatives to make up for losses in military cooperation between Ankara and Tel Aviv, especially air exercises, intelligence cooperation, arms deals, etc. Athens found opportunity in these developments to use its relations with Israel to approach the critical economic crisis overwhelming Greece.

Israel realised the potential of strong ties with Greece and their strategic rewards for the Zionist entity, so it manipulated the hostile history between Turkey and Greece by emphasising the importance of developing relations between Tel Aviv and Athens to confront Turkish "ambitions". Israeli researcher Abirama Golan states that Israeli leaders frequently pointed out to Greek officials what Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu wrote in his book Strategic Depth as proof of Erdogan's ambition of reincarnating the Ottoman Empire in modern times and with new tools. Also, that Davutoglu's book is proof of the neo-Ottoman attempt to recover the country's former influence.

The Israelis do not hesitate to use historic hostilities rooted in the era when Greece and other Balkan states came under Ottoman rule for hundreds of years. Israeli Ambassador to Bulgaria Noah Gal-Gendler admits that Israel focuses on the historic and cultural background as an incentive to encourage all Balkan states to cooperate with the Zionist entity. It also relies on Islamophobia in Europe to build bonds on new foundations with these countries.

Meanwhile, Papandreou realised that EU assistance would not be enough to save Greece from economic catastrophe, and that it needs to increase foreign investment into the country. His government exerted great efforts to convince foreign firms to invest in Greece, as Israel's leadership scrambled to find a way to prevent Freedom Flotilla II from sailing to Gaza. If Israel were to use military force again to halt the convoy it would further harm Israel's already damaged image on the world stage and also hurt ties with countries whose nationals would be aboard the vessels in solidarity with the Palestinians.

Israel used the Greek economic crisis to serve its own interests. Netanyahu's government consulted with major Jewish organisations in the US to manipulate Greece's dire economic conditions for Tel Aviv's benefit. Netanyahu's office and the leaders of major Jewish organisations in the US agreed that a delegation of organisation representatives would head to Athens to meet with Papandreou, and promise him that these organisations would work on convincing US companies and Jewish businessmen to invest in Greece. In return, Greece would prevent Freedom Flotilla II from sailing from Greek ports. It was a done deal; the Greek government said that its decision to ban the ships from sailing out of its ports was based on Greece's national security.

Washington's official position and that of the UN secretary general that are firmly against Freedom Flotilla II sailing to Gaza also played a role in Greece's decision. Meanwhile, Netanyahu informed Papandreou that Israel could help Greece in overcoming the economic crisis by encouraging hundreds of thousands of Israeli tourists to visit Greece instead of Turkey -- a previously favourite destination for Israeli tourists. Netanyahu told Papandreou that there are 400,000 Israelis looking for holiday destinations and suggested promoting joint tourism packages to Tel Aviv and Athens.

One of the reasons why Greece is developing relations with Israel is its need for Washington's support in its conflict with Turkey regarding the future of Cyprus, and its supposition that cooperating with Israel would improve its standing with the US. While the focus has been the dizzying improvement in Greek-Israeli relations, in reality most Balkan states are now very interested in nurturing ties with Israel and are competing amongst themselves to offer the Zionist entity strategic services.

Bulgarian Prime Minister Boyko Borisov visited Israel a few months ago and proposed to Netanyahu that Israel's air force should exercise in Bulgarian airspace. Rather unusually, Borisov also initiated a meeting with the chief of the Mossad at the time, Meir Dagan, and offered security and intelligence cooperation with Israel. The Bulgarian prime minister also invited Dagan to visit Sofia and allowed Bulgarian newspapers to publish photos of his meeting with the Mossad official -- unheard of coverage for any Mossad chief's visit to a foreign country. Naturally, Borisov wanted something in return. He asked Israel to help develop Bulgaria's advanced technology industry and receive a percentage of Israeli tourists who had previously travelled to Turkey.

Closer ties between Israel and Greece and Bulgaria are also noticed in Romania, which had preceded Greece in allowing Israel to use its airspace for military exercises. But cooperation ended after an Israeli helicopter exploded over Romania one year ago, killing several Israeli pilots. Meanwhile, Slovenia, Croatia and Macedonia have also signalled their interest in improving relations with Israel.

It seems likely that Balkan states will support the Israeli-US position in rejecting the request by the Arab League to allow the Palestinian state membership in the UN in September

Out in the cold

2012-03-08T10:47:00.002-08:00

Awatef Al-Assar filled bags of sand to hold down the sides of the tent in a failed attempt to stabilise it. Her children still remember how hard she tried to hold on to the pole of the tent that was sheltering her and her family last winter as the winds blew hard to uproot it. Meanwhile, trying to help, her husband was shaking with cold and fear from the thunder outside. Rainwater swamped the tent as their efforts failed and the tent collapsed on the heads of the children. The entire family was forced to seek refuge at a nearby house.

Like thousands of others, Al-Assar's home was destroyed during Israel's war on the Gaza Strip. Even now she fears a repeat of the same punishing experience of last winter. Her neighbour, Hajja Fatma Hamdan, who is at the same refuge camp with her family, remembers how she was surprised by the amount of rain filling up the tent while her family slept. They awoke startled, and all they could do was abandon all their possessions and seek shelter elsewhere.

The residents of the refuge camp, which lies close to Beit Lahia, said that uprooted and torn tents resulted in many health problems for the homeless, especially children. The young suffer from vomiting, diarrhoea and stomach cramps. Nehaya, who was widowed when her husband was killed during the war, said that for a long time she was continuously taking her children to a clinic in Beit Lahia for severe cases of colds.

As winter approaches, the occupants of this camp -- like those in other camps -- complain that there are not enough warm blankets. Suleiman Al-Masri, whose home in Beit Hanoun in northeastern Gaza was destroyed, said his family of 15 only received seven blankets from a charity organisation. Nine months after the end of the war, many homeless families still return to their destroyed homes in search of more blankets and warm covers under tons of rubble. Most of these attempts end in failure, either because everything inside is scorched or is buried too deep in the debris.

These families have no refuge except the camps set up by the Hamas government, UNRWA or charities working in Gaza. Camps for those who lost their homes have become widespread in Gaza. In fact, camps were constructed in every area destroyed during the war.

While those whose homes were completely demolished during the war suffer the winter cold, those whose homes were not completely obliterated during the assault also suffer. Windowpanes need to be replaced in many homes to block the bitter cold of winter, but because of the siege the supply of glass is limited and only available via smuggling. This has raised the price of glass unreasonably. The windows of Ghassan Abu Samha's family home, located in Al-Maghazi Refugee Camp in the centre of Gaza, were destroyed by the Israeli onslaught. The eight members of his family will be exposed to the winter chill as the cold season approaches and no repairs have been possible.

Abu Samha told Al-Ahram Weekly that he could not afford to repair the windows with the available glass, which is of poor quality anyway. "It costs 2,500 shekels [$700] to repair, which is a huge sum for me," he continued. "I have no other choice but to cover the windows with plastic which doesn't cost more than 100 shekels." Abu Samha's 10- year-old son Ahmed remembered how he could hardly sleep last winter because of the plastic on his bedroom window. Nonetheless, using plastic to cover broken windowpanes has become the common remedy for many families in Gaza.

Meanwhile, hundreds who live on the border between Israel and the Gaza Strip, and whose homes are intact, have decided to leave out of fear of being bombed by Israel. They feel especially vulnerable because their homes are located opposite Israeli army bases on the demarcation line.

Zaidan Sarar, who lives in Om Al-Gamal on the border, is one of those who chose to leave their home and move to a rented apartment out of fear of the Israeli army. Sarar moved to an apartment block in Deir Al-Balah and abandoned his home, telling the Weekly he preferred spending all his income on rent rather than risk his safety. "When I recalled the corpses of children who were killed in the last war, I decided to do anything so my children don't suffer the same fate," he said. "This is why I sought to rent an apartment and leave my home which I spent all my life's savings to build."

Other families are grappling with overcrowding after opening their doors to homeless families. Gamal Al-Masri, 29, waits until night before returning to his home in Al-Nosayrat Refugee Camp in the centre of Gaza. Al-Masri's home currently accommodates his parents and younger siblings who sought him out after their home in Al-Maghazi Camp, east of Al-Nosayrat, was obliterated in the last war in Gaza. Al-Masri, who is married with five children, told the Weekly that he tries to spend as much time outside the house as possible because his three-bedroom home now houses 17 people. As winter approaches, his ability to stay out with co-workers or neighbours is diminishing, but he is still unable to live in the overcrowded house. Al-Masri's biggest problem is a shortage in warm covers to shield everyone from the harsh winter cold.

Al-Masri is not the only one who was obliged to take in his family after the Israeli army destroyed their homes during the war. In fact, he could be considered luckier than most who have had to house many more family members because of the war. Adel Sala, 43, had no choice but to take in two of his brothers' families after the Israeli army destroyed their homes in two separate air attacks. With 25 people now living in his four-bedroom house in Al-Qarara village, each room houses one family while the three men sleep in the fourth room. Sala admits that the living conditions are very difficult, complicated and awkward. For example, going to the bathroom requires prior scheduling, while he and his brothers go to the mosque for ablutions to avoid any embarrassment.

The scenes of hardship this winter are endless, not least of the children whose homes were demolished and had to move far away from their areas of residence. Now they must commute for long distances to reach their schools and also lack sufficient winter clothing to protect them against the bitter winter cold

Hopelessness takes hold

2012-03-08T10:46:00.002-08:00

Hopelessness takes hold

While insults across the Palestinian rift continue to be traded, ordinary Palestinians see the national cause suffer at a time otherwise ripe for international solidarity, writes Saleh Al-Naami

Jamal Hussein, 39, couldn't find the words to console his wife when her hopes of leaving the Gaza Strip were dashed. They were supposed to travel to a hospital in Jordan for a procedure that would put an end to 15 years of suffering due to her inability to conceive. Hussein is a teacher in a Gaza City school and was hoping to take advantage of the summer holiday to have the procedure done in mid-July. Until 7 July, he had hoped that an agreement putting an end to the Palestinian domestic rift would be signed, and that this would lead to the Rafah Crossing being reopened as Egyptian officials had promised. "Following the close of the sixth dialogue round, it became clear that it was impossible for the two sides to reach an agreement, and that as a result my wife and I would have to wait another year hoping that conditions improve and that we'll be granted an opportunity to have this procedure done," he told Al-Ahram Weekly.

Hassan Al-Zari, 28, lives in Deir Al-Balah City in the central Gaza Strip. He holds a bachelor's degree in civil engineering, and following immense efforts won a grant to a Canadian university to pursue his graduate studies. Last month he tried to leave the Gaza Strip to travel via Cairo airport but he was unable to cross the border into Egypt. Officials in the Gaza Strip's Interior Ministry say that priority is given to individuals suffering from serious, chronic diseases, and to those with residency abroad. Travel is permitted for cases such as Hassan's only during a very limited period in which Egypt allows the border to be reopened. "I can hardly believe this," Al-Zari told the Weekly. "Obtaining a grant to study in a Canadian university was my life's dream, and now that it's been granted, the crossing has become my barrier."

Inshirah Ribah, 41, is a Palestinian who was born and raised in Libya and who married a Palestinian teacher from the Gaza Strip who was working in Libya. She now lives in Al-Maghazi Refugee Camp in the central Gaza Strip and hasn't seen her family in five years. In late July her youngest sister is going to marry a Palestinian living in Egypt, and although she wants to attend the wedding it seems impossible that she will be able to due to the crossing's closure. Like so many others, Inshirah blames her situation on the continued Palestinian domestic rift that grants external parties justification for besieging the Gaza Strip and isolating it from the rest of the world.

Lack of hope that the domestic rift may end and unity be restored has become a dominant feature of commentary in Gaza. Palestinians no longer hold any hope that the next dialogue rounds will produce a breakthrough leading to a final agreement. Mohamed Al-Shamali, 46, owns an electrical appliance store in the Al-Ramal neighbourhood of Gaza City, but since he can't stand sitting in his shop as long as there are no customers at the door, he closes it and goes to exchange sarcastic quips with the owners of neighbouring shops instead. One of these joked as he exhaled cigarette smoke, "All that remains is for the states of Gaza and the West Bank to recognise each other, exchange ambassadors, and begin signing commercial, trade and other bilateral agreements."

Indeed, the gap between the two sides' positions has widened and the war of insults between them remains ongoing. Spokesperson for the security agencies in the West Bank Adnan Al-Damiri says that Hamas has spent millions of dollars to establish a security apparatus in the West Bank. He says that West Bank security agencies seized $8.5 million illegally entering the Palestinian territories over the last five months, in addition to large caches of arms and explosives in Nablus, Hebron and Qalqilya.

Hamas figure Ayman Taha says that such statements are an "attempt to justify striking at the movement and doing away with it, and are evidence of the West Bank security agencies trying to make the national dialogue fail." In a statement to the Weekly, Taha said that the funds Al-Damiri had spoken of belonged to charitable organisations that "support the families of martyrs and prisoners, the orphans and the weak. These kinds of measures make these families' situations further deteriorate."

Taha says these measures have come at a time when the Salam Fayyad government is pursuing the resistance, arresting resistance fighters and seizing weapons. He holds Al-Damiri's comments as an example of "fabricating lies aimed at justifying the failure of the dialogue and granting excuses for continued targeting of Hamas in the West Bank," although he also believes that efforts to do away with Hamas will fail. Taha says that talk by the Fayyad government and its security agencies of Hamas planning a coup in the West Bank sounds like a "cracked record", and he questions: "If the Palestinian Authority [PA] is pursuing Hamas activists because they are planning a coup, then why are Islamic Jihad activists also being pursued?" He believes Hamas is being targeted due to its role in the resistance.

Deputy speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) Hassan Khureisheh has revealed that President Mahmoud Abbas has suggested that Hamas mandate five ministers to participate in a prospective national accord government, on condition that they represent their personal points of view and not the political views of Hamas. In a statement to the Weekly, Khureisheh clarified that Abbas made this offer during his recent meeting with PLC Speaker Aziz Duweik in Ramallah, and that he asked Hamas to name five ministers capable of adopting positions different to those of Hamas. They would have to accept the conditions stipulated by the Quartet, most prominently commitment to the agreements signed by the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), recognition of Israel, and renouncement of resistance on the basis of it being terrorism. Abbas justified his request by saying that only a government of this colour would be capable of lifting the siege on Gaza and overseeing its reconstruction.

Khureisheh says that during the meeting Abbas refused to enter the argument between Fatah and Hamas over Duweik being the speaker of the PLC following statements of PLC Hamas bloc leader Azzam Al-Ahmed, who said that the bloc no longer considers Duweik speaker. Khureisheh also says that Abbas denies that the security agencies have arrested anyone on the basis of their political and organisational affiliations, but rather only due to their possession of arms and "political money".

Abbas stresses that he has issued orders for no one to be mistreated during their detention or interrogation. According to Khureisheh, he and Duweik have confirmed to Abbas that these orders had been issued, but that the security agencies simply don't follow them. "We have told Abbas that most of those released from PA prisons in the West Bank have shown signs of being severely tortured." Khureisheh is pessimistic about the dialogue succeeding, saying that the dispute between Fatah and Hamas is not limited to the political programme but has grown to threaten personal interests in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Action and reaction has become the leading feature of relations between the Fatah and Hamas authorities.

It is ironic that the prospects for Palestinian dialogue have plummeted at the time Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has restated impossible conditions for agreeing to the establishment of a Palestinian state. He has again stipulated that the Palestinians recognise Israel as the state of the Jewish people, that they agree to solve the issue of refugees outside the borders of Israel, that Jerusalem remain the unified capital of Israel, and that any Palestinian state is demilitarised. In other words, at a time that many Palestinians were placing their hopes on Netanyahu's rightwing government being isolated due to its extremist positions, the Palestinian rift allows Netanyahu to hold tight to his stances with a minimum of pressure from the international community. Thus the Palestinians who were betting on a settlement have lost a negotiations battle while Palestinians who believe in resistance as a strategic option are consumed with efforts towards the lifting of the Gaza siege.

