From info at j-n-v.org Tue Jul 4 14:08:44 2006 From: info at j-n-v.org (JNV) Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2006 14:08:44 +0100 Subject: [JNV] Independence from the USA Message-ID: Dear All 1) Independence... from the USA Here's a poll from yesterday's Daily Telegraph that highlights the growth of understanding and realism in the British public. The growth of 'independence of mind'! 2) This weeks listings of upcoming events around the country Best wishes Maya Evans Milan Rai JNV *** NEWS: 'Britons see US as vulgar empire builder', by Ben Fenton Daily Telegraph, 3 July 2006 (front page news) Britons have never had such a low opinion of the leadership of the United States, a YouGov poll shows. As Americans prepare to celebrate the 230th anniversary of their independence tomorrow, the poll found that only 12 per cent of Britons trust them to act wisely on the global stage. This is half the number who had faith in the Vietnam-scarred White House of 1975. Most Britons see America as a cruel, vulgar, arrogant society, driven by class and racism, crime-ridden, obsessed with money and led by an incompetent hypocrite. American troops are failing either to win "hearts and minds" in Iraq or bring democracy to that country. More than two-thirds who offered an opinion said America is essentially an imperial power seeking world domination. And 81 per cent of those who took a view said President George W Bush hypocritically championed democracy as a cover for the pursuit of American self-interests. *** COMMENT: 'Britain falls out of love with America- What Britons think of the US' by Professor Anthony King Daily Telegraph, 3 July 2006 (The full poll results are supposed to be embedded in this page, but aren't, at the time of writing) YouGov asked respondents to assess the Bush administration's impact on the world beyond America's shores. Their assessment is overwhelmingly negative. Fewer than one quarter, 22 per cent, believe that the present American government's policies and actions make the world a better place to live in. Three times that proportion, 65 per cent, regard America's influence in the world today as predominantly malign. As the figures in the chart also show, confidence in America's ability to handle problems outside its own borders has plummeted over the past three decades. The Gallup Poll in 1975 found that roughly a quarter of Britons, 27 per cent, had considerable confidence in American leadership. That figure has now fallen by more than half to a mere 12 per cent. President Bush's personal ratings in this country are horrendous. Almost no one holds him in high regard as a world leader. Fully 34 per cent think he is a "pretty poor" leader and even more, 43 per cent, reckon he is "terrible" in that role. A majority of Britons regard the US President as not only incompetent but also as a complete hypocrite. As the findings in the chart indicate, 72 per cent of YouGov's respondents reckon Mr Bush cares little for democracy and is merely using his pro-democracy rhetoric as a pretext for pursuing selfish American interests. Even more of YouGov's respondents, 76 per cent, think that, even if the president really does want to promote the cause of freedom and democracy in the world, he is not going about it in the right way. Hardly anyone - a mere nine per cent - thinks Mr Bush is performing well, even in his own terms. The view that America aspires to ultimate world domination is only a little less widespread. Despite America's anti-imperial past, well over half of YouGov's respondents, 58 per cent, reckon it is now fair to describe the US as "an essentially imperial power, one that wants to dominate the world by one means or another". Only 28 per cent dismiss such a view as unwarranted. In regards of American troops in Iraq and whether they are doing a good or bad job of helping to bring democracy to Iraq 54% said the US were doing a "bad job" and only a quarter (24%) thought they were doing a good job. Perhaps most worrying in political terms is the almost universal sense in this country that the US is determined to go its own way in the world, with an almost casual disregard for everybody else. Roughly three quarters of Britons think the US is "badly led" (73 per cent), "ignorant of the outside world" (73 per cent) and "doesn't care what the rest of the world thinks" (83 per cent). A good general indication of feelings towards the USA can be gained through reviewing the results of phrases which best described the USA today. It's damning evidence concludes that Britons really have fallen out of love with the USA. Caring 19% Uncaring 60% Cares what the rest of the world thinks 11% Doesn't care what the rest of the world thinks 83% Ignorant of the outside world 73% Knowledgeable about the outside world 15% Dominated by big business 90% Not dominated by big business 2% YouGov elicited the views of 1,962 adults across Great Britain