Photo from Haaretz

In an historic vote at the United Nations Thursday, Nov. 29, exactly 65 years after passing the Partition Plan for Palestine, the General Assembly voted by a huge majority to recognize Palestine within the 1967 borders as a non-member state with observer status in the UN.  138 countries voted in favor of the resolution, 41 abstained and 9 voted against: Canada, Czech Republic, Israel, U.S., Panama, The Marshall Islands, Palau, Nauru, and Micronesia. 

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, closing his speech to the UN, asserted:

The support of the countries of the world for our endeavor is a victory for truth, freedom, justice, law and international legitimacy, and it provides tremendous support for the peace option and enhances the chances of success of the negotiations. Your support for the establishment of the State of Palestine and for its admission to the United Nations as a full member is the greatest contribution to peacemaking in the Holy Land.

The US opposed the move, with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton calling it “unfortunate and counterproductive.”  U.S. UN envoy Susan Rice said the resolution does not establish Palestine as state, that it prejudges the outcome of negotiations, and ignores questions of security.

Israeli Ambassador to the UN Ron Proser responded to President Abbas’ speech, saying  “the UN was founded to advance the cause of peace. Today the Palestinians are turning their back on peace. Don’t let history record that today the UN helped them along on their march of folly.”

Prime Minister Netanyahu’s office released a statement saying the world had watched a speech “full of dripping venom and false propaganda against the IDF and Israeli citizens. This is not how someone who wants peace speaks.”

An Israeli spokesman announced on Friday that Israel will build 3000 new housing units in the illegal settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and that it will advance plans for the controversial E1 area outside Jerusalem.  If the E1 settlement plans are fully developed by Israel, it would threaten the contiguity of any future Palestinian state by virtually cutting the West Bank into northern and southern portions.

Read full Haaretz article | Read President Abbas’ full speech

Other reactions to the vote:

World weighs in on UN Palestine vote
World headlines showed a mix of emotions – but a lot of common ground on how much impact this may have on prospects for peace.
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/terrorism-security/2012/1130/World-weighs-in-on-UN-Palestine-vote

UN vote celebration in Ramallah
http://edition.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t1#/video/world/2012/11/29/wr-pleitgen-ramallah-reacts-to-un-palestinian-vote.cnn

After Vote, Palestinians and Israel Search for the Next Step
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/30/world/middleeast/palestinians-and-israel-seek-next-step-after-vote.html?ref=middleeast

Vatican hails UN vote, wants Jerusalem guarantees
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=543566&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Palestinian Legal strategy against Israel: The Real Prize is Europe AND Israeli Reaction to UN Vote: Politicians Burn Palestinian Flag, Pundits fear International Criminal Court
http://www.juancole.com/

Supporting Palestine at the UN today is a vote for peace in the Middle East by Hanan Ashrawi
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/29/supporting-palestine-un-vote-for-peace

The International Crisis Group analyzes the politics and new realities of the Gaza situation post-Arab Spring:

For now, the immediate objective must be to ensure fighting truly stops and that the other commitments mentioned in the ceasefire agreement are fulfilled. There is good reason for scepticism given the history of such undertakings and the imprecision in the text itself. But new dynamics in the Middle East potentially could make this time different. Cairo has an incentive to ensure success; it has much to offer – politically, diplomatically and, together with its allies in Ankara and Doha, materially – to Hamas; and the Islamist movement would be loath to alienate Morsi’s Egypt in the way it rarely hesitated to alienate Mubarak’s. By the same token, Israel can take solace in the fact that, even when governed by the Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt proved pragmatic and eager to avoid escalation. If it does not wish this situation to change, it too will have to live up to its undertakings. Finally, the U.S. and President Obama likely acquired new credibility and leverage in Israel by virtue of the unquestioned support they offered Jerusalem; those assets can be used to ensure compliance with the ceasefire agreement.

Read full analysis.

Churches for Middle East Peace outlines recent events including the Palestinian bid for non-member status, speeches by both Palestinian President Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu at the UN, recent protests in Palestine and the financial problems as well as background on those issues.  Read more here.

Presbyterians have had partnerships with Christians in Syria and Lebanon since the early 1800s. Two of their partners recently spoke in New York about how the church is responding to the current crisis in Syria, a crisis that impacts Lebanon.

Watch the 30 minute video featuring the Rev. Dr. Nuhad Tomeh, Associate General Secretary of the Middle East Council of Churches and the PC(USA) Regional Liaison for Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and the Gulf, and the Rev. Fadi Dagher, the General Secretary of the National Evangelical Synod of Syria and Lebanon.