Empty words

2012-03-08T10:45:00.000-08:00

Empty words

Fatah and Hamas appear able to agree just one thing, that elections be postponed. Saleh Al-Naami examines the causes, and ramifications, of a dispute that serves to exacerbate the suffering of ordinary Palestinians

Beneath the blazing sun Ahmed Al-Sheify continues to search the lists of names tacked to the wall of a school next to a police headquarters in the west of Gaza. They contain the names of everyone entitled to a $100 payment from the Ministry of Social Affairs of the Palestinian government. Suddenly Al-Sheify's face lights up. His name is on one of the lists.

The payment, supplemented by aid from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), which supplies basic food necessities, allows Al-Sheify's family of six to survive. The thing that most frustrates him is that he will be forced to live on such handouts until an agreement is reached that can end internal Palestinian divisions.

Al-Sheify is not alone in despairing at the petty back-and-forth squabbling between Fatah and Hamas. Each group blames the other for the failure of the latest round of talks in Cairo. Amid conflicting statements issued by the two factions one thing is clear. It is security arrangements that are at the heart of their most recent disagreements.

Majed Faraj, a member of the Fatah delegation, said Fatah had demanded Hamas recognise the existence of the security forces in Gaza before Hamas came to power. He also said Fatah had demanded the step-by-step return of those security forces to their posts -- they amount to 10,000 men -- as well as a review of the security forces introduced after Hamas took control. According to Faraj, Hamas is seeking to limit return to 3,000, starting with just 300. He also claimed Hamas was asking to send its own forces to the West Bank under some sort of a quota system, an idea Fatah has refused in its entirety.

Salah Al-Bardawil, a member of Hamas delegation to Cairo, accuses Fatah leaders of adopting an uncompromising position that will shatter any earlier consensus. He was taken by surprise when Fatah demanded "an end to Hamas's rule in Gaza", arguing that such a stance undermines the basis of dialogue between the two factions.

Speaking to Al-Ahram Weekly Al-Bardawil said that Fatah had objected to Egyptian proposals calling for the formation of a joint committee to oversee the administration of the Gaza Strip, as well as a joint security force. He also said Fatah had refused to discuss the issue of political prisoners.

Ashraf Gomaa, a senior Fatah legislator, refutes such charges, and has accused Hamas of trying to reach a political deal that guarantees its continued control over Gaza. Gomaa called on Hamas to adopt a strategy more open to Fatah the better to deal with the international community.

"It is clear that people are looking after their own interests, especially when it comes to political detainees. The Fatah movement is against political arrests. We do not arrest anyone. We are seeking the release of prisoners in the West Bank, and this is being done gradually," said Gomaa.

Fatah and Hamas at least agreed to postpone elections that were scheduled to be held on 25 January. The Weekly has learned that an understanding to this effect was reached in the second round of talks held last Sunday in Cairo. Informed sources say both Fatah and Hamas consider postponement in their interest.

While Fatah leaders are publicly in favour of elections now, in private they are worried that they will be defeated at the ballot box. They fear the Palestinian Authority's failure to persuade Palestinians, especially those in the West Bank, to reach a settlement with Israel, and continued Israeli settlement building and land confiscation in the West Bank, combined with draconian restrictions on movement, will weigh heavily against their electoral chances. Fatah is also worried that voters will exact a heavy price for its security forces' violations of human rights under Salam Fayyad's government.

Nor does Hamas see elections as being in its own interest as long as Gaza remains under siege. It fears that many who voted for the movement in the last elections will desert.

Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri has said that the movement is predicating elections on a number of conditions. It is demanding the restructuring of the Electoral Commission and the Judicial Committee which oversee elections. It also wants guarantees that the siege of Gaza will end, that Egypt be the one to work towards Palestinian reconciliation, and that elections to the Palestinian Authority be conducted in tandem with legislative and presidential polls. Hamas is also demanding an end to political detentions, the release of all members of parliament currently under arrest, and international guarantees that MPs will not be arrested after they are elected.

"Political indicators confirm the inability of the two Palestinian factions to bridge the divide between them, which means that elections will not be held on schedule," says Hassan Khreisheh, independent second deputy speaker of the Legislative Council. "If the elections are not held on time the Legislative Council will continue to exist along current lines, i.e. those who are from the West Bank will remain in the West Bank, and those from Gaza in Gaza."

Should that happen, argues Khreisheh, President Mahmoud Abbas will lose constitutional legitimacy, opening a political vacuum that will remain until presidential elections are held.

The Weekly has learned that Egypt requested the Hamas delegation in the Cairo to allow Fatah members and Gaza residents to travel to Bethlehem in order to participate in Fatah's General Conference. A Hamas source confirmed that Hamas would respond "positively" to Egypt's request, taking into account security conditions. The source stressed that Hamas would not seek to hamper Fatah's Sixth Conference. However, he added, "some of those associated with the Fatah Conference raise security concerns and it will be difficult for us to allow them to travel".

"For this reason, those who want to travel must submit a request to the government in Gaza, in order that their files can be checked. Another problem is that there are still some people who have expressed their request to travel verbally, and have yet to submit a written request."

In the meantime, Palestinians are paying close attention to Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's stance, not least his refusal to take a single step towards resolving the conflict through peaceful means. This, in turn, affects the credibility of the positions put forward by President Abbas and Fayyad's government. Netanyahu has openly challenged the US administration by rejecting American demands to freeze settlement-building in occupied East Jerusalem. At the weekly Israeli cabinet meeting on Sunday Netanyahu said Jews could live in Jerusalem wherever they pleased.

Netanyahu's challenge followed reports in Haaretz newspaper that Israeli decision-makers had started to take Obama's admonitions lightly, characterising the US president as naïve. According to the newspaper, the attitude was most deeply embedded among senior staff in Netanyahu's office. According to the report the most popular joke circulating among the Israeli prime minister's senior advisors is as follows:

"What does an American do when he discovers his house is a wreck, or that his washing machine is not working?

Easy, he calls on Obama to give a speech. Problem solved."

Zero sum game

2012-03-08T10:44:00.002-08:00

At noon on 13 May the sounds of laughter and joviality could be clearly heard all the way at the end of the corridor leading to the large meeting room on the fifth floor at one of the major ministries in Gaza City. A number of leaders from Fatah and Hamas were sitting around a table to focus on finding formulas to bring their points of view closer regarding reconciliation between the two factions. The atmosphere of the meeting, which concluded with lunch, was friendly and both sides agreed to meet again at the home of one of the Hamas leaders in Gaza.

Sources told Al-Ahram Weekly that several similar meetings had taken place in the West Bank and Gaza between leaders from both sides, mostly members of parliament from each faction. Moneeb Al-Masri, a prominent Palestinian businessman, was keen to convey to the West Bank some of the ideas that were discussed in Gaza and at length by representatives of both groups. While Fatah refuses to admit that prospects for reconciliation are under discussion, Hamas and independent Palestinian figures -- along with the media that is closely following developments -- insist that many proposals are being debated.

One informed source told the Weekly that Hamas and Fatah representatives had reached tentative points of agreement on some issues, while direct and indirect talks continue between the two sides regarding outstanding issues. The source said that to avoid any setbacks, both groups have agreed that they will not announce the outcome until all issues are settled and approved by the leaders of the two groups.

Apparently, the two sides have agreed on the following points, and only await the approval of faction leaders. First, both sides will inform Cairo that they have come to an agreement on the Egyptian reconciliation plan. They will later decide if they want to include some points of concern or add them in an addendum; these concerns, meanwhile, should not block Hamas from signing the proposal. Second, both sides would begin releasing detainees in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and set up a mechanism to deal with supporters and institutions affiliated to each group in each region, including organisational and charity groups.

Third, the government in Ramallah must be more cooperative in ending the suffering of the residents of Gaza, such as paying for the fuel needed to operate the sole power station in Gaza to end daily power outages across the Strip that last at least eight hours. Fourth, both sides must show flexibility in reopening the Rafah Crossing to end smuggling through illicit tunnels.

According to the source, all these ideas were presented by Hamas in order to bridge the gap between the two sides, and were tentatively approved by representatives from Fatah who emphasised that senior Fatah leaders will have the final say, and hence their initial approval does not commit the group to these ideas. "We're still a long way away from reaching a final agreement," the source cautioned. "Signing the Egyptian plan is the first step on a long road of agreeing on a large number of details regarding elections, security, reforming the Palestine Liberation Organisation [PLO], and other issues."

The source added that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas does not fully support these understandings, and wants Hamas to first sign the Egyptian proposal before discussing a final agreement. Abbas's position is what caused Fatah leaders to deny progress is being made.

While Hamas leaders try to avoid discussing the understandings reached so far, Mahmoud Al-Zahhar, member of the group's politburo, confirmed that Hamas is waiting for a final answer from Fatah regarding ideas presented by the group. "We suggested specific mechanisms and we asked them to think about it, and we are waiting for their response," Al-Zahhar stated. "If we reach agreement, we will go to Egypt and we can make it part of the deal or an appendix to it."

According to the Hamas leader, contacts with Fatah are focussed on two major points: first, the Central Elections Committee, and second, the PLO. Al-Zahhar believes that Fatah is being responsive. He added that Hamas wants the electoral committee to be based on mutual consultations, while Fatah wants it to be by mutual agreement. He criticised Abbas's statements that no progress will be made until Hamas first signs the Egyptian proposal without revision. "If that is his opinion, then he shouldn't hold his breath."

Al-Zahhar further mocked statements by Fatah members that Hamas suffers from internal divisions. "He who lives in a glass house should not throw stones," he said.

Azzam Al-Ahmed, head of Fatah's parliamentary faction in the Palestinian Legislative Council, confirmed that direct meetings have been held between representatives from both sides in Gaza and the West Bank but denied that anything of substance was being discussed. Al-Ahmed underlined his group's commitment to what was agreed upon in Cairo, urging Hamas to sign the Egyptian plan and express its concerns at the time of implementation.

However, a senior figure close to ongoing reconciliation efforts told the Weekly that despite optimism about recent meetings and many indicators that both sides believe their political futures are bleak without reconciliation, the probability of an agreement in the near future is slim because of foreign interference. The source said that Abbas, under pressure from the US and Israel, is now insisting that Hamas accept the conditions of the Quartet, including recognition of Israel, renouncing armed resistance against the occupation as terrorism, and recognising all past agreements signed by the Palestinians and Israel. The source pointed out that this requirement was never part of the Egyptian plan.

"While Israel insists on continuing its settlement building in the West Bank and Judaicisation of Jerusalem, and the world sees Israel as the obstacle to peace, it is unreasonable to condition [Palestinian] reconciliation with accepting the Quartet conditions," argued the source. According to him, Abbas is facing strong counter pressure from members of Fatah's Central Committee and Revolutionary Council to reject US-Israeli diktat and embrace reconciliation, because the status quo does not serve the group's interests.

The source continued that there is restlessness in Fatah's ranks, as expressed in a statement by Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades -- Fatah's military wing -- that threatened to assassinate Mohamed Dahlan, a member of Fatah's Central Committee, for "conspiring" with occupation forces to obstruct efforts for national reconciliation. The source also pointed out another problem, namely escalating tensions between Hamas and Cairo compounded by accusations of torture of Hamas detainees in Egyptian jails. The source continued that Cairo's hard line position, which insists that Hamas sign the Egyptian plan without revisions, blocks any possibility for Hamas to change its position but also save face with its popular base.

In short, if the Palestinians are unable to free themselves from the restrictions placed on them by foreign parties, there is no guarantee that direct talks between Fatah and Hamas will be successful. In the next four months, which is the timeline of indirect negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, there is little hope that attempts to end divisions amongst Palestinians will lead to anything positive.

Abbas's popularity takes a leap

2012-03-08T10:43:00.000-08:00

Hassan waited more than 10 minutes outside the stationary shop on Friday before the shop owner opened the door to let him in. The vendor and a group of his neighbourhood shopkeeper friends were transfixed on a small television screen in the shop, listening to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas's address at the UN General Assembly.

The shopkeeper and his friends were not the only ones in Al-Nossayrat Refugee Camp, the second largest camp in the Gaza Strip, who stopped work to follow events at the UN. The camp, which is usually bustling with activity, appeared as if it was under curfew, since almost everyone wanted to listen to Abbas's historic speech. What he said was well received on the Palestinian street and highly praised by large sections of the population.

Intissar, a college student, told the Weekly that "this was the first time that Abbas adopts the Palestinian cause forcefully and unequivocally, by truthfully revealing Israel's actions for what they are. I believe that if Abbas continues on this track he will become a national leader and hero."

Some Palestinians were angry with the leaders of Hamas and Islamic Jihad who were quick to slam and criticise Abbas's move. Ahmed, a teacher at a school in central Gaza, could not fathom why Hamas and Islamic Jihad adopted the same positions as Israel and the US regarding Abbas's plan and speech. "Enough bickering," he told the Weekly. "I expected Hamas and Jihad to stand behind Abbas in confronting Israel and the US. There is a dire and pressing need for the two groups to change their attitudes entirely to become more patriotic and not so partisan."

But there are still those who doubt Abbas's intentions and expect him to deviate from the positions he declared in his speech. Khaled, who works at a government agency in Gaza, believes that after his address Abbas should now demonstrate that he has genuinely changed his outlook. The most important step would be to order Palestinian Authority (PA) security agencies to immediately halt all cooperation with Israel on security issues.

Only a minority of Palestinians would agree with Khaled; even those that disagree with Abbas on other levels cannot accept the hostile positions of their leaders towards the president. Ahmed Youssef, a leading figure in Hamas who previously served as political adviser to Gaza Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, disapproved of his group's position and its decision to ban any activities in the Gaza Strip that support Abbas's move. "No one accepts Hamas rejection of a step that is supported by the Arab nation, the Islamic Conference, Turkey and most world countries," Youssef argued. "Hamas must reconsider its position entirely."

Nassereddin Al-Shaer, former deputy prime minister and minister of education in Haniyeh's government, who is also a young leader in Hamas, did not hesitate to telephone Abbas in New York to express his support and praise the positions stated in his speech. It was clear that the positive response on the Palestinian street caught Hamas off guard and forced it to retract, especially after Abbas asserted that he will pursue national reconciliation.

Yehia Moussa, a leading Hamas figure and deputy leader of the group's parliamentary bloc, welcomed Abbas's position: "What is needed now is for words to become action," Moussa told the Weekly. "Restoring national unity is the guarantee needed to recover national rights, and we must invest all our efforts to accomplish this mission." He added that the positions expressed by the US and Israel during the UN General Assembly session clearly demonstrate that the PA cannot rely on current options.

Moussa indicated that Hamas criticised Abbas for going to the UN without coordinating the step with his partners on the Palestinian arena, making it a "non-consensual" move that does not serve national reconciliation.

Moussa emphasised that what is needed now is the implementation of the reconciliation agreement that was signed by Fatah and Hamas several months ago, especially restructuring the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) along new national and democratic principles to transform it into a national institution that truly represents all the Palestinian people. He added that it is pertinent to quickly form a coalition government to manage the affairs of areas under the PA's control during the interim phase that precedes elections. He added that agreement on the person who will head this government and its programme is something that was agreed upon in the Cairo deal.

Khalil Shaheen, a writer, believes that the mass welcome of Abbas upon his return from New York indicates that the Palestinian people no longer accept a return to "farcical" negotiations under any circumstances. "Abbas's reception proves that the people uphold national principles, and the people must embrace all the steps that the leadership takes, whether by transferring the entire Palestinian issue to the UN and international agencies or implementing the reconciliation agreement."