online between June 26 and 28. The data have been weighted to conform to the demographic profile of British adults as a whole. YouGov abides by the rules of the British Polling Council. *** 2) Events Listings Sat 15 July LONDON International Day of Demonstrations against the authorities violating human rights. Following the deaths of three Guantanamo detainees, under suspicious circumstances, earlier this month a national coalition of Guantanamo campaigns in UK and various other organisations have called for an international day of demonstrations against the American authorities violating human rights internationally. In London demonstrators will march to the American embassy and hand in a petition demanding the closure of Guantanamo and similar prisons across the world. Similar demonstrations are proposed in other cities of the world. The electronic petition is at: For further details visit www.guantanamo.org.uk Sat 22 July LONDON Political anti war group 'Solidarity Park' perform their latest collection of materials at a night of peace culture featuring many other anti war groups. starts 9:00pm at 'The Orange at the Fox' 3 mins from West Kensington Tube London Wed 9 Aug BRIGHTON Palestine Day of Action at EDO MBM, 4-6pm EDO MBM have admitted that they profit from selling equipment for the illegal occupation of Palestine. This day is to remember the Palestinian victims of EDO MBM. Organised by 'Smash Edo' contact: 07891 405923 Sat 23 Sept MANCHESTER Organised by STW 'Time To Go' demonstration is timed for the start of the Labour Party Annual Conference which is being held in Manchester this year. Its focus is 'troops out of Iraq, don't attack Iran'. It will coincide with a peace camp in the city organised by Military Families Against the War see STW are urging as many folk as possible to get involved, for details contact Telephone 020 7278 6694 or email office@stopwar.org.uk Wed 18 Oct INTERNATIONAL ' Media Democracy Day' A day of action based on three themes: Education - understanding how the media shapes our world and our democracy. Protest - against a media system based on commercialization and exclusiveness. Change - calls for media reforms that respond to public interests, promote diversity, and ensure community representation and accountability. See for more details From info at j-n-v.org Thu Jul 6 15:40:57 2006 From: info at j-n-v.org (Milan Rai) Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 15:40:57 +0100 Subject: [JNV] New 7/7 Suicide Bomber Video Confirms Iraq/Afghanistan Link Message-ID: Dear friends The latest al-Qaeda video, broadcast on Al-Jazeera television, features another 7/7 suicide bomber, Shehzad Tanweer. Tanweer confirms that the bombings on 7 July are connected to British foreign policy - exactly as the majority of British people believed after the attacks, exactly as leaks from inside the British government confirmed in the aftermath of the atrocities, and exactly as charged in '7/7: The London Bombings, Islam and the Iraq War'. According to the Washington Post transcript of the broadcast, Tanweer says: "What have you witnessed now is only the beginning of a string of attacks that will continue and become stronger until you pull your forces out of Afghanistan and Iraq. And until you stop your financial and military support to America and Israel." The BBC report has Tanweer saying the non-Muslims of Britain deserve the attacks because they voted for a government which "continues to oppress our mothers, children, brothers and sisters in Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq and Chechnya". It is unclear how much of this is going to survive into tomorrow's newspapers. On past form, these crucial elements will be downplayed, despite the fact that they simply confirm what we already knew. Best wishes Milan Rai author of 7/7: The London Bombings, Islam and the Iraq War £11.99 post-free from JNV -- Justice Not Vengeance www.j-n-v.org 44 (0)1424 428 792 44 (0)7980 748 555 From info at j-n-v.org Fri Jul 7 19:18:19 2006 From: info at j-n-v.org (JNV) Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2006 19:18:19 +0100 Subject: [JNV] 7/7 Video: New JNV Briefing Message-ID: Dear friends Here is our latest briefing, which is available with full links from our home page www.j-n-v.org. It is also available as a double-sided A4 pdf for printing from the briefing page. We hope you find it useful. best wishes Maya Evans Emily Johns Milan Rai Justice Not Vengeance www.j-n-v.org ****** 7/7 One Year On The New Video: Confirmation That Foreign Policy Was A Root Cause Briefing 89: 7 July 2006 REALISM AND DENIAL The suicide bombings in London on 7 July 2005 killed 52 people and injured hundreds more. Evidence emerged soon afterwards that the four young Muslims who carried out the attacks were motivated in large part by their anger over the impact of British foreign policy on Muslims around the world. (See Milan Rai’s 7/7: The London Bombings, Islam and the Iraq War.) This has been confirmed by the video statement of suicide bomber Shehzad Tanweer, released by al-Qaeda on 6 July—discussed below. Despite this new evidence, the British Government continues to deny that British foreign policy is in any way responsible for the attacks, or for the heightened level of threat from al-Qaeda. The British media continues to distort and censor its news reporting and commentary in support of this line. 