Delegation member meets a man from one of the Palestinian villages slated for demolition to make room for an Israeli firing zone. (Photo by Elior Levy)

European Union and other diplomats from around the world recently  toured some of the 8 villages slated for destruction by the Israelis to make room for a firing zone and called on Israel to halt the scheduled demolitions.   Ecumenical Accompaniers and other advocates from Rabbis for Human Rights and other groups have been following this situation and advocating for a halt to the demolitions for months.  See background on the villages.

 A recent OCHA report summarizes the negative effects of the Israeli designation of large sections of the West Bank, especially the Jordan Valley and the South Hebron Hills, for firing and military zones.  Acording to OCHA, approximately 18% of the West Bank has been designated as a closed military zone for training, or “firing zone”; this is roughly the same amount of the West Bank under full Palestinian authority (Area A, 17.7%).

The diplomats visited the village of Jinba days after  a night raid by masked Israelis to take photographs of structures and count residents frightened the residents.

African Americans for Justice in the Middle East & North Africa is an initiative that has been created in order to build solidarity, in a true Pan-African and Black Internationalist tradition, with the peoples and progressive social movements in North Africa and the Middle East that have been engaged in struggles for democracy, justice and national liberation.  We come together from different organizations, institutions and movements, and some as simply individuals of conscience, who have concluded that silence in the face of injustice and oppression is unacceptable.  We believe that African Americans in the United States of America have a special role in speaking out against enemies of peace, justice and democracy, both foreign and domestic.

So states the preface of a statement by fifty-five black activists and scholars.  They say the time has arrived for an African American voice on US policy towards the regions of North Africa and the Middle East.  They call themselves a “process rather than an organization,” and one of their action points is:

Promoting a clear demand for justice for the Palestinian people as central to peace and stability in the Middle East.  In doing so we join together with non-African Americans, people of different faiths, including but not limited to Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, animists and others, who are committed to justice for the Palestinian people.  We believe that there is a special significance to working with progressive Jews in the USA and Israel who share our abhorrence to the system of oppression experienced by the Palestinian people.

Read the full statement | For more information about African Americans for Justice in the Middle East and North Africa, email aajmena@gmail.com.

A Palestinian family in the Jordan Valley cannot access their land due to Israeli restrictions on it.

Republican Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney has toured Israel and raised controversy in several arenas.  First, he said he would move the US Embassy to Jerusalem, a controversial move that others in the international community have not done.  Then he compared the Israeli economy to the Palestinian economy, implying that a superior Israeli culture accounted for the better Israeli economy.  Read a New York Times editorial about Mr. Romney’s visit.

Meanwhile, more and more sources are pointing out how much the Palestinian economy is decimated by the Israeli occupation of its land and resources.  In a new report, On the Brink: Israeli Settlements and their Impact on the Jordan Valley, Oxfam points out that the Jordan Valley, which could be a potential breadbasket for the Palestinian economy, is actually almost totally controlled (94%) by the Israeli government, settlements and infrastructure.  From the report:

SUMMARY

The Jordan Valley, located in the eastern part of the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT), makes up 30 per cent of the West Bank (see Map 1 on page 7). Requisitions and expropriations of Palestinian land by the Israeli authorities continue to destroy the livelihoods of Palestinians living in the area and, unless action is taken, there are strong indications that the situation will only get worse. The Israeli government recently announced proposals and policies for the expansion of settlements, which, if implemented, will further threaten the living conditions and human rights of Palestinian communities in the Jordan Valley, undermining efforts to bring peace and prosperity to the OPT and Israel.

UNEQUAL ACCESS
Only 6 per cent of the land in the Jordan Valley is currently available for Palestinian use and development.1 While the Israeli settlements there have developed modernised agribusinesses that produce crops for high-value export to the European Union (EU) and international markets, Palestinian farmers – most of whom are smallholders – face restrictions that severely hamper their ability to sell their produce locally, regionally, or internationally.

Development is further constrained because Palestinian families and businesses, and even EU donors and aid agencies, find it nearly impossible to gain permits to build homes, toilets, wells, animal pens, or other vital infrastructure for local communities. Less than 1 per cent of „Area C‟ (the 60 percent of the West Bank under exclusive Israeli control where nearly all of the Jordan Valley is located) has been planned for Palestinian development2 by the Israeli Civil Administration,3 and 94 per cent of permits have been rejected in recent years.4 Essential structures built without development plans and hard-to-obtain permits are frequently demolished in contravention of international law.

It is estimated that if Israeli restrictions on Palestinian development were removed, an additional 50 sq/km of the Jordan Valley could be cultivated, potentially adding $1bn a year to the Palestinian economy, or 9 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP).5

Read full Oxfam report:  ON THE BRINK: Israeli settlements and their impact on Palestinians in the Jordan Valley.