Meanwhile, it was revealed that Abbas threatened US President Barack Obama that he would dissolve the PA if he were unable to implement his political programme. Israeli television reported on Sunday that the US administration and Europe informed Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, on the sidelines of his visit to the UN, that Abbas is about to take decisive steps -- including dissolving the PA -- if real progress is not achieved on Palestinian statehood and the future of talks with Israel.

The television report quoted informed Israeli political sources as saying that Abbas was unyielding in his response to Obama's "firm" demand not to submit the Palestinian request to the Security Council for full UN membership.

Abbas maintained that the Palestinian people "are fed up with negotiations that Israel uses to impose facts on the ground" and that he will not "betray his people's cause and become a bridge for realising Israel's expansionist dreams." The sources said that US officials told Israel's representatives that Israel will face "a real catastrophe" if Abbas carries out his threat of dissolving the PA, adding that Abbas made it clear to the Americans that the PA refuses to be in the service of Israel.

Sources said Abbas told Obama: "We created the PA for the sake of peace and protecting the rights of our people, not squandering them. I am not willing to be remembered in the history of my people and the Arab world as the one responsible for Israel's continued murderous and destructive policies against peace in the region." Sources continued that Obama and his advisers closely listened to Abbas's speech at the UN, and the White House was stunned by the entire address. The US administration is in consultations with Arab countries to avoid any negative backlash that could affect Washington's credibility if it uses its veto power in the Security Council to block Palestine's membership of the UN.

Meanwhile, Palestinian media reported on Monday morning that a Palestinian official said that Obama threatened Abbas that he would hold him directly responsible if a single drop of US blood is spilled if Washington is forced to use its veto power, since a US veto could mean that Arab masses would attack US interests in the region.

It is obvious that Abbas's popularity has risen sharply and he was able restore his stature as a patriotic Palestinian leader. But continued support for him by the Palestinian masses will depend on him not returning to the negotiating table and implementing the reconciliation agreement

Abbas battling on many fronts

2012-03-08T10:41:00.002-08:00

Omar did not expect his family to be so distraught and despondent when he came home Friday to his home in the town of Al-Khedr on the outskirts of Bethlehem. His father's health took a sharp blow after occupation forces seized large sections of family land to expand the Jewish settlement of Nogdeem, where Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman lives. Omar, a university student and an activist in Al-Shebiba movement, the on-campus student arm of Fatah, was one of thousands of Palestinians who welcomed Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas upon his return from New York, in an expression of support of what he said in his speech to the UN General Assembly.

Omar, whose family is in shock, believes that Abbas should now insist on refusing to return to the negotiating table if Israel does not freeze settlements in the West Bank and Jerusalem. Also, that he should reject the suggestion by the Quartet to resume talks with Israel. Omar's position represents a majority of Palestinians who believe that Abbas's address at the UN signaled the end of negotiations with Israel if Tel Aviv does not commit to freezing settlements. This is something that the Palestinian Authority (PA) has finally realised.

Complicating matters further for the PA is the fact that the Israeli government announced at the end of last week a plan to build 1,100 new residential units in the settlement of Gilo in occupied Jerusalem. Yasser Abed Rabbo, member of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), said that it was impossible to combine settlements on Palestinian land and continuing negotiations with Israel.

Meanwhile, Israel declared that it accepts the general guidelines of the Quartet statement. Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said that his cabinet can live with the statement, since it did not call for an end to settlements, or indicate a specific frame of reference for negotiations. While Netanyahu is demanding that the Palestinians do not place any prerequisites, such as freezing settlements, he himself is demanding a series of preconditions for the Palestinians. Most prominently, conceding beforehand the Ghor region of the Jordan Valley, which represents 30 per cent of the West Bank. Essentially, Netanyahu is asking the Palestinians to surrender 51 per cent of the area of the West Bank before restarting talks.

The Palestinian position does not seem to be rejected by Israel but by the US, which criticised the Israeli decision but at the same time believes there should be a response to the Quartet proposal. US Ambassador in Israel Dan Shapiro said that Obama's administration rejects the Palestinian demand to halt settlement building before the Palestinians agree to restart talks. "On principle, the US does not support preconditions that state that a freeze on settlements is a prerequisite for negotiations," Shapiro was quoted in the Israeli newspaper Yediot Aharonot as saying. "Keep in mind we have objected to Israeli settlements in the West Bank for a long time. What we have always said is that we believe that direct talks is the only way to resolve the conflict, and it cannot be solved except by the parties themselves through talks that begin without preconditions."

Washington not only adopted Israel's position, but even began exerting economic pressure. The US Congress decided to freeze the transfer of $200 million in aid to the PA, which will affect the latter's ability to meet its financial commitments towards tens of thousands of government employees in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Gaza will especially suffer because the PA announced that in light of the US decision, it will not be able to pay the cost of fuel for the sole power plant in the Gaza Strip.

While Washington is directly defending Netanyahu's position, some Israelis are strongly criticising him and holding him responsible for the freeze in negotiations. Haaretz newspaper described his cabinet's policies of continuing settlement building, especially in the West Bank, as "open provocation". In an editorial on Sunday, the newspaper argued that Netanyahu's settlement policy is an obstacle to achieving a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders. It added that Netanyahu's insistence "to challenge the world and continue settlement building in East Jerusalem undermines his call to restart talks, and could in fact result in serious ramifications for Israel."

Palestinian sources confirmed that Arab parties have agreed to the US demand and began pressuring the PA to reverse its refusal of the Quartet proposal and immediately return to the negotiating table with Israel. Several Palestinian officials told journalists off the record that countries such as the United Arab Emirates, Morocco and Jordan are putting pressure to relaunch talks and not continuing the gamble on Palestinian statehood at the UN.

One of the main reasons behind the Palestinian refusal of the Quartet's positions and why Palestinian leaders now view the group suspiciously is because of the actions of Quartet envoy Tony Blair, who is accused by many Palestinian political figures of being entirely biased to Israel and purposefully not conveying Palestinian views to Quartet members.

MP Bassam Al-Salhi, secretary-general of the Palestinian People Party who attends Palestinian leadership meetings, said that Blair has "lost all credibility among the Palestinian leadership and there is extreme caution in dealing with him since he has become a junior employee of the Israeli government." In a news conference in Ramallah, Al-Salhi added: "An increasing number of Palestinian officials are demanding a boycott of Blair because he did not accurately convey Palestinian positions to international parties and is clearly biased towards Israel and its outlook. Several members in the Palestinian leadership have called for a boycott of Blair and not welcoming him in the Palestinian territories. Blair has lost his credibility and is not impartial as he should be in this post."

Al-Salhi emphasised that criticism of Blair's actions is no longer confined to leadership circles in the PA but now includes civic society, noting that there are calls for a boycott by the public. He also warned that if Blair continues as the representative of the Quartet his influence will become even weaker.

The clash between the Palestinian leadership and Israel about the Quartet proposal did not end tensions between the PA and the leadership of Hamas in the Gaza Strip, which continued to criticise Abbas for going to the UN to ask for membership for a Palestinian state. Fatah, which is headed by Abbas, was especially troubled by continued criticism by Gaza Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh of Abbas, and emphasis that creating a Palestinian state on any part of Palestine is acceptable as long as it does not recognise Israel.

Fatah spokesman Ahmed Assaf described Haniyeh's statements as "political ignorance". "Haniyeh's position means that Hamas approves the creation of a Palestinian state within temporary borders, in the same manner that Israel wants," Assaf asserted in a written statement. "Statements by Haniyeh and other Hamas leaders about the creation of a state on any land is political ignorance resulting from their lack of political and national experience. They are satisfied to just rule Gaza through force, and in this way justify detaching and removing it from the Palestinian dynamic, as witnessed these days."

Meanwhile, a number of young Hamas leaders continued to support Abbas's recent plan. Sources told Al-Ahram Weekly that former Deputy Prime Minister Nasreddin Al-Shaer and former Planning Minister Samir Abu Eta, both members of Haniyeh's tenth cabinet, visited Abbas on Saturday at his home in Ramallah. The two men expressed their appreciation and support for "the courageous position expressed in Abbas's historic address to the UN General Assembly in the name of the Palestinian people". Al-Shaer and Abu Eta described Abbas's position as "an honest expression of the ambition of the Palestinian people and their aspiration to achieve freedom and independence".

The Palestinian leadership currently faces a difficult test of credibility. While Abbas believes that returning to negotiations under the shadow of settlements would be political suicide for him on the domestic front, at the same time rejecting the Quartet proposal and continuing on the UN path to statehood would precipitate more economic sanctions by the US at this critical time

Arab Spring forced us to accept Hamas's demands'

2012-03-08T10:40:00.003-08:00

In the dead of silence, the sound of Jamal Hassan's fall onto the floor of his cell in Shatta Prison in Israel was especially loud on Friday evening. When the guards opened the door to his cell, they found blood flowing from his head and he had lost consciousness. He was transferred to a nearby Israeli hospital. Hassan, 31, is one of hundreds of Palestinian detainees in Israeli jails who 18 days ago began an open-ended hunger strike to protest the brutal conditions they are subjected to. These conditions include a long series of procedures ordered by Binyamin Netanyahu's cabinet in an attempt to pressure Hamas to speed up the prisoner exchange deal and abandon preconditions for releasing the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.

Hassan, who is serving a life term in prison, succumbed to hunger, thirst and solitary confinement and passed out. The Israeli authorities are not releasing any information about his health condition, while Palestinian sources assert that the Israelis are concealing the fact that they transferred a large number of Palestinian prisoners to hospitals, out of concern that this news would trigger an angry reaction among the Palestinian public.

Punitive measures against prisoners include transferring all their leaders to solitary confinement, whereby the prisoner is held in a solitary cell measuring 1x1x0.5 metre, including a toilet, where he sleeps and eats. The Israelis also limited the types of food served to detainees, as well as preventing them from leaving their cells, increasing the number and frequency of roll calls, as well as naked body searches whereby prisoners are forced to remove all their clothing under the pretext of searching for sharp objects. Prisoners are also often subjected to brutal abuses by special squads whose job it is to injure and torment prisoners.

Sources told Al-Ahram Weekly that Israel has used a carrot and stick policy with the leaders of prisoners, by escalating harsh treatment while opening channels of communication with these leaders and asking them to pressure Hamas to be more flexible in its preconditions for the release of Shalit, in return for better treatment in prison.

The leaders of Palestinian prisoners asserted that Israeli political and security personnel are especially brutal with detainees because their leaders not only did not respond to the offer by prison authorities, but even asked Hamas not to compromise on any of the demands it is making. The demands include the release of all prisoners serving life terms, as well as women, children and the sick.

The actions of prison leaders escalated aggression against prisoners. Those on hunger strike only ate salt dissolved in water so that their stomachs do not rot, but soon prison authorities banned salt from prisons. Prisoners were also denied any change of clothes, so they remain in the same outfits to further pressure them psychologically.

In a challenging response, prisoners and their leaders took counter measures by refusing to wear the uniforms issued by Israeli prisons and not standing up when guards take a roll call, as well as not cooperating with the prison administration or interacting with it. Palestinian prisoners are calling their struggle against oppressive measures by Israeli forces, the "War of Empty Stomachs".

Prison leaders say that they will confront oppressive policies by withstanding hunger, thirst and solitary confinement. They said they had made up their minds and if the Israeli prison authorities do not stop these brutal measures, they will continue their strike until death.

Sources told the Weekly that prison leaders at first hesitated about announcing an open-ended hunger strike because it coincided with the Palestinian leadership's mission in September of seeking international recognition of the state of Palestine. They were concerned that their strike would negatively affect this effort. Sources close to the issue of prisoners said that the unprecedented oppressive measures by prison authorities against prison leaders, and a decision to expand solitary confinement, convinced prisoners to begin the fast.

Sources told the Weekly that the first one to go on a hunger strike was Ahmed Saadat, secretary-general of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), and Jamal Abu Al-Heja, a leading figure in Hamas, who are both serving life sentences. They were moved to special cells nearly three years ago, and they have no contact with the outside world. The sources said that Saadat and Al-Heja sent a message on Thursday emphasising the need to continue the hunger strike until the Israeli occupation forces respond to all the demands of Palestinian prisoners, including ending solitary confinement altogether.

The source added that prison authorities isolate any prisoner who declares a hunger strike, and after that forms a committee to negotiate with him the terms of ending the strike. Israeli authorities were reportedly surprised to find that Palestinian prisoners in all their jails have the same demands. ADDAMEER, the Prisoners' Support and Human Rights Association, a group that defends prisoner rights, said that prison authorities are now gathering large numbers of prisoners and beating and terrorising them, in an effort to break their will.

Palestinian Minister of Detained and Freed Prisoners Eissa Qaraqa said that the "War of Empty Stomachs" is targeting the extremist right-wing Netanyahu government, as well as the Israeli Prison Authority. Qaraqa said that the battle would continue until all prisoner demands are met. "If the occupation force does not stop punitive measures, the struggle against occupation will not remain inside prison walls," he warned. "It will move to the Palestinian street."

Indeed, Palestinians have organised tens of protests in solidarity with their family members behind bars, and many Palestinians began a hunger strike also in support of prisoners. Meanwhile, representatives from all Palestinian factions erected tents outside the offices of the Red Cross to express their solidarity with prisoners.

Sherine Iraqi, a lawyer for the Palestinian Ministry for Prisoners, said that the detainees whom she met were handcuffed and wore ankle cuffs, and that prisoners at Shatta are searched while naked when they are transported from one place to another. Iraqi added that the health condition of several of those on hunger strike has become critical.

Hamas called on resistance factions to sharply escalate activities against the Israeli occupation in response to what it described as "crimes against prisoners". "Amidst silence by the world community, and Arab and Islamic weakness, we will defend our prisoners and resist occupation everywhere," declared Khalil Al-Hayya, a leading Hamas figure during a massive march sponsored by his group on Friday evening in Gaza in solidarity with the prisoners. "We will not rest until we liberate all prisoners from occupation jails."

Al-Hayya noted that comprehensive resistance in all its forms is the way to liberate the prisoners, protect the free, safeguard their dignity and defend the individual whom the Israeli occupation has violated in dignity, life and in possessions. "In response to the arrogance of the occupation in violating the rights of our prisoners, we will pursue it with our resistance and will prosecute its leaders as war criminals and they will pay for their actions sooner or later," he added.

The Hamas leader held Israel responsible for the lives of 7,000 prisoners who are on hunger strike in the "War of Empty Stomachs", calling on the Palestinian people to close ranks and unite behind the prisoners. Al-Hayya also called on the free people of the world and Arab citizens to take action on the issue of prisoners and to prioritise it, in order for Israel to know that the prisoners are not alone.

With empty stomachs, thousands of Palestinian prisoners are facing Israel's oppressive machine. They are counting on the Palestinian people in the West Bank, Gaza and in Diaspora not to abandon them to their fate. They also hope that the world's conscience will awaken and pay attention to their impossible suffering

Prisoner swap: why now?

2012-03-08T10:40:00.000-08:00

A resident in Gaza City told me he couldn't believe his eyes. The Yamen family, who were all members of Fatah, had just hoisted the green flag of Hamas on top of their home. The decision to change colours was taken unanimously by all members of the family the moment they learned that young Mohamed Yamen, who was serving a life sentence in an Israeli jail for having shot an Israeli occupation soldier during an armed confrontation, would be among the Palestinian prisoners to be freed under the prisoner exchange deal that was just concluded between Hamas and Israel. Mohamed's mother, who was the first to suggest raising the Hamas banner, explained that by capturing the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, Hamas succeeded in achieving what Fatah had failed to accomplish during 16 years of "futile" negotiations. "We feel that we've become one people who care about each other again. Were it not for this deal my son would have died in prison and his father and I would have died before ever being able to hug him again."

The Yamen family was not alone in raising the green flag; many families whose members belong to other organisations similarly demonstrated their gratitude for Hamas's accomplishment. As you move through the streets of Gaza, you quickly sense the air of celebration. Many of the groups of people strolling through the streets and alleyways are on their way to offer their congratulations to the families whose sons were named on the list of prisoners to be released. Groups of young men are stringing up decorations over the streets. Children are handing out sweets to passersby. Cars equipped with amplifiers are blaring out patriotic and popular songs. Friends and relatives are using every available moment to make welcome home preparations for their loved ones. Salah Ayyad would not rest on Saturday until he managed to persuade a crew of painters to put their present job on hold and turn their full attention to sprucing up his brother's apartment in Zuweida village in central Gaza. His brother Hamed is among the hundreds who are to be released in the middle of next week. He had been sentenced to life imprisonment and had already spent 14 years in Shatta Prison in Israel. He is now 36 years old. His family hopes that now he will be able to marry and raise a family.

Many of the prisoners' relatives who live abroad have decided to return to Gaza to take part in the welcome home celebrations, a decision aided by the reopening of Rafah Crossing. Some families suddenly deferred other celebrations until after the released prisoners return. One of the Muslih family's sons was supposed to get married last Thursday, but the wedding was put off until this Thursday, so that Ahmed Muslih -- among those to be released -- could attend.

For some Gazans, the prisoner exchange deal has a special meaning in other ways. Among those due to be released perhaps the most prominent is Yehia Al-Sinwar, 51, who was serving four life sentences. On the eve of the first Intifada, Al-Sinwar created Hamas's security apparatus, which he called Majd (Glory). In 1989, he was condemned by an Israeli military court for the murder of three Israeli soldiers and an intelligence agent. Both Israeli and Palestinian sources agree that Al-Sinwar was a highly charismatic leader with a commanding presence. In prison, he was the leader of the Hamas detainees, and even though he spent long stretches of his internment in solitary confinement, he continued to hold sway over Palestinian political prisoners. Further testimony to his force of character is to be found in the fact that successive Israeli intelligence chiefs cited him as the Palestinian detainee who made the greatest impression on them, both because of his operational activities and because of the way he handled himself during interrogations and in prison. One of the reasons that Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Moshe Yaalon objected to the prisoner exchange deal, when it came to a vote in the cabinet on Tuesday, was that the list included Al-Sinwar, whom he described as "the most dangerous mind" in the resistance.

Preparatory to the homecoming, the government in Gaza, headed by Ismail Haniyeh, announced that it had formed a committee to oversee the conditions of the released prisoners and to provide accommodation for them. Deputy Prime Minister Mohammed Awad said in a press conference that the committee was devoting particular attention to prisoners whose families live in the West Bank. "We do not want a released prisoner to find a difference between conditions of life for him in Gaza and those he would find at home," he said. He went on to explain that there would be two phases in the accommodation process. First, the returnees would be put up in hotels and similar establishments. Then, in the second phase, they would be given a permanent residence. Gaza is expected to receive 165 returnees who originally come from the West Bank. It is generally assumed that the families of these individuals will be able to join them at a future stage. Awad added that his government has set aside an open budget to cover the expenses necessary to ensure comfortable accommodation for the returnees.

But what suddenly made this prisoner swap possible, especially given the seemingly unbridgeable gap that had existed between the two sides until just recently? Observers in Israel believe that the lack of opportunity to free Shalit by military means forced Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to back down on his original refusal to release prisoners who had been condemned for killing Israeli soldiers and settlers. The hypothesis is upheld by Shin Bet (General Security) Chief Yoram Cohen who said that Israel failed to obtain the intelligence that would facilitate an operation to free Shalit, while all relevant military officials said that no amount of intelligence would guarantee that Shalit could be rescued alive.

In the opinion of Minister of Intelligence Dan Maridor, the Israeli leadership feared that the sweeping changes taking place in the Arab world as the result of the wave of democratic revolutions would close off all opportunities to free Shalit. He added that Israel realised the crucial role that Egypt played in brokering the agreement, but at the same time it was uncertain how long the current form of government would continue. Tel Aviv fears that the forthcoming legislative and presidential elections in Egypt will produce a government that is openly hostile to Israel and that would not see it in its interest to mediate with Hamas to free Shalit.

Israeli Channel 2 top commentator Amnun Abramovitch offers a markedly different opinion. The end of the Mubarak era proved instrumental in enhancing the opportunities to free Shalit, he said. Citing Israeli military and intelligence leaders, he said that the Mubarak regime, as represented in the person of former Intelligence Chief Omar Suleiman, had not been keen on reaching a deal because it felt that such a deal would contribute to strengthening Hamas, which for the Mubarak regime was out of the question. Simultaneously, he said, Israeli officials could not ignore the widespread sympathy for Shalit and his family among the Israeli public and they also feared that the soldier's continued captivity would demotivate Israeli youth from volunteering for combat service in the Israeli army.

On the other hand, not a few analysts strongly suspect that Netanyahu and Ehud Barak's enthusiasm for the exchange deal was primarily motivated by their eagerness to attack Iran. This would require settling a number of pending issues, not least of which the Shalit file, for an Israeli offensive against Iran would render the possibility of his release more remote than ever.

Perhaps the most frequently voiced objection to the prisoner exchange deal in Israel was that it would boost the popularity of Hamas and simultaneously deliver a stinging blow to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Israeli commentators emphasise that the Israeli cabinet's approval of the prisoner exchange deal at this time was not a way to get back at Abbas for pressing for recognition of a Palestinian state in the UN. It was not in the interests of Israel to undermine Abbas because he is opposed to armed resistance and even to popular resistance, which constitute a threat to Israel, they said.

Several ideas have been aired in Israel in order to offset the damage the deal would do to the Palestinian president. One was to release another contingent of Palestinian prisoners and frame the step in a way that would give credit to Abbas. Nevertheless, as strongly as the suggestion was advocated by some media figures and retired generals, there is no indication that it has been taken up by government officials in Israel.

Arab-Israeli exchange

THE DEAL to exchange 1,027 Palestinian prisoners for the captive Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit was not the first, and will not be the last.

After the 1948 war, a swap deal was concluded between Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon on the one hand and Israel on the other.

In 1954, the Syrian forces captured five Israeli soldiers who went into the Golan Heights on a secret mission. The body of one of them was returned to Israel in 1955 and the other four were returned the following year in return for 41 Syrian prisoners.

In 1957 a major deal was concluded between Egypt and Israel according to which 5,500 Egyptians and four Israeli soldiers were released.

In 1968, a deal was made between the Palestine Liberation Organisation and Israel via the Red Cross after fighters from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine hijacked an Israeli plane and forced it to land in Algeria. The deal organised the release of some 100 passengers in return for 37 Palestinian prisoners.

In 1983, Israel freed 4,600 Arab detainees in return for six Israeli soldiers held in Lebanon.

In June 1984, Israel swapped 291 Syrians captured in battle and the remains of 72 Syrians for six Israelis and five bodies. Israel also freed 20 Arab civilians held for spying and security offences.

In May 1985, Israel released 1,150 Arab prisoners in exchange for three Israel soldiers held by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command in Lebanon. The deal took almost nine months to negotiate.

In June-July 1985, Israel freed 331 Lebanese Shia detainees. Shia leaders say their freedom was guaranteed in exchange for the return of 39 foreign passengers hijacked in an American TWA airliner to Beirut. Israel denied a connection.

In July 1996, Hizbullah and Israel carry out a German-brokered swap when the bodies of 123 guerrillas are returned to Lebanon in exchange for the remains of two Israeli soldiers.

Hizbullah also freed 17 fighters of the Israeli-backed South Lebanon Army militia, which in turn freed 45 Lebanese captives.

In January 2004, Israel released 436 Palestinian and Lebanese prisoners in a deal with Hizbullah for the return of Elhanan Tannenbaum, an Israeli businessman, and three dead Israeli soldiers abducted on a border patrol in 2000.

In July 2008, in return for releasing five men, Israel recovered from Hizbullah the bodies of two of its soldiers captured in a 2006 cross-border raid that triggered a 34-day war with the group.

In October 2011, Israel agreed a deal with Hamas that some 1,027 Palestinians prisoners would be freed in exchange for Israeli soldier Shalit who has been held captive since June 2006

Back from the grave

2012-03-08T10:38:00.002-08:00

Abdel-Rahman Salah, 58, was watching the young boy who was quickly overtaking everyone to reach him, while hundreds of family members and neighbours welcomed him on the outskirts of Jenin in the north of the West Bank. Within moments, the boy he didn't know was in his embrace shouting joyfully, "Daddy, daddy!"

That is when Salah realised that his son, Fadi, who was six years old when his father was arrested, released nine years later as part of the prisoner exchange deal between Hamas and Israel. As he tightly hugged his now 16-year-old boy, the tears rolled down Salah's face. He kissed his head over and over again, and Fadi kissed his father's hands. He shuts his eyes and then once again covers his son in kisses.

Salah said that occupation forces banned his family from visiting him during his incarceration and he was not allowed to receive any photographs or letters from them. He relied on his imagination to picture his children growing up. The most difficult time in prison was in 2005, he recalled, when he was listening to the news on the radio and the anchor announced the death of his eldest son, Mohamed, who was shot by the occupation army. He collapsed on the floor. The grief stricken father said that the news was a shocking blow since Mohamed was his first born and was in charge of taking care of the family after his father was arrested.

Eman, 38, said that the day the prisoner exchange took place was the happiest in her life because she was able to reunite with the man she loves after losing all hope that she would ever see him again. Eman married Jamal Hassan 18 years ago but her joy was shortlived when her husband was arrested months after their union. The Israeli military tribunal sentenced him to life imprisonment, dashing all their dreams of building a home and family together.

While Hassan offered to divorce Eman so she can start a new life with someone else, she angrily refused although she knew that a life sentence meant that her husband would die in prison. She told him that she could never love anyone else. Although nearly one week has passed since her husband's release from jail, Eman still cannot believe her eyes. "Whenever I go into the bedroom and find him asleep in our house, I can hardly believe it. My heart is always pounding; I cannot believe that this is reality and not one of my recurring dreams," she said.

The overwhelming sense among the families of prisoners is that the exchange deal brought their sons back from the grave, since most of those who were released had been sentenced to life imprisonment and there was no hope that they will come out alive. This is why their welcome home was very emotional.

Salah hysterically caressed his brother Hamed's face and head, staring at him for a moment then hugging him and kissing as tears streamed down his face. Then he would ask him to stand up so he can embrace him again and hold him close. His silent weeping would suddenly erupt into loud sobbing and then wailing in front of hundreds of relatives, friends, neighbours and strangers who came to the ceremonial tent erected next to the family home in Al-Nossayrat Refugee Camp in central Gaza to receive Hamed's well-wishers. Hamed was imprisoned for 21 years as part of five life sentences, adding up to 475 years in prison.

To dispel the disapproving looks in reaction to his deep emotional reaction, Salah told them as he embraced his Hamas member brother: "God has given me back my brother from the grave; he has come back from the grave. It's a miracle; God has given him life after death. I feel that my brother has come back from the grave. I cannot believe it."

This was the feeling of most families whom Al-Ahram Weekly encountered as they were reunited with their freed sons, disembarking from buses that had transported them from Israeli jails or at ceremonial tents erected by the families to receive the many well-wishers who came to offer their congratulations.

The meeting between Abdel-Hadi Ghoneim (Abu Thar), a member of Fatah, who was sentenced to 20 life terms, or 2,064 years, and his only son Thar -- who was born on the day that his father was arrested -- was especially emotional. Thar was never allowed to see his father, making the meeting especially passionate and touching. They embraced and kissed each other in disbelief. Ghoneim's reunion with his entire family was very emotional, especially since he was the first one to ever carry out a large-scale revenge attack during the first Intifada in response to the shooting of hundreds of Palestinian civilians by the occupation Israeli army during the first two years of the Intifada.

In the summer of 1989, Ghoneim commandeered a bus transporting dozens of occupation soldiers from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and drove it over a cliff at Al-Latrun in West Jerusalem, killing 17 soldiers and injuring dozens others. Ghoneim's esteem among the Palestinian masses has remained high since that time, with tens of thousands of well-wishers from across the Gaza Strip and from all factions flooding to the ceremonial tent erected next to his family home in Al-Nossayrat Refugee Camp. Everyone was saying the same thing: "He has returned from the grave."

There were also very emotional scenes during celebrations of the return of Eid Salah. Hajja Umm Mahmoud, the owner of the grocery shop where Salah shopped before he was arrested 21 years ago, broke into tears when someone pointed out Salah to her. Umm Mahmoud said that she remembers him as a young man with black hair, but now after his release his hair has all turned white -- although the smile she fondly remembers is still there.

Not all released prisoners were reunited with their relatives. About 200 prisoners were deported to the Gaza Strip or overseas and stay in touch with their families by telephone or online. Some 165 prisoners were sent to the Gaza Strip since their families live in hotels in the West Bank in preparation of moving them to residential quarters. Ayman Qafesha, 41, who was serving a life sentence and was released after 15 years behind bars, said that the Gaza government is going above and beyond to try to provide him and fellow released prisoners with everything they need to make them comfortable. Meanwhile, the Palestinian public has given them a warm welcome home and not a moment passes without delegations and individuals coming to visit them to welcome and congratulate them on their release.

Nonetheless, Qafesha continued, they are pained to be separated from their families although they are overjoyed to be free from prison. He said that some television programmes are making it easier on them by linking them through video conferencing with their families in the West Bank, so they are able to see and speak with each other. Some families of prisoners deported to Gaza were reunited with them by traveling to Jordan and then Egypt, and arriving in the Gaza Strip from there. Israel, however, refuses to permit many such families from leaving the West Bank.

One of the challenges facing the relatives of many freed prisoners is rehabilitating those who were released and familiarising them with everyday life outside prison, especially that many of them were arrested before getting married and many are over 40 and 50 years old. Sources told the Weekly that some organisations are planning to assist released prisoners to get married, not only through funds but also through matchmaking

The Middle East was never more dangerous

2012-03-08T10:37:00.002-08:00

Those who know Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu well say that he dreams of following in the footsteps of former British prime minister Winston Churchill and go down in history as a leader who was able to completely wipe out the danger threatening the existence of the Hebrew state, just as Churchill was able to eliminate the Nazis who had threatened the world until the outbreak of World War II. Amnon Abramovich, a prominent Israeli commentator, said that Netanyahu believes that Iran's nuclear programme is a danger that threatens Israel's existence and that his "pet project" is to wipe out the Iranian nuclear programme.

Noam Brening, a senior commentator at Yediot Aharonot newspaper, argues that Netanyahu and Defence Minister Ehud Barak are strongly lobbying for a decision to attack Iran's nuclear facilities. Brening wrote that although army and military intelligence leaders are leery of any decision to target Iranian nuclear facilities, Netanyahu and Barak believe they can convince these senior officers of the attack. Until recently, leaders of security agencies who retired months ago, such as former Army Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi and former Mossad boss Meir Dagan and former Shin Bet director Yuval Diskin, were successful in thwarting the plot by Netanyahu and Barak.

While it is true that the political leadership in Israel can take any decision and the military is obligated to carry it out, the political leadership knows that Israeli public opinion is cognizant that professional cadres, such as the leaders of security agencies, should support the decisions they take. But the military has made it very clear to Netanyahu and Barak that any operation to attack Iran would yield very negative outcomes for Israel and undermine its strategic standing.

After leaving office as Mossad chief, Dagan launched media campaigns against Netanyahu and Barak making it very clear that an attack on Iran would only lead to strategic disaster for Israel. This angered right-wing politicians in Israel who said that Dagan's media attacks harmed Israel's deterrence ability against Iran.