Recent articles in the Israeli and American Jewish press heralded or opposed the recent Israeli Supreme Court ruling that opens up aspects of Israeli religious life to the more liberal streams of organized Judaism. Most American Jews seem to welcome such liberalization because it allows Israel to reflect the diversity of world Jewry.

Jews have had a love/hate relationship with the state of Israel from its origins in 1948. Israel has become increasingly contentious in recent years, mostly in response to the Palestinian question. Nonetheless, the overriding issue often silenced in the press is where everything comes to a head. What does it mean to be Jewish after the Holocaust and after the formation of the state of Israel?

The argument over the kind of religiosity appropriate to a Jewish state will continue into the future. The power of the Orthodox is being challenged. For many Jews, Israel is the ground of their identity and how Jews perceive themselves as it has to do with the state itself. As a symbolic matter, Israel is called upon by a majority of Jews as an affirmation of Jewish survival and flourishing. Thus the expression of Jewish religiosity in Israel serves as a reflecting mirror. Many Jews want to see themselves represented within the Jewish state. In the Jewish community the state of Israel represents more than overt expressions of institutional religion.

What it means to be Jewish is a perennial issue in Jewish history. Yet after the Holocaust and after the creation of the Jewish state of Israel, even the religious part of Jewish identity has shifted. With the assumption of political and military power in Israel and America, Jewish religiosity is no longer a place of refuge where Jews affirm their identity in a larger, mostly hostile, surrounding culture. The new challenge facing Jews is what religiosity means in an empowered Jewish state.

Jews are learning, albeit reluctantly, that Israel is like other states when it uses it power for its own advantage. American Jews have largely sat on the sidelines of the great political and ethical challenges facing the Jewish state. Rather than engaging in criticism of Israeli abuses of power in relation to Palestinians, American Jews have been enablers of these policies. This is true at least of the leadership of American Jewish religious institutions.

Jewishness has often come in a bundle of ethnicity, religion and nationality. Rarely in Jewish history has nationality been tied in a material way to territorial settlement in the land of Israel. The overwhelming arc of Jewish history has played itself out in the Diaspora. But with Israel, this territorial tie now seems clearly defined, the religious debate about Jewish identity may represent an unannounced challenge to this definition. Perhaps the continual struggle over authentic Jewish religion in Israel is partly a sense that Judaism and thus Jewish life is not so connected or at least subsumed under the rubric of a Jewish state. Why else would American Jews care so much about what part of Jewish religion carries the day in Israel?

Yet playing Jewish identity out in a struggle about religiosity may be misplaced. This is especially the case now when Judaism in its various forms has conformed to power–whether in Israel or the United States–as the way forward for the Jewish community. After the Holocaust, Jews have decided that having and linking with empire power is the way to flourish in a world that has often been hostile to Jewish life.

Still, what religion can mean in such a situation is becoming an open wound. Jews who oppose empire in all its forms, including Jewish empire power, are hardly interested in this Orthodox/liberal religion debate. For these Jews any religion worth embracing is one that actively promotes justice. Perhaps they are embracing the oldest form of Jewish religiosity.

Regardless of the Israeli Supreme Court rulings, the political facts on the Israeli/Palestinian ground will ultimately determine the true religion of contemporary Jews or at least its ethical content or lack thereof. Here the ultimate judge will be history rather than God. In the Biblical text, prayer without justice is the height of blasphemy. Injustice renders the “authentic” religion discussion moot. This prophetic sense places the ongoing liberalization of Jewish religion in Israel in its proper perspective for Israeli Jews and American Jews as well. For without justice for Palestinians, what does it mean for Jews to pray to God?
 
Marc H. Ellis is author of over 20 books on Jewish identity and global spirituality, most recently Encountering the Jewish Future. He has recently retired as University Professor of Jewish Studies at Baylor University and is now Distinguished Visiting Professor at the University for Peace in San Jose, Costa Rica.

On July 5, 2012, the European Parliament passed a resolution condemning Israeli policies in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, focusing on home demolitions and forced displacement (see new UNRWA report on home demolitions and displacement).   The resolution uses as background the EU Heads of Mission reports on Area C and Palestinian State Building  and on East Jerusalem.   