It later came to light that a number of senior right-wing ministers supported the Ashkenazi-Dagan-Diskin camp, including Dan Maridor, Moshe Yalon, Benny Begin, and even Avigdor Lieberman. Ben Kasbet, a senior commentator at Maariv newspaper believes that the recent appointment of new leaders for the army's chief of staff, Shin Bet and Mossad will dilute the ability of these new appointees to resist pressure by Netanyahu and Barak and they could be coerced into agreeing to an assault on Iran.

Alon Ben-David, senior defence correspondent for Israeli television's Channel 10, argued that by attacking Iran's nuclear programme, Netanyahu wants to stir the pot in the Middle East in the wake of the Arab Spring. Ben-David believes that Netanyahu is trying to end Israel's crisis after its international standing was eroded when Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas went to the UN to apply for membership for a Palestinian state. He added that the Netanyahu-Barak duo believe that agitation is the solution for many strategic problems facing Israel, especially after the outbreak of democratic revolutions in the Arab world.

Ben-David continued that Netanyahu and Barak believe that the best way to do this is by targeting Iran's nuclear facilities, which the two believe would send a message of deterrence to Arab governments that are taking shape in the wake of the Arab Spring. Unlike Brening, who expects Netanyahu to issue orders for an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities even before winter, Ben-David believes that this will wait until spring, since cloudy winter skies reduce the effectiveness of satellite pictures and unmanned planes that gather intelligence data needed to strike.

Ben-David asserted that although at first it may appear that conditions are not conducive for an attack on Iran, because Israel is strategically isolated, "it is the most dangerous since 1967". And although any military operation against Iran could result in destabilising the entire region, Netanyahu and Barak believe this would curtail the threats of democratic revolutions in the Arab world. According to senior Israeli commentators, Netanyahu will justify the attack by asking leaders of security and military agencies, as well as senior ministers in his cabinet, to support this action because time is on the side of Iran's nuclear programme. These commentators add that Netanyahu is telling his ministers and senior generals that the centrifuge equipment at Iranian nuclear facilities will soon begin enriching another ton of uranium, which Tehran would transport to a secret nuclear facility constructed under the mountains in the religious city of Qom. By then, it would be very difficult for any air bombing to intercede in the manufacture of nuclear weapons in Iran.

Ronin Brigman, Yediot Aharonot's intelligence correspondent, writes that the chances of a successful Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities are not high. "Iran learnt its lesson when Israel destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor in 1981, therefore Tehran scattered its nuclear facilities all over the country; hence [we do not know] how many nuclear facilities Iran was able to hide," Brigman said. He added that nuclear facilities are protected by anti-aircraft batteries that Iran is working to improve every day, some of which were built underground.

He further noted that the plan of attack is very complicated and Israel possesses limited air capabilities and no aircraft carriers, which inhibits the air force's ability to manoeuvre. Also, the distance between Israel's air defence bases and Iran's nuclear facilities is at least 1,500 kilometres, which means they will need to refuel at least once on the way. Brigman would expect air battles that would require fighter jets to refuel a second time at least.

He continued that since this would be a short attack, only a small number of locations would be targeted, quoting military experts as saying that even if Israel was able to destroy all of Iran's nuclear facilities, this does not mean erasing the knowhow of Iranian nuclear scientists. This implies that within three to four years, Iran would be able to rebuild its nuclear facilities once more.

Some Israelis warn that any Israeli operation will unify Iranian ranks under the incumbent leadership and reinforce the prevailing "extremist" camp. At the same time, there are those in Israel who doubt the justifications for a military attack against Iran since Tehran has agreed to the restrictions outlined in the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and known facilities are monitored by the UN, which complicates Iran's ability to develop nuclear weapons. Meanwhile, any attack by Israel would give Iranian leaders pretext to expel international monitors.

Washington's position regarding a possible Israeli strike against Iran is unclear. Until recently, there was an impression that the US objects to an Israeli attack against Iran out of concern that US interests in the region would be harmed by an Iranian response to such an assault. But during a recent visit by US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to Israel, things appeared different. Israel's Maariv newspaper revealed that Panetta indicated to his Israeli hosts that Washington would give Tel Aviv freedom to do what it sees fit on this matter.

At the same time, some in Israel believe that US President Barack Obama -- currently fighting to secure his political future on the eve of presidential elections -- will not be able to put any pressure on Israel or deter it from attacking Iran, out of concern that this would anger Jewish groups that could undermine his chances of winning a second term.

Uri Bar-Yosef, an Israeli intellectual famous for his research and writings about Israel's failures during the 1973 War, is very concerned about Netanyahu's intentions and plan to attack Iran and its nuclear programme. He bitterly mocks Netanyahu's burning desire to achieve Churchill's legacy through such an undertaking, and said that Netanyahu's rule, especially his entire decision-making process, proves that he is more like Italian fascist dictator Benito Mussolini who unwittingly became involved in World War II. And the rest is history

Between success and failure

2012-03-08T10:35:00.000-08:00

From his office in the modest building of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Al-Nasr Street, which connects Al-Rimal district with Al-Sheikh Radwan district in the north of Gaza City, Ghazi Hamad, the undersecretary of foreign affairs in Ismail Haniyeh's government, continues to call the leaders of Hamas and Fatah. Hamad is hoping to make the upcoming meeting between Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and the head of Hamas's politburo, Khaled Meshaal, on 24 November in Cairo a success. He knows that the meeting must be well prepared beforehand, specifically in terms of talking points. This is why Hamad is spending all this time talking to both sides, and he has many friends among Fatah leaders.

"There is no doubt that both sides realise that they have reached a dead end, and it is impossible for the status quo to continue," Hamad told Al-Ahram Weekly. "Implementing the reconciliation agreement is not only vital to both Hamas and Fatah, but to continue as we are would result in the collapse of the entire Palestinian national cause forever. This is why we must work earnestly. It is blatantly obvious that President Abbas's political agenda has failed and there is no sense in continuing to rely on it, since Israel refuses to meet the minimum requirements for a political settlement of the conflict and continues its settlement and Judaisation policies. Meanwhile, the US administration is unashamedly collaborating with Netanyahu's government. At the same time, no government in the Gaza Strip can gain international legitimacy without national unity."

But despite Hamad's arguments, it appears that an agenda for the meeting has not been decided on. This raises doubts over whether the scheduled meeting will be successful or would become yet another encounter between Abbas and Meshaal that produced no tangible outcomes. Concern over possible failure caused Egyptian mediators to intensify their meetings with representatives from Hamas and Fatah in order to guarantee a successful encounter.

Sources told the Weekly that senior officials in Egypt's intelligence agency and foreign ministry recently met several times in Cairo with leaders from the two groups to discuss ways of implementing the reconciliation agreement signed in Cairo seven months ago. Informed sources said that these talks primarily aimed to urge both groups to agree on the prime minister who will form the next transitional cabinet, since Abbas insists on choosing incumbent Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, whom Hamas rejects. The sources continued that the meetings have so far failed because Hamas continues to object to Fayyad's appointment and there are no signs that Abbas is willing to change his mind.

Sources also told the Weekly that there is a direct and permanent channel of communication between the deputy chief of Hamas's politburo, Moussa Abu Marzouq, and Azzam Al-Ahmed, a member of Fatah's Central Committee, with the aim of reaching an agreement on the upcoming meeting's agenda.

During telephone interviews with party and independent Palestinian sources regarding mediation efforts between the two sides, all agreed that the meeting between Meshaal and Abbas would decide the chances for success or failure of reconciliation. They said that the possibility of success is high if the two men agree on a comprehensive nationalist work strategy that not only implements the reconciliation agreement, but goes beyond that by trying to reach agreement on actual political options such as the future of negotiations, confronting Israel, resistance mechanisms in the coming phase, utilising recent changes in the Arab world to serve the Palestinian cause, as well as implementing the reconciliation deal.

The sources added that there are circles inside both Fatah and Hamas that are focused on discussing these issues and reaching agreement on them, in the belief that the two sides should agree to revise the decision to negotiate with Israel as well as keeping the Palestinian Authority (PA) and its security agencies in place. Also, to reconsider resistance activities in terms of goals, means, and well considerations of when and where. They added that there is pressure on the leaders of both groups to demonstrate leadership and agree to genuinely revise the platform of each faction to guarantee the interests of the Palestinian people and their cause.

Despite this optimistic vision, the sources revealed that Fatah and Hamas leaders who expect the meeting to succeed are a minority, while the majority in both camps does not anticipate any real breakthrough. Many within Hamas believe the meeting is bound to fail if Abbas is only interested in discussing legislative and presidential elections while ignoring other issues in the reconciliation agreement. On the other hand, Fatah sources asserted that if Hamas insists on abandoning negotiations for good and annulling signed agreements between the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) and Israel, this would definitely spoil the encounter even before it begins.

The sources continued that senior officials in Hamas and Fatah are upset about recent statements by Abbas promoting the urgency of holding parliamentary and presidential elections, since Hamas believes that advocating elections and ignoring other aspects of the national reconciliation deal only aims at removing Hamas from the political arena. A common belief among Hamas leaders, added the sources, is that despite Abbas's very critical tone towards Israel, especially after he went to the UN to apply for membership for a Palestinian state, and the unlikelihood of re-launching negotiations in light of Tel Aviv's persistence in settlement construction, Abbas is still counting on a relationship with Washington and its role. This is why he is hesitant in taking a decision on national reconciliation, according to the sources, and that the general sense among some Hamas leaders is that Abbas is concerned that implementing reconciliation would definitively result in the collapse of all links between him and the US -- something he wants to avoid.

Sources said that Hamas believes that the escalation in the media by Abbas against Israel is contrary to the actions of the PA on the ground, especially as it continues security cooperation with the occupation army, detention of Hamas political activists and Salam Fayyad's government in Ramallah continues to refuse issuing passports to many Palestinian citizens living in Gaza under the pretext of their ties to Hamas, or because they work in institutions and security agencies affiliated with Haniyeh's government.

On the other hand, sources close to Abbas believe that in light of the prisoner exchange deal between Hamas and Israel, Hamas is taking a more hard-line position regarding the conciliation deal because the group's leaders believe that the prisoner exchange has greatly boosted its popularity. The sources warned that the upcoming meeting is bound to fail not only if there is no agreement on an agenda but also if common ground is not decided before talks begin, essentially that the meeting between the two be preceded by a preliminary agreement on the issues under discussion. This would require intensified meetings between representatives of the two sides to ensure success.

Hamas's position was clearly expressed in statements by Meshaal who called for "reorganising the Palestinian house and agreeing on a national agenda for the coming phase." In an address via telephone at a ceremony honouring a leader in the Muslim Brotherhood on Sunday in Gaza, he said: "Through Palestinian reconciliation, Hamas is seeking to reorganise the Palestinian house through agreement on a national agenda that reflects the lessons learnt from the past, to advocate our rights and national principlesزê¦ We realise that the victory of the Palestinian cause depends on resistance; the principles of our movement champion conciliation, restructuring the Palestinian house and ending divisionزê¦ We are opening our hearts and minds to our brothers in Fatah and all factions, and telling them that after all the doors have closed and all bets are lost, to come because all that is left are our labours and guns, since it has become obvious that neither the Americans nor others nor those who want to negotiate will do us any good."

The only hope that the two sides will agree to implement the conciliation deal is the fact that the Arab Spring has undermined the reliance of both sides on regional heavyweights. Despite appearances, Hamas has realised that its margin of flexibility has shrunk after the eruption of the Syrian revolution and the bias of Iran and Hizbullah to the Syrian regime, while the grassroots bases of Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood generally champion the revolution. The same applies to PA leadership which laments the ouster of some rulers, especially Hosni Mubarak who used to support it in its confrontation with Hamas

Israeli defense spending and the Arab revolts

2012-03-08T10:33:00.000-08:00

"Peace" and Israel's economic boom .1

The fate of the peace treaties and defense spending 2.

The "1973 Syndrome" obsession 3.

Increased ties with the United States 4.

Conclusion 5.

1. "Peace" and Israel's economic boom

The Israeli security establishment predicts that the democratic revolts across the Arab world and their potential ramifications will impose a reformulation of the Zionist state's fundamental defense and security doctrines, as well as essential changes to the structure, preparedness and mobilization plans of the Israeli military; this will require an increase in the security budget, and a restructuring of its components so that it can respond to the anticipated threats.

This study examines arguments presented by the leaders of the Israeli security apparatus in order to justify increased security spending in light of the Arab revolts, as well as the possible facets this increase will take, including the evaluations of economic experts and decision-makers in Israel, and their expected ramifications on Israel's economic stability and its social strength.

Official Israeli figures indicate that the signing of the peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan (Camp David with Egypt, and Wadi Araba with Jordan) represented significant turning points in the Zionist entity's achievement of substantial economic progress.

The diminution of security threats on the southern and eastern borders allowed Israeli decision-makers to greatly decrease defense spending, and resources that had been allotted to security were diverted towards investment in civil infrastructure and advanced technologies, as well as other sectors. This led to a huge reduction in the size of the security budget relative to the national budget and GDP.

However, one of the consequences of the 1973 war was that, in order to avoid further military failures in the future, in 1974 then-Prime Minister Golda Meir's government made the unprecedented decision to almost double defense spending, so that it reached 47% of the national budget, and 37% of GDP, in order to cover the costs of restructuring the military, . [1]

In order to emphasize the extent of change the security infrastructure has undergone since this step, it is sufficient to point out that the defense budget for 2011, which amounts to 49.4 billion shekels (approximately USD 12 billion), the largest of its kind in Israeli history in absolute terms, represents just 15.1% of the national budget, and 6% of GDP, which is 864 billion shekels (approximately USD 201 billion). This is the smallest percentage of GDP allotted to defense ever recorded in Israel's history.[2]

Official Israeli figures indicate that the signing of the peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan (Camp David with Egypt, Wadi Araba with Jordan) represented significant turning points in the Zionist entity's achievement of substantial economic progress.

After the economic crisis that overtook Israel following the 1973 war, economic experts referred to the ten years that followed the conflict as the "lost decade"; the interest Israel paid on its debt during that period was greater than the size of its total spending on education, health, social security, housing and welfare.[3]

In other words, the increasing strength of Israel's military following the war came at the expense of economic growth, and the state almost declared bankruptcy. This would have occurred had it not been for a sweeping economic plan enacted by the national unity government in 1985.

Following the signing of the Camp David agreement, the decrease in defense spending enabled Israel to funnel resources to pay the interest on its loans, and divert some of the funds towards the health, education, and housing sectors. In other words, "peace" and stability helped enable Israeli decision-makers to follow a socioeconomic policy that established the foundations of a welfare state, making Israel more attractive to Jewish immigration.

This development played a large role in improving the Israeli economy, enabling Israel to absorb waves of Jewish immigration from the former Soviet Union at the end of the 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s.

Economic expert Shlomo Maoz argues that it was these waves of immigration that strengthened the economy, since they brought in many qualified workers and skilled technicians, particularly in the advanced technology sector, which led to a growth in exports and rapid economic development.

During this period, the percentage of skilled scientific workers leaped from 10% to 20% of the total population. This in turn played a role in increasing export revenues; the latter grew from USD 50 billion a year prior to the immigration wave, to USD 80 billion after that.[4]

Israeli analysts suggest that the signing of the Camp David agreement paved the way for the Palestine Liberation Organization's (PLO's) signing of the Oslo Accords, and Jordan's signing of the Wadi Araba pact, which made possible further increases in the pace of economic growth.[5]

Economic experts exclude the period of the al-Aqsa intifada from this picture, since it affected the Israeli economy negatively. In the four years of the intifada, the Israeli economy lost approximately 12 billion US dollars, and the per capita GDP declined by approximately 1800 US dollars/year.[6] Undoubtedly, these figures lend credibility to the conclusion that the security situation and structure has a noticeable effect on economic activity

2. The fate of the peace treaties and defense spending

In this section of the study, I will lay out the strategic risks that the Arab revolts could hold, and their consequences on the level of defense spending, as estimated by analysts and the security and economic elites in Israel.