From the resolution:

10.  Calls on the Israeli Government and authorities to meet their obligations under international humanitarian law, in particular by:

 11.  Calls for an end to the administrative detention without formal charge or trial of Palestinians by Israeli authorities, for access to a fair trial for all Palestinian detainees, and for the release of Palestinian political prisoners, with special regard for members of the Palestinian Legislative Council, including Marwan Barghouti, and administrative detainees; calls also for the immediate release of Nabil Al-Raee, the artistic director of the Freedom Theatre in Jenin Refugee Camp, arrested on and detained since 6 June 2012; welcomes the agreement reached on 14 May 2012 that allowed for the end of the hunger strike of the Palestinian prisoners and calls for its full and immediate implementation;

12.  Calls for the protection of the Bedouin communities of the West Bank and in the Negev, and for their rights to be fully respected by the Israeli authorities, and condemns any violations (e.g. house demolitions, forced displacements, public service limitations); calls also, in this context, for the withdrawal of the Prawer Plan by the Israeli Government;

13.  Encourages the Palestinian Government and authorities to pay increasing attention to Area C and East Jerusalem in Palestinian national development plans and projects, with the aim of improving the situation and living conditions of the Palestinian population in these areas;

14.  Stresses again that peaceful and non-violent means are the only way to achieve a sustainable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; continues to support, in this context, President Abbas’ policy of non-violent resistance and to encourage intra-Palestinian reconciliation and Palestinian state-building, and considers presidential and parliamentary elections to be important elements of this process;

15.  Reiterates its strong commitment to the security of the State of Israel; condemns any act of violence by any party deliberately attacking civilians, and is appalled by the rocket attacks from the Gaza Strip;

16.  Calls on the Council and the Commission to continue to support and deliver assistance to Palestinian institutions and development projects in Area C and in East Jerusalem with the aim of protecting and strengthening the Palestinian population; calls for improved coordination between the EU and Member States in this field; stresses that Israel must put an end to the practice of withholding customs and tax revenues belonging to the Palestinian Authority;

17.  Calls on the EEAS and the Commission to verify on the ground all allegations concerning the destruction of and damage caused to EU-funded structures and projects in the occupied territory, and submit the results to Parliament;

18.  Calls on the Council and the Commission to continue to address these issues at all levels in the EU’s bilateral relations with Israel and the Palestinian Authority; stresses that Israel’s commitment to respect its obligations under international human rights and humanitarian law towards the Palestinian population must be taken into full consideration in the EU’s bilateral relations with the country;

19.  Urges the EU and Member States again to play a more active political role, including within the Quartet, in the efforts aimed at achieving a just and lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians; stresses again the central role of the Quartet and continues to support the High Representative in her efforts to create a credible perspective for re-launching the peace process;

20.  Reiterates its call for the immediate, sustained and unconditional lifting of the blockade of the Gaza Strip in terms of persons, the flow of humanitarian aid and commercial goods, and for steps allowing for the reconstruction and economic recovery of this area; calls also, with due recognition of Israel’s legitimate security needs, for an effective control mechanism preventing the smuggling of arms into Gaza; takes note of the decision of the Council to extend the mandate of the European Border Assistance Mission Rafah until 30 June 2013 and expects it to fulfil its tasks and play a decisive and effective role as regards the daily management of cross-border relations and the build-up of confidence between Israel and the Palestinian Authority; calls on Hamas to recognise the State of Israel and to give its support to the two-state solution; also calls on Hamas to put an end to the violence perpetrated both internally and externally against the State of Israel;

21.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the EU Special Representative to the Middle East Peace Process, the President of the UN General Assembly, the governments and parliaments of the UN Security Council members, the Middle East Quartet Envoy, the Knesset and the Government of Israel, the President of the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian Legislative Council.

Nof Zion, one of the most recent settlements in East Jerusalem, is now considered illegal under international law. The Levy report contradicts this.

The recently-released Levy report commissioned by Israeli Prime Minister Bejamin Netanyahu’s office has concluded that not only are all outposts legal, but all settlement activity in the West Bank is legal.  The report went on to reject the claim that Israel’s presence in the West Bank is one of an occupying force.  Settler communities hailed the report, others condemned it, as it contradicts many UN resolutions, Israeli supreme court decisions and the Fourth Geneva convention. 

Read Haaretz article 
Read YNet article
Legal experts respond to Levy report
Download Levy report 

The US issued a statement criticizing the report and said it continues to oppose Israeli settlement activity in the West Bank.  Meanwhile, the UN Human Rights Council continues to plan to look into the Israeli settlement question and Israel’s Foreign Ministry says it won’t cooperate with the initiative.  On the question of whether the West Bank is occupied territory, international legal expert  Prof. David Kretzmer, said, “If Israel is not an occupying force, it must immediately relinquish ownership of all private lands seized over the years for military use, taken with authority as the occupying force in an occupied territory, and restore the lands to previous owners,” said Kretzmer.