The revolts occurring across the Arab world have provoked fears among the decision-makers and economic elites that the transformations resulting from these revolts will threaten the achievements Israel has attained from the peace agreements.

The Israeli elites view the ongoing events in the Arab world as a threat to the Camp David agreement, which allowed the Zionist entity to decrease its defense spending and increase its investment in civilian sectors that promote development and keep away the ghost of economic stagnation.

Oded Eran, chair of Israel's National Security Research Center, believes that between the signing of Camp David in 1979, and the outbreak of protests demanding change in Tahrir Square on January 25, 2011, there were absolutely no doubts about Egypt's commitment to the accord. Eran states that repeatedly surprised when the Egyptian regime continued to adhere to Camp David despite Israel's bombing of the Iraqi nuclear facilities in 1981, its invasion of Lebanon in 1982, the outbreak of two intifadas in Palestine, the second war on Lebanon in 2006, and the war on Gaza in 2008.

In fact, instead of genuinely protesting Israel's behavior, Egypt worked hard to pacify Arab states when Israeli practices provoked anger across the region.[7] Eran would not be surprised if Egypt reneged on the Camp David agreement now, basing his conclusion on the results of a public opinion poll conducted by the Pew Research Center that showed that 54% of the Egyptian population consider the annulment of the Camp David agreement as necessary, versus 36% who consider its maintenance as essential.[8]

Dan Eldar, who has previously held leadership positions in the Mossad and who currently works as a lecturer in Middle Eastern Studies at Tel Aviv University, reaches the same conclusion as Eran, indicating that the removal of Mubarak's regime will allow the expression of a deeply rooted enmity towards Israel that lurks in the Egyptian unconscious.

He believes that the Islamists' integration into Egyptian political life will lead to their alliance with the military leadership, predicting that such an alliance will hasten the demise of the Camp David alliance.[9] The Orientalist scholar Alexander Belli believes that the next Egyptian regime will refrain from cancelling the Camp David agreement in order to avoid losing international legitimacy, but that it will work to weaken it until the responsibility for cancelling it falls upon Israel.[10]

Due to these fears, the Israeli military elite and a number of economic experts and influential businessmen believe that the threats that could be brought forth by the Arab revolts will impose radical changes on the size and structure of the defense budget, in addition to a radical restructuring of the Israeli priority ladder.

The military elite and a number of economic experts and interested parties believe that the threats brought forth by the Arab revolutions will impose enormous pressures on Israel's security budget and its structure, in addition to a radical restructuring of the Israeli priority ladder.

This has been clearly expressed by Benny Gantz, the Israeli military's chief of general staff, who said that the changes that are occurring in the Arab world demand the allocation of extra resources to the military, arguing that these transformations had increased the levels and dimensions of threats on all the front lines.[11]

Similarly, the former head of Israeli military intelligence, Amos Yadlin, has called for an "upsurge" in the security budget that must occur if the dire prophecies about the collapse of Camp David prove true. He believes that Israel now must prepare to defend itself against Egypt, with all that entails regarding a radical expansion and restructuring of the Israeli military, necessitating a considerable increase in the size of the defense budget.[12]

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak agrees that the changes in Egypt represent a true danger to the Camp David agreement, expecting that post-revolutionary Egyptian parties will compete to show animosity towards Israel and the United States.

Barak believes that this scenario will entail a radical increase in defense spending; he also predicts that Israel will not be able to meet these security costs alone, and should ask the United States to pay an extra USD 20 billion as a contribution to help Israel cope with the consequences of the Arab revolts for its national security. Barak also has advised the Americans that such an investment would bring positive returns for the United States, "because ensuring Israel's superiority is one of the factors of stability in an unstable region".[13]

Although Israeli's business and economic establishments traditionally reject the formulations the security elite uses to justify increased defense spending, some view the current transformations in the Arab world as justification for radical changes to this budget. Uri Galai, CEO of the Sigma-PCM investment group, believes that the size of the Israeli defense budget in the past three decades has fundamentally relied on the state of calm on Israel's borders with Egypt, Jordan and Syria, which will not continue.

For this reason, Galai expects that the increasing security costs will lead the Israeli government to ransack the various civilian ministries of their financial resources, siphoning the funds off to the Defense Ministry.[14]Michel Strawczynski, deputy director at the Bank of Israel's Research Department, also expects that the defense budget will be increased due to ongoing changes in the Arab world.[15]

The Israelis' starting point is an assumption that the success of the Egyptian Revolution could lead to essential changes in the Arab world that represent security challenges with concomitant and exorbitant economic costs. There are doubts over Jordan's commitment to the Wadi Araba agreement in light of its rejection by Jordanian public opinion, and Israelis also expect a tsunami in the wake of the Palestinian Authority's attempt to seek United Nations acknowledgement of a Palestinian state; they are also concerned over the repercussions of the murky situation in Syria.

Danny Rothschild, head of the Institute for Policy and Strategy at the Hertzliya Center and former director of research for Israeli military intelligence, believes that the threat posed by the Arab revolts has been magnified by the fact they have broken out at a time when negotiations with the Palestinians have broken down.[16]

Those demanding an increase in the defense budget justify this by saying that security expenditure represents, in fact, a strategic investment in economic activity; this spending will be mobilized in a manner that aims to limit dangers to security that would affect the economy. From the above, it is clear that the dominant trend in Israeli analysis regards the Arab revolts as heralding a change in Israel's strategic environment in general, which will require vast security measures that, in turn, necessitate an increase in defense spending.

3. The "1973 Syndrome" obsession

Analysts in Israel believe that the consequences of the democratic revolts in the Arab world will not only force increases in defense spending, but also affect growth rates and cause economic stagnation, which will translate into a major decline in Israeli GDP.

This suggests that if defense spending's portion of GDP and the state's budget is doubled - i.e. if these expectations turn out to be true - Israel will be threatened with a return to the same conditions prevailing after the 1973 war, with all that that entails regarding transforming growth into stagnation, as well as ballooning inflation.[17]

Zvi Lavi [, the economics commentator of the daily Yedioth Ahronoth, believes that the expected increase in defense spending brought on by the changes in the Arab world will lead Israel to implement a policy of economic austerity, based on the dominant principle in Israel which states that between security immunity and social immunity, one must unhesitatingly choose the former.[18]

One of the visible signs of this austerity is the fact that there has been a retreat from the tendency that had dominated prior to the breakout of the Arab revolts, which was to decrease taxes.

Now, he expects that Israel will actually resort to imposing new taxes in order to meet security needs. Lavi expects that this increased defense spending will lead to a considerable shrinking of the surplus in annual income, which is usually used to fund social security projects, particularly for lower-income groups.

There are indications that some of the aforementioned concerns have started to come true. When the Arab revolts broke out, several members of the Knesset were demanding that the price of fuel be lowered, and discussions of the subject were held in the legislature, specifically in the Finance Committee."

What increases the Israeli political and economic elite's concerns are fears that the Arab revolts will impose new constraints on Israel's external trade.

" However, following the Egyptian Revolution, repeated explosions along the pipeline that transfers gas from Egypt to Israel, and calls within Egypt to raise the price of that gas, ,the fuel issue was no longer brought up, and the Israelis became preoccupied with investing in research into self-sufficient energy sources.[19]

What worries the Israeli political and economic elites even more is the effect that the Arab revolts may have on limiting Israel's external trade. Some 98% of this activity is transported by sea, and a third of Israeli imports and exports are shipped eastward via the Red Sea, i.e., via the Suez Canal.[20] Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is not only concerned about the closure of Suez to Israeli merchant ships, but also worried that the Egyptians will shut the Straits of Tiran and threaten navigation via the port of Eilat, which would tighten the stranglehold on Israel.[21]

As a reminder of how valuable the region is, it should be noted that Israel considered the shutdown of the straits a sufficient provocation for the wars of 1956 and 1967. Israeli Orientalist scholar Alexander Belli takes this point even further, painting a grim picture of Israel's external trade situation in the wake of the Arab revolts.

He claims that all of the sea ports crucial to Israel's external trade are threatened, arguing that the matter is not confined to the Suez Canal alone, but may extend also to the Bab al-Mandab, which connects the Red Sea to the Indian Ocean; the Straits of Hormuz, which link the Gulf to the Indian Ocean; and even the Bosporus, which connects the Mediterranean Sea to the Black Sea.[22]

According to Belli's logic, in the crisis currently unfolding in Yemen will lead to the ascent to power of an anti-Western government, or to a descent towards absolute chaos, and either scenario would threaten marine navigation, in particular Israeli navigation.

He also points out that Hormuz is at the mercy of Iran, while freedom of navigation through the Bosporus can no longer be guaranteed since the rise of "Erdoganism" in Turkey, which oversees the strait. Belli writes that Israeli decision-makers must draw up a back-up plan to maintain fuel supplies through other ports, or seriously consider increasing investment in searching for petroleum within Israel and offshore.[23]

From the foregoing, it is apparent that there are genuine concerns among Israeli experts that the Arab revolts could create a new strategic environment that would return the Israeli economy to the same situation it found itself in after the 1973 war, which in Israel is described as the "1973 Syndrome".

The risk of economic doldrums

One of the most significant pre-emptive measures that Israeli security experts advocate in light of the ongoing changes in Egypt is the revival of the southern front and an increase in ground troops in order to absorb the security burdens that could result from the new situation.[24]

However, if this scenario does come true, it will not only severely increase the defense budget, but will also contribute in the medium and long terms to damaging the civilian facilities, which would be another contributor to a notable decline in local GDP. In light of the increased demographic weight of the Haredi religious sect, whose followers are exempt from military service, the weight of military service borne by secularists and religious Zionists will continue to grow. But official figures show a large decrease over the past decade in secular youths' willingness to volunteer for the military units that are relied upon to fight battles and wars.

According to a study carried out by Israeli researcher Yoram Beiri, secular youth are now more interested in developing and pioneering social projects instead of taking the pathway of military service, and they now aim for personal success and avoid volunteering for combat units, or choosing the military as a personal career.[25]

This will obviously lead to an extension of the scope of military service for officers and soldiers in the reserves, who end up undertaking 70% of combat efforts. If reserve officers and troops work at and/or run the ports, the effectiveness of these facilities will be reduced, which will have a negative effect on GDP.

Interfering with welfare policy:

Israel has exerted considerable effort to create welfare policies that are based on providing a wide range of social services across all social classes, assuming that such policies help to attract Jewish immigration, and to limit reverse migration. Fiscal year 2010 ended with an 11 billion shekel budget surplus, most of which was used to shore up the welfare services budget.[26]

One of the foundations of welfare policy is an increase in all facets of civilian spending (health, education, housing, etc.) to the detriment of military spending. Thus, the figures show that between the mid-1980s and 2010, civilian expenditures accounted for 40% of the budget, while security expenditures were just 14%.[27]

Obviously, if defense spending grows, it will be at the cost of civilian spending, which presumably means that those in charge of the development of Israel's political economy will find themselves forced to constrict social security measures, which in turn could affect Israel's viability as an attractive environment for immigration, and increase reverse migration. That in itself is a violation of one of the most crucial founding principles of Zionist ideology, which is to actively try to attract more Jews to historical Palestine

4. Increased ties with the United States

Some Israeli analysts warn that an increase in defense spending in light of the Arab revolts will lead to increased ties between Israel and the United States, which could negatively affect Israel's political autonomy.

Strategic affairs scholar Omer Gendler argues that Israel cannot substantially increase its security budget without external help, particularly in light of the global financial crisis. Israel's ability to mobilize financial backing is extremely limited, meaning that the only option left before it will be to resort to the United States, and ask it to substantially increase its military aid.[28]

Gendler warns that additional demands for US aid will increase Israeli dependence on the United States, limiting the margin of political maneuverability for Israel's ruling elite, which is one of the reasons that Israel has sought to minimize this to a great extent over the past years. Gendler also specifies that the implications of this situation will be harsher if there is a sitting US president who is critical of Israeli government policies, as is the case with President Barack Obama.

He warns that as Israel's dependence on the United States is increasing, the latter's esteem in the Arab world is tumbling, since Arabs view it as having provided aid to repressive, dictatorial regimes. Thus, he believes that there is a potential for the United States to actually increase pressure on Israel in order to regain its standing in the Arab world.[29]

In the event that worst-case scenarios regarding the Arab revolts are realized, and Israel's southern, eastern and northern borders become conflict zones, security expenditures will be so large that even increased US aid will not cover them

Gendler also points out that an increase in military aid to Israel will simultaneously lead to economic dangers, arguing that since this aid is usually tied to Israeli pledges to buy American military exports, even at the expense of Israeli military products, this could render the Israeli defense industry unable to compete, or to make profits.

Some Israeli analysts believe that an increase in security expenditure will make Israel a burden on the West, and on the United States in particular, which contradicts Netanyahu's assertion that the transformations in the Arab world will force the West to support Israel financially since it represents "an oasis of democracy and stability in an unstable region", and performs a strategic service for the United States and the West.

However, military commentator Ron Ben Yishai comes to the completely opposite conclusion, arguing that the Arab revolts will reveal how much of a burden, rather than a strategic reserve, Israel is for the West, which could lead to a decline in Western, particularly American, commitment to supporting Israel financially.[30]

Another point of view:

The ongoing internal debate in Israel demonstrates that there is no consensus over whether there is an urgent need to increase the defense budget in light of the Arab revolts. Some analysts believe that objective circumstances commit Egypt in particular to maintain its commitment to its peace accords with Israel, regardless of the nature or ideological beliefs of the next Egyptian regime, due to Egyptian economic considerations.

Research Yitzhak Gal of the Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies argues that most of Egypt's oil and gas fields are near Israel, which means that a deterioration of relations between the two sides towards military confrontation would imperil Egypt's energy resources, including its petroleum and natural gas, whose production accounts for approximately 50% of its export revenue (USD 25 billion), which the government can use to subsidize basic goods consumed by the Egyptian people.[31]

Gal also points out the proximity of the Suez Canal and Egypt's tourist ports (which contribute approximately 35-40% of Egypt's annual revenue) to Israel, makes Egypt unwilling to worsen its relations with Israel and thereby risk putting these assets in danger.

Others believe that the internal situation will keep the next Egyptian regime from prioritizing a confrontation with Israel. David Brodet, chairman of the board of directors at Leumi Bank and former budget director of the Finance Ministry, believes there is no need to increase the defense budget due to the situation in Egypt, arguing that the new rulers of Egypt will be primarily preoccupied with meeting the economic needs of the Egyptian people, and that they will not be concerned with a military confrontation with Israel; he warns that an increase in military expenditures might tilt the region towards an arms race.[32]

5. Conclusion

Despite reservations by business leaders and some experts over the general tendency to increase the defense budget, and although it is far too early to judge the effects of the Arab revolutions on Israel, it is possible to say that the general confusion and doubt brought forth by the revolts will lead Israel to take major security measures that will bleed its treasury dry.

Therefore, Israel will try to rely on additional US aid in order to cover its costs quickly, so that its increased security expenses will not affect the social welfare policies that provide a favorable quality of life for Israelis.

But if the dire prognostications about the possible consequences of the Arab revolts do come true, and the southern, northern and eastern borders become front lines, defense spending will be so great that even additional US aid will not be enough to cover it. At this point, the increased cost of security will lead to:

Cutbacks in public services and a violation of the tenets of the welfare state, meaning a decrease in social security allocations.

Using the state's material and human resources in the service of security demands, which will paralyze the economy.

A decline in growth rates and increased economic stagnation.

A decline in GDP.

A decline in Israel's attractiveness as a place for Jewish immigration, and an increase in reverse migration

Joint resistance strategy

2012-03-08T10:32:00.002-08:00

Hassan Ouda, 21, was unable to call his mother on his cell phone because of the heated debate between his colleagues on the bus on their way to university Saturday morning. They were discussing statements by Ezzat Al-Reshq, member of Hamas's politburo, after a meeting between the group's chief Khaled Meshaal and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in Cairo. It was the first time that Hamas declared its support for "peaceful resistance" against the Israeli occupation. The students were divided over Al-Reshq's declaration which marked a clear shift in the group's position that had previously insisted on armed resistance as the only means to liberate Palestine.

It was clear that the majority of students supported the statement. Indeed, agreement between Meshaal and Abbas to focus on peaceful resistance or "popular resistance" is the most significant understanding that Fatah and Hamas have reached since a rift opened between them after the Oslo Accords were signed in 1993. Publicising this agreement confirms what Al-Ahram Weekly reported last week that the meeting between Meshaal and Abbas would essentially focus on reaching consensus on a joint political agenda in the coming phase.

Hence, although Meshaal's meeting did not result in an announcement about the identity of the candidate who will form the next government, agreement on prioritising peaceful resistance in the coming phase demonstrates flexibility in Hamas's position. At the same time, Fatah's admission that negotiating with Israel is no longer viable and that the next phase requires that the reconciliation agreement is implemented to augment the ability of Palestinians to isolate Israel on the international stage indicates that the leaders of the Palestinian Authority (PA) have finally realised the futility of negotiations and settlement.

Iyad Al-Siraj, member of the National Dialogue and Conciliation Committee, endorsed Hamas's declaration of support for peaceful resistance saying that it demonstrates "maturity, perception and a high degree of responsibility and political understanding." Al-Siraj added that Meshaal has adopted a moderate and responsible posture close to the position of Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan and the leader of Tunisia's Al-Nahda Movement Rached Al-Ghanoushi.

"Agreeing on a cabinet has become a minor detail if we look at the bigger picture that shows consensus between Fatah and Hamas on a political and strategic partnership of resistance that will contribute to isolating Israel and embarrassing it about its adamant rejection of peace," he stated.

Al-Siraj said that Abbas and Meshaal talked "rationally about the truce, the 1967 border and peaceful resistance, which infuriated Israel because any Palestinian accord would uncover Israel's games and undermine Netanyahu's claims that the Palestinians do not want peace and that Israel is the perpetual victim of Palestinian violence." He added: "All this requires a united leadership and goes hand-in-hand with a long-term plan to close the gap in Palestinian society and focus on building a human being and system that respects freedoms and the law."

Al-Siraj noted that any Palestinians who launch missiles at Israel in the coming phase would be helping Israel demonise the Palestinians in front of world public opinion.

As for forming the next government, it appears that the matter will be decided during meetings between representatives of Palestinian factions in Cairo in the second half of December. Salah Al-Bardawil, a leading Hamas figure, said that the issue was not discussed during the reconciliation meeting between Abbas and Meshaal on 24 November in Cairo. Al-Bardawil added that there is agreement between Fatah and Hamas to postpone discussions of this issue until the expanded meeting of factions on the matter.

"It will be a huge accomplishment if during the next meeting there is consensus on the composition of the government with the participation of all factions," he told the Weekly. Al-Bardawil added: "If they cannot agree on the cabinet, the issue will be postponed until after legislative and presidential elections are held. Fatah and Hamas representatives agree on the need to include all Palestinian factions in forming the government and expressing their views now. We want everyone to be partners in shouldering the responsibility of the coming phase."

Sources told the Weekly that there is a secret agreement between Fatah and Hamas to postpone discussions of forming the next government until after legislative elections are held in May 2012. According to informed Palestinian sources, Abbas told Meshaal that he would not be able to fire Fayyad right now out of concern that the US and EU would suspend assistance to the PA. The source continued that Abbas explained to Meshaal that Fayyad would in all cases be forced to resign after the coming elections.

But Salam Fayyad, who is mindful of the accord between Abbas and Meshaal, is once again trying to use funds to pressure Abbas not to let him go. Fayyad asserts that the PA will not be able to pay civil servant salaries if Israel continues to withhold tax revenues that it collects on behalf of the PA. Israel stopped handing over tax money after UNESCO's decision to accept Palestine as a member in the international organisation. At the same time, Netanyahu said that reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas means that taxes will be permanently withheld.

"We will not be able to pay salaries without tax transfers from Israel," Fayyad told reporters. "It's not just a matter of salaries only, but also the PA's ability to meet its other obligations including paying PA debts to the private sector."

The leaders of Fatah see through Fayyad's ruse and do not believe him. "Threats by Israel and the US do not scare us, and will not make us concede our position and principles," countered Faisal Abu Shahla, member of the parliamentary oversight committee and a leading figure in Fatah. "Conciliation is an integral part of Palestinian principles; we will not trade our principles and national partnership with all factions in return for money and US support."

Abu Shahla added that the meeting between Abbas and Meshaal "left a good impression, unlike previous meetings". He expected that grassroots activities will return for both groups in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, since it is a dire necessity. He asserted that popular events for either Fatah in Gaza or Hamas in the West Bank should not be hindered. Abu Shahla continued that reality dictates an end to political detentions and other manifestations of division that occurred since the events of July 2007.

Kayd Al-Ghoul, member of the politburo of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), said that Palestinian factions will discuss two pertinent issues in Cairo: national Palestinian partnership among all factions, and consensus on a comprehensive national strategy in the coming phase. Al-Ghoul underscored the importance of Palestinian factions participating in discussions on the apparatus of implementing the reconciliation agreement on the ground, although the nature of this apparatus is unclear. He asserted that the national strategy must be a frame of reference for any diplomatic action on the regional or world stage, and in confronting the occupation.

Meshaal said he was optimistic about his meeting with Abbas in Cairo. He told Al-Rai newspaper, which is affiliated with the Gaza government, that his group will do its best to implement the agreement on the ground and hoped that the political environment will be conducive to this. He added that Fatah and Hamas are both sincere and have good intentions, especially that this spirit was prevalent during the meeting with Abbas.

Meshaal continued that both groups are serious about ending divisions and accomplishing Palestinian reconciliation. "Palestinian rhetoric is united and complementary," he said. "Hamas is calling for unity and closing ranks." He added that reconciliation within society and among clans must be achieved in order to heal the wounds of the previous phase.

The flexibility of Fatah and Hamas has shown that the crisis of choices that faced the two groups caused the leaders in both camps to drastically revise their domestic political agendas and positions, and this augmented the chances of ending internal division. The most conspicuous proof of this flexibility is closer understanding between the two groups regarding a joint political and strategic agenda

War rapidly approaches

2012-03-08T10:31:00.000-08:00

The signs of joy were obvious on 10-year-old Ramadan's face as he kissed his mother goodnight on Thursday night. His father, Bahgat Al-Zaalan, 37, had promised that he would take him Friday morning with the rest of his siblings and mother on an outing to the amusement park, and thereafter they would have lunch at a restaurant in Gaza City.

While Ramadan and the rest of his family slept in their family home west of Al-Nasr district in northern Gaza, they were attacked by missiles that destroyed the house, killing Bahgat and fatally injuring Ramadan. His mother and three siblings are injured, one critically, and his grandparents in the next door house were also injured.

While Ramadan's family were asleep dreaming about an exciting day in the morning, three US-made Israeli Apache helicopters fired several missiles at a Hamas military location close to the Al-Zaalan home. Three missiles landed on the house, leveling it and causing much destruction to the neighbouring house. Palestinian security sources insist that the Israeli army targeted the house on purpose, since many times Israeli planes are able to selectively target small cars on busy streets without harming other vehicles.

Targeting Palestinian homes with people inside was a gruesome tactic used by Israel during its war on Gaza at the end of 2008. Last week's attack brought back bitter memories of that time. This feeling is enforced by the fact that Israel returned to its policy of attacking homes on Sunday night. One young girl was critically injured and her father was also injured when the occupation army fired a missile on a house in Al-Zeitoun neighbourhood. The attack could have had a worse outcome if it wasn't for the fact that the family was having a late night in the garden outside their house, and not inside the building.

Prominent Palestinian security sources told Al-Ahram Weekly that through these attacks the Israeli army is trying to instigate a confrontation with the Palestinian resistance, especially Hamas, in order to achieve specific goals. The sources added that targeting homes is part of a series of attacks by the occupation army that target military leaders of Palestinian resistance groups. In the afternoon of 8 December, Israel assassinated Essam Al-Batsh, 43, the leader of one of Fatah's military wings, and his nephew Sobhi, 20, a military activist in Hamas.

These killings were preceded by a clear escalation in incitement by Israeli generals to launch a new military attack on Gaza, similar to the last war in 2008. A number of Israeli generals who previously were in charge of the Southern Command of the Israeli army argued that a massive military campaign on the Gaza Strip is only a matter of time. These revelations coincided with Israeli media reports that large-scale military games are underway in the Negev Desert, Tasaelim region, by the Israel army to train for a military campaign against Gaza. This is the main training area for the occupation army.

General Yoav Galant, the former commander of the Southern Command, his predecessor General Dan Harel, and General Shmuel Tamir, the former commander of Israeli forces in the Gaza Strip, agreed that a military strike against Gaza is necessary because if the status quo remains it would mean surrendering to the fact that Gaza will be a threat for Israel, and deteriorating security conditions inside Israel. But it seems that the scenarios proposed by the three generals do not include any incentives for the leaders of security and political powers in Israel to launch a military attack on Gaza.

The main reason why Israel wants to quickly attack Gaza is because of the transformations taking place in the Arab world, especially Egypt. The debate in Israel indicates that the primary assumption that decision makers in Israel agree on is that the results of the first round of parliamentary elections in Egypt are very disturbing, because they show that the Muslim Brotherhood will play a leading role in shaping Egyptian policies in the coming phase.

Ron Ben-Yishai, a leading Israeli commentator, argues that decision makers in Tel Aviv know that Hamas is an extension of the Muslim Brotherhood and therefore they expect that Israel's ability to strike Hamas after conditions settle in Egypt will be limited. The assumption is that Egypt, under the Brotherhood, will not tolerate any Israeli step towards attacking the Gaza Strip, which makes the rulers of Israel want to take the initiative and quickly strike Hamas now.

There is another reason why Tel Aviv wants to hasten the attack on Gaza, essentially because there is an increasing chance that US President Barack Obama's will win a second term. Ari Shavit, a prominent Israeli analyst, states that decision makers in Israel anticipate that Obama will take a harder stance towards Netanyahu's government because it embarrassed him on purpose and unashamedly manipulates differences in US domestic politics. Also, because he realises that the conduct of Netanyahu's government has greatly harmed US interests in the region.

Shavit added that Netanyahu knows that he will be Obama's spoilt child until US presidential elections are held in November 2012, because the latter needs Jewish votes and campaign funds. But everything will change if Obama wins a second term because he will be free of re-election restraints. Hence, Netanyahu's government knows that it must quickly carry out any missions that require strong US support before the US elections to ensure Obama's backing, including a strike against Gaza. Some Israeli circles believe that if a final decision is taken to launch a military attack on Gaza or Hizbullah or Iran, this must happen before next November.

Retired Colonel Gabi Siboni, director of the Military and Strategic Affairs Programme at the Institute for National Security Studies in Israel, believes that international and regional conditions do not allow for a root solution such as missile attacks or destroying the infrastructure and human resources responsible for resistance operations in the Gaza Strip.

Also, political action is on hiatus and cannot result in understandings that would result in two key goals. First, restoring Israel's deterrence capability in light of its erosion at the end of the war Israel launched against Gaza at the end of 2008. Achieving this goal requires carrying out an overwhelming military strike against the "enemy" that would require it a long time to recover.

Siboni stated that the second goal is to limit the duration of the military campaign, especially by curbing the damages Israel would suffer. This requires long and difficult training on how to quickly eliminate the capabilities of Palestinian groups to launch rockets by taking control of areas where rockets are launched.

In order to limit the damage in Israel resulting from a military campaign, Siboni suggested strengthening the civic Israeli front to withstand rocket attacks by building electronic and actual shields around settlements that are expected to be the primary targets of rocket attacks.

Israeli leaders realise that achieving these goals requires working inside residential areas, since the Gaza Strip has the highest population density in the world. This means that achieving the above goals would result in immense damages for Palestinian civilians. But Tel Aviv knows that its international standing is at rock bottom and it is politically damaged since the last war on Gaza as a result of a very strong response to the Israeli onslaught, especially from Western public opinion.

Further complicating matters for Israel is the fact that Arab public opinion in the wake of democratic revolutions shows a heightened interest in Israel's actions, and will pressure Arab rulers to take action against Israel. Therefore, it is obviously in Israel's interest not to kill a large number of civilians in its coming attacks. Some Israeli military sources are even suggesting the evacuation of Palestinian civilians in all areas that will be targeted, to reduce damages, allowing the military campaign to proceed with minimal international and regional opposition

Through force alone

2012-03-08T10:30:00.000-08:00

Fatemah Al-Jarbouni, 68, is trying to be by herself as she weeps sometimes in silence and sometimes wails out loud. She has lost hope that her daughter, Lina, serving a 17-year sentence, will be released from an Israeli jail as part of the second and final phase of the deal to exchange prisoners between Hamas and Israel that took place on Sunday evening.

At the family home in the town of Araba in Al-Jaleel region in northern Palestine, family members decided not to turn on the television as Arab and Israeli satellite channels continuously report on the deal, broadcasting footage of released male and female prisoners with their families. Lina's family don't want to make it any more painful for the mother, whose daughter is one of two female prisoners who were not released because Hamas negotiators did not know that they were imprisoned, and therefore did not put their names on the list in the first phase.

Now Lina will remain in prison until 2019, when she finishes her sentence.

Hamas was embarrassed to find out that its negotiating team did not have complete information on the number and identities of female Palestinian prisoners in occupation prisons, which left the two women out of the deal. The two are also Israeli nationals and Tel Aviv usually refuses to include Palestinian Israeli nationals in prisoner exchange deals.

Hamas spokesmen have tried to explain what happened, but their justifications do not convince the families of either woman behind bars. A source in Hamas told Al-Ahram Weekly that a deal was struck between Egypt, Israel and Hamas to release the women in a special agreement later.

Tel Aviv alone holds the decision on which prisoners to release in the second phase of the prisoner exchange, and indeed the second phase of prisoner releases highlighted Israel's criteria for releasing prisoners. Essentially, that they are not members of Hamas or Islamic Jihad; none of them live in Jerusalem or are Israeli citizens; they are not convicted of killing or injuring settlers or occupation forces; and they only had a relatively short time remaining on their sentences.

The deputy chief of Hamas's politburo, Moussa Abu Marzouq, admitted that it was up to Israel to decide on who to release, but added that the prisoner exchange deal "does not include any prisoner whose sentence ends before 2013." Abu Marzouq added: "Israel decided on all the names of prisoners, but Hamas stipulated that none of them should be prisoners whose sentences ends before 2013." He stated that Israel did not include the two female prisoners, who are also Israeli nationals, although the deal also included prisoners who are children and sick.

A source in Hamas said that all 550 prisoners who were released were convicted of security crimes not felonies, and will return to their homes and not be exiled, adding that 500 prisoners are from the West Bank, 43 from the Gaza Strip, two from Jerusalem and two Jordanians. The source explained that the second phase of the prisoner exchange was the result of negotiations during three rounds of talks between Egyptian and Israeli officials. The source continued that negotiations also included the need to end punitive measures in Israeli prisons against Palestinian prisoners that began after Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit was captured. According to this source, Israel is expected to stop using solitary confinement and banning studying and visits for prisoners.

"We also asked for freedom of movement for prisoners released in phase one who were banned from travelling overseas, whether for medical or personal reasons," the source noted. He added that Israel was responsive to many of these Egyptian requests, stating that the second phase included 20 members of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, 50 from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), 300 from Fatah, and the rest independents not affiliated to any group.

None of those released in the second phase belonged to Hamas or Islamic Jihad, which disheartened the families of Hamas members. Samer Abu Taher is angry that his brother Khaled, who has five years left in prison, was not released. "Khaled is a member of Hamas and was put in prison as punishment for his activism in the group's military wing," Abu Taher explained to the Weekly. "That's why we expected Hamas would exclusively be concerned with releasing its members."

Contrary to the disappointment of Abu Taher, who lives in Al-Qarara village in the south of the Gaza Strip, there are joyful celebrations at the Eissa family home a few hundred metres away. Mohamed, the family's eldest son who is a member of Fatah, was released Sunday evening as part of the deal.

Jumaa Ibrahim Abu Jowayfel, who was released in the second round of the deal after serving four years of an eight-year term in Israeli jails, declared: "Today, my joy is priceless. I cannot believe I am out of prison although I only spent a short time behind bars compared to a large number of prisoners, especially those who are still in prison." An exhausted Abu Jowayfel, who is a member of Fatah, said that by closing this deal and releasing 1,027 prisoners from Israeli jails, Hamas has proven its worthiness and effectiveness more than others. It also proves that prisoners will not be released without more soldiers being captured, he said.

"I am jubilant but my joy is incomplete because I left nearly 5,000 prisoners behind," said Moussa Abu Muammar after spending five years in prison. "I shared with them the pain and suffering of prison, as well as being away from our families and homes." Abu Moussa, a member of the PFLP, said that the exchange deal "has honoured all Palestinians without exception", and proved that "the language of force is the only effective way to deal with the Israeli occupation. A clear example of this is that [Tel Aviv] agreed to all the conditions of the Palestinian resistance and these prisoners were released."

The Ezzeddin Al-Qassam Brigades, the military wing of Hamas, said that the Israelis kept their side of the bargain by implementing the prisoner exchange deal during the first and second phase, on schedule and as per agreement, "which is a step worthy of note and an achievement for both the resistance and Egyptian mediation." At a news conference in Gaza on the eve of implementing the second phase of the deal, Abu Obeida, spokesman for Al-Qassam Brigades, said: "The adherence by the occupation to the deal is more proof that the occupation is fearful of the resistance, and is very leery of the consequences of breaching an agreement with it, although [Israel] often abrogates all its commitments in political agreements in front of the whole world since none of these agreements rely on the most effective pressure tool, namely resistance."

Abu Obeida added that some "violations" were reported in Israel's execution of the deal, especially in applying some criteria, and these violations are being revised with Egyptian mediators "to achieve the best outcome". He described the release of any Palestinian prisoner as "a victory for our people, families and resistance, irrespective of their political affiliation. We are religiously, morally and patriotically obligated to all prisoners in occupation prisons, irrespective of their factions."

Abu Obeida concluded: "As [members of the] Palestinian resistance, our ambition was, is and always will be to empty the prisons of the enemy of all our imprisoned heroes. Our proud and historic victory in this deal will not distract us from our sacred duty of liberating the free resistance activists from jail." He added that "the issue of prisoners is a priority for the Palestinian resistance, and more will follow after this immense military, security and political effort by the men of the resistance. It will be a weapon and ammunition for the courageous resistance in its future battles against the enemy, especially on the issue of prisoners."

In short, the conclusion by the majority of Palestinians is that Israel only understands the language of force, and wasting time in seeking political settlements while the balance of power remains in Israel's favour is futile

Time of change for Hamas

2012-03-08T10:29:00.000-08:00

From his seat on the balcony with a view of the sea, Rateb Zeidan, 45, is carefully watching the waves ebb and flow on the shore. Zeidan looks at the blue azure filling the horizon, and even as he speaks he keeps an eye on the enchanting scene. He is one of the prisoners released from Israeli prisons two months ago as part of the prisoner exchange deal between Hamas and Israel.

Zeidan's family lives in the West Bank, but he was exiled to the Gaza Strip since his release after spending 21 years behind bars. He was serving a double life sentence plus 20 years after being convicted of killing three occupation soldiers in a battle with Israeli military forces. The fight was in response to a massacre by occupation forces in the village of Qabya near Ramallah at the beginning of the first Intifada that killed 10 Palestinians and injured dozens.

Although it has been two months since his release, Zeidan still cannot believe he is free. "I feel as if I was a wilting plant for a long time, and suddenly the rain came," he tells Al-Ahram Weekly. "It's a wonderful feeling of repose, joy and disbelief." He said he can't stop looking at the sea and walking on the beach because for 21 years his feet did not touch sand.

During the interview, many released prisoners were walking on the beach despite very cool temperatures, and some even played in the water.

If the eruption of revolutions for democratic transformation was the key event of 2011 in many Arab states, the most important event in Palestine was accomplishing the prisoner exchange deal between Hamas and Israel. Never in the history of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict had the Palestinian resistance been able to force Israel to release Palestinian prisoners.

The prisoner exchange deal was a substantial and crucial national accomplishment for Palestinians that markedly improved the national public mood. "The prisoner exchange is the most positive reward of Palestinian resistance," asserted Salah Ayad, whose brother Hamed was released after 22 years in jail. "My brother was serving a life sentence, and if it wasn't for the deal he would have died in prison. But today, he is free, has married and is dreaming about starting a family at the age of 45."

Nonetheless, some Palestinian commentators believe that after the deal there are many challenges awaiting the Palestinian resistance, especially Hamas, and so urge for caution. This is especially pertinent regarding resistance operations against Israel, such as launching missiles from the Gaza Strip.

Nahed Al-Sheikh, a writer, believes that Netanyahu's government understands the implications of the deal for the Palestinians, in terms of boosting Hamas's popularity. It also knows the strong criticism by the Israeli elite of the deal who said it represented "subjugation and weakness" in the face of what they described as "terrorism". They argue that it corroded Israeli deterrence in confronting resistance.

Al-Sheikh continued that after the deal Netanyahu's government would be more sensitive to resistance operations launched from Gaza, and would use it as a pretext to use unequal force in response to these operations, irrespective of the outcome. He explained that the Israelis would use their response to resistance operations in the future as a means to rebuild their deterrence in confronting Palestinian factions.

Other Palestinians believe that Hamas should realise that after the prisoner exchange deal there is a need to integrate Palestinians in the new Arab order that has been shaped by the revolutions for democratic change in the Arab world. Sources told the Weekly that some figures inside Hamas are working on ending the bilateral nature of the confrontation with Israel. The group is trying to create an extensive Arab front to confront Israel that would require Hamas and other resistance factions to integrate into the Arab order, because such integration would curtail Israel's dominance. Especially that Tel Aviv knows it must be mindful of Arab public opinion before taking any steps towards the Palestinians, particularly in the Gaza Strip.

Nonetheless, these circles warned Hamas that integrating into the order taking shape in the Arab world requires the resistance to coordinate action towards Israel with the Arab environment, especially resistance operations. Hamas is also advised to show flexibility and wisdom and not be roused by Israel's provocations.

The group should be mindful of unstable conditions in Arab states after the revolutions for democratic change and that many domestic challenges are distracting Arab governments, especially the ones that overthrew despotic regimes and are now transitioning, most prominently Egypt. At the same time, the resistance -- especially Hamas -- is counselled not to base its policies towards Israel entirely on consultation and coordination with the Arabs.

After the exchange deal, more members within Hamas support national reconciliation with Fatah. This resulted in a conspicuous and public dispute among leading figures in Hamas. Many group leaders, especially those abroad, are convinced that the group cannot be integrated into the Arab order unless it reconciles with Fatah. This would require Hamas to agree to significant compromises, such as supporting peaceful resistance over armed resistance in the coming phase.

This position was declared after a recent meeting in Cairo between Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Khaled Meshal, the director of Hamas's politburo. Although the camp urging for reconciliation with Fatah realises that Abbas has not taken genuine steps to achieve reconciliation, they believe Abbas, his Palestinian Authority, and Fatah have a very narrow margin to manoeuvre. This is especially true after the completion of the prisoner exchange deal that made Palestinians ponder the effectiveness of Abbas's insistence to pursue settlement and sacrifice national unity (essentially a gamble on the benefits of opening up to the outside world).

The pro-reconciliation camp believes that Abbas has only two options: either achieve reconciliation that allows for the restructuring of Palestinian affairs based on new foundations, or risk completely losing credibility in front of the Palestinian masses. They assert that reconciliation will not only benefit Abbas but also everyone on the Palestinian scene, especially Hamas, since rebuilding national solidarity limits Israel's ability to attack Palestinians and eliminates excuses by Arab regimes to abandon their responsibilities towards the Palestinian people.

It appears that the head of the Gaza government, Ismail Haniyeh, is in the opposite Hamas camp, which is unenthusiastic about reconciliation. Haniyeh adopts positions that embarrass the group's leadership abroad, such as declaring at celebrations of Hamas's 24th anniversary: "Armed resistance is the strategic method and choice to liberate Palestinian land from the sea to the river." It was as if he wanted to overturn what Meshal and Abbas agreed on regarding "popular resistance".

Mahmoud Al-Zahhar, a leading Hamas figure, went even further in statements to the Weekly. Al-Zahhar described Abbas as "the major obstacle hindering reconciliation because he is still counting on the Israel-US axis. Being bound to the US makes it difficult for Abbas to sincerely and seriously embrace reconciliation. There is a US-Israeli veto on reconciliation, therefore there will be more excuses to avoid ending internal divisions."

He further doubted that Abbas wants to turn over a new leaf. "What new leaf?" Al-Zahhar retorted. "Political arrests continue and security cooperation is in full throttle in pursuit of resistance fighters, to prevent them from moving against the occupation. At the same time, they still stand by earlier positions. After all this, how can there be talk of turning over a new leaf?"

Nevertheless, within Hamas, those calling for reconciliation are more than those who oppose it. But despite this internal dispute, it is obvious that the prisoner exchange deal has pushed Hamas towards reconciliation and convinced its leadership of the need to integrate into the Arab order that is taking shape after the Arab revolutions

Viruses instead of missiles

2012-03-08T10:27:00.002-08:00

Over the past week, the hotline at Israel's Central Bank was inundated by an avalanche of phone calls from tens of thousands of Israelis who panicked after it was disclosed that their credit card information was hacked by someone who claims to be a Saudi citizen living in Mexico. The compromised accounts are estimated at hundreds of millions of dollars, making it a nightmare scenario for many Israelis inside and outside the country.

Decision-makers in Israel, however, were not as concerned about these citizens losing their savings as they were worried that the hacking was part of a cyber war launched by a hostile party aimed at causing maximal damage to Israel's national security. Israeli officials refuted claims that this was merely a "Saudi hacker" but asserted there is reason to suspect that Iran is behind the attack.

Ben Kasbet, a senior commentator at Maariv newspaper, quoted Israeli military sources as saying that Iran has a clear interest in launching a strategic cyber war against Israel in response to the cyber attacks it endured recently and accused Israel of carrying them out, specifically the Stuxnet worm that paralysed the centrifuge system used to enrich uranium in Iranian nuclear facilities. There have also been several attacks that targeted missile silos across Iran. "Israel has chosen to launch cyber war against Iran," Kasbet wrote, "and now it must face the same type of war. It only has itself to blame."

All of Israel's national security agencies agree that cyber war is to be taken seriously. Israeli Minister for Home Front Defence Matan Vilnai said that since civil and military institutions in Israel use highly advanced technology, these systems are more susceptible to hacking by hostile parties.

Shamuel Mentsur, the manager of a cyber security company in Israel, said that any digital war against Israel would completely paralyse the infrastructure of the country, such as airports, production in economic sectors, as well as private institutions. Mentsur explained that hostile parties could use technology to penetrate public and military communication networks, not only to acquire sensitive and critical secret information, but also pass on misinformation to decision makers in Israel that could cause serious harm.

Amos Yadlin, the former chief of military intelligence, said the Israeli army has already created a military unit for electronic warfare. Maariv quoted Yadlin as saying: "Electronic warfare is based on three principles: gathering intelligence, launching attacks and providing protection." As part of this policy, a new leadership was chosen especially for electronic warfare at what is known as Unit 8200, the electronic listening unit in Israel's military intelligence.

The new division is headed by a brigadier general and includes experts in space electronics and intelligence officers. It specialises in protecting the networks of sensitive military and civilian institutions such as the Israeli Power Company, airports and other critical locations. It also launches quick digital attacks on hostile parties. The Israeli army took further steps by announcing its intention to recruit 300 Israeli hackers, to put them to work in countering attacks that could be made against vital military targets.

The army Chief of Staff Beni Ganz has asked for revisions of the five-year plan that was recently approved by the military in order to allocate several million dollars to protect sensitive army systems. Meanwhile, the army opened for the first time this week an academy for what it described as "cyber fighters" whose job will be to protect the army's computer systems from virus attacks.

A key question is why Israel believes Iran is the primary suspect in launching electronic war against Tel Aviv, and whether Tehran has the capabilities to pursue such strategic attacks against Israel. Alex Fishman, a senior military commentator in Yediot Aharonot newspaper, believes that experience has shown that the Iranians have the capability to carry out damaging cyber attacks, which is why he takes a more firm position in pointing blame at Iran. "If Iran was recently able to take control of one of the most potent and expensive stealth unmanned US planes using advanced technology, then it is not impossible for Iranians to hack into the credit card database of tens of thousands of Israelis," stated Fishman.

He added that Iran has a record of cyber war and was able to achieve the "incredible" feat of crashing the main command and control operations of US unmanned drones in Iraq, although the headquarters of the unit flying them is located on a military base inside the US. Fishman added that although the US has 14,000 cyber war experts and invests billions of dollars to protect its cyber networks, it was unable to avert Iranian attacks.

Fishman believes there is reason to believe that Iran is capable of tapping into military systems around the world. He added that at the end of the 1980s, the Iranians were able to decipher the codes to Israeli surveillance planes over South Lebanon and pass on to Hizbullah fighters information necessary to help monitor the movements of Israeli special units operating in South Lebanon that was occupied by Israel at the time. This resulted in luring a group of the Israeli Navy's special unit Force 13 into a trap, killing 12 and injuring others.

In August, DigiNotar, a company specialised in online security in Israel, declared bankruptcy after Iranians hacked into the websites of two Israeli intelligence agencies, Mossad and Shin Bet, and the renowned news website Walla. Israeli military sources warn that any war against Israel would include cyber attacks, and that the Israeli military's superior technical capabilities -- in comparison to other armies in the region -- are also a critical weakness.

Yediot Aharonot quoted sources as saying that using advanced technology to strengthen effective coordination among army branches can be the Israeli army's Achilles heel, because advanced technology gives the "enemy" opportunity to infiltrate and paralyse the military structure running Israel's war machine, or manipulating it to target Israel.

The incident of hacking into an extensive credit card database has raised alarm bells among Israelis. The Knesset is scheduled to hold an emergency session to discuss ways of confronting "cyber war", while Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon threatened that cyber intrusion on Israel's sovereignty would bring consequences. In a seminar on Friday in Beersheba, Ayalon said that recent cyber attacks give Israel reason to follow the example of the US that has declared that any attack on its cyberspace is akin to a declaration of war, and it will respond even by launching actual missiles if necessary.

After Israel succeeded in crashing Iran's centrifuge system by using a cyber virus, an Israeli military officer boasted: "Instead of the Air Force, we can use cyberspace; instead of missiles, we can use viruses." It seems that in response Israel is likely to be confronted with other viruses, albeit of foreign origin