'FALSE GRIEVANCE' On 4 July 2006, Tony Blair re-affirmed his position that to ‘defeat’ al-Qaeda-type terrorism, we must ‘defeat’ ‘a completely false sense of grievance against the West’. The Prime Minister told a Parliamentary committee that Muslims should not say to al-Qaeda sympathisers: ‘Look: we understand why you feel like this and we can sympathise with that but you are wrong to do these things’—they should say: ‘You are wrong to feel those things’. (Blair’s words, not ours. Official draft transcript) In other words, if you are against terrorism, you should tell British Muslims: ‘You are wrong to be furious about the invasion of Iraq’; ‘You are wrong to be angry about the occupation of Afghanistan’; and ‘You are wrong to rage against the West’s support for the oppression of the Palestinians.’ On the one hand, Blair argues that the young British Muslims who carried out these atrocities were not motivated by their fury and despair over British foreign policy. On the other hand, he says that British Muslims do feel fury and despair about British foreign policy, and they shouldn’t. TANWEER: IT’S FOREIGN POLICY Tony Blair’s denial that British foreign policy was a motive for the bombings was flatly contradicted by the video statement of suicide bomber Shehzad Tanweer, released on 6 July, which highlighted the plight of Muslims globally. In the al-Qaeda video, Tanweer said: ‘To the non-Muslims of Britain, you may have wondered what you have done to deserve this. You are those who have voted in your government, who have in turn and still continue to this day continue to oppress our mothers, children, brothers and sisters from the east to the west in Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Chechnya. Your government has openly supported the genocide of over 150,000 innocent Muslims in Fallujah.’ (Search for International Terrorist Entities, (SITE) (The reference to voting tends to confirm the suggestion made in 7/7: The London Bombings, Islam and the Iraq War that the bomb plot started in earnest after, and because of, the re-election of the Blair Government.) TANWEER: IT’S IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN AND PALESTINE Tanweer also said: ‘What have you witnessed now is only the beginning of a string of attacks that will continue and become stronger until you pull your forces out of Afghanistan and Iraq and until you stop your financial and military support to America and Israel.’ (Guardian) [EXTRA Not included in the pdf of this briefing. More of Tanweer's statement:] ['What you have witnessed now is only the beginning of a series of attacks, which by the Grace of Allah, will intensify and continue until you pull all of your troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq. Until you stop all financial and military support to the U.S. and Israel, and until you release all Muslim prisoners from Belmarsh and your other concentration camps. And know that if you fail to comply with this, then know that this war will never stop and that we are willing to give our lives one hundred times over for the cause of Islam. You will never experience peace until our children in Palestine, our mothers and sisters in Kashmir, our brothers in Afghanistan and Iraq feel peace.' (SITE)] Tony Blair said on 4 July, ‘There is a reason why they [al-Qaeda terrorists] were plotting terrorist activities in Spain even after the Spanish had withdrawn their troops from Iraq.’ (Official draft transcript) Yes, there is a reason. It’s because Spain was involved— and continues to be involved—in the occupation of Afghanistan, which is just as important to al-Qaeda jihadists as Iraq or Palestine, as we see from Tanweer’s video statement. MEDIA SELF-CENSORSHIP How have the British media responded to the Tanweer video statement? Typically, the Financial Times had a flat headline (page 2): ‘Video of London bomber shown on Arab TV’; and a perceptive, realistic news report (para. 5): ‘Its linkage of the bombings to British foreign policy appears to be a calculated challenge to the government of Tony Blair, who earlier this week urged British Muslims not to excuse extremism by blaiming British military operations abroad.’ Most of the media framed the statement either in relation to the al-Qaeda connection (Independent headline, ‘Bomber’s video shows hand of al-Qaida’, page 5); or the cynical timing of its release (Guardian headline, ‘One year on, a London bomber issues a threat from the dead’, page 1); or the possible impact on people personally affected by the atrocity (Telegraph headline, ‘Suicide bomber’s video won’t frighten us, say July 7 families’, page 1). The Times was the only newspaper to headline the key element of the video statement: ‘I blame war in Iraq and Afghanistan, 7/7 bomber says in video’ (page 4). However, unlike the FT, The Times did not make any connection to the propaganda of the British Government, and the way in which Tanweer’s statement undermined Blair’s denial. REPORTED AND SUPPRESSED Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman point out that media provision of some information about an issue ‘proves absolutely nothing about the adequacy or accuracy of media coverage’: ‘The media do in fact suppress a great deal of information, but even more important is the way they present a particular fact—its placement, tone, and frequency of repetition—and the framework of analysis in which it is placed.’ ‘That a careful reader, looking for a fact can sometimes find it, with diligence and a skeptical eye, tells us nothing about whether that fact received the attention and context it deserved, whether it was intelligible to most readers, or whether it was effectively distorted or suppressed.’ (For more on the Propaganda Model of the mass media, see this JNV summary.) It is possible for something to be reported, but effectively distorted or suppressed. In the case of the reporting of Tanweer’s explicit statement of his own motivations, we have a classic case of this phenomenon. Newspapers often record his words—the attacks continue ‘until you pull your forces out from Afghanistan and Iraq’—but they do so in a way that suppresses their meaning. For example, see the Guardian's front-page story, whose headline ‘One year on, a London bomber issues a threat from the dead’, subhead ('Al-Qaida release video on eve of 7/7 of Shehzad Tanweer, one of the homegrown terrorists') and first 7 paragraphs have nothing to do with the foreign policy element, makes no further reference to foreign policy in the 5 paragraphs following the Tanweer quotes in paragraphs 8 and 9. Typically, the final paragraph is allowed to contain a hint of realism, quoting Mohammed Abdul Baari, Secretary-General of the Muslim Council of Britain: ‘We hope this video serves to end the denial in parts of government about the impact of some of its foreign policies on the radicalisation of a section of Muslim youth, but also the denial in some pockets of the Muslim community that these four Muslim men were responsible for these murderous acts.’ GUARDIAN: POLICE CONFIRM FOREIGN POLICY LINK What is so striking about the Guardian’s front-page distortion is that it sits alongside another confirmatory front-page story: ‘After the London bombings, British counter-terrorism officials intensified their efforts to understand why some Muslims turned to violence. The document, which has been seen by the Guardian, is the product of that work, and was completed within the past three months before being distributed to senior officers across London. The document says in a headline introducing one section: “Foreign policy and Iraq; Iraq HAS [its emphasis] had a huge impact.” ’ The report includes the removal of legitimate grievances as part of the anti-terrorist programme: ‘What will change them [the jihadists]—gradually—is argument, the removal of justifying causes (Palestine, Iraq), the erosion of perverted beliefs and day-to-day frustrations.’ This is exactly the argument of 7/7: The London Bombings, Islam and the Iraq War, it is exactly the argument JNV has been making for many years now, it is the argument that Tony Blair has been resisting, and it is the argument that the mainstream media has largely excluded from the debate. There are concessions to reality. See the end of Philip Johnston’s comments in the Telegraph or the muted sentences buried in the middle of the Independent editorial today (page 24 or paid-for access) for typically weak examples. They are minor elements drowned out by the rest of the media chorus. DOWN THE MEMORY HOLE Overall, the mass media continue to effectively suppress vital facts, such as the leaked Home Office/Foreign Office report ‘Young Muslims and Extremism’, which said that British foreign policy post-9/11 was a major cause of such ‘extremism’; the Joint Intelligence Committee warning to Tony Blair that invading Iraq would ‘heighten’ the threat from al-Qaeda; the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre report in June 2005 that ‘Events in Iraq are continuing to act as motivation and a focus of a range of terrorist related activity in the UK’, and so on. Also omitted are the most credible statement of responsibility, the earlier video from Mohammad Sidique Khan, and the evidence of the bombers’ friends. (See 7/7 for more in-depth material and discussion.) Without retrieving this information, we cannot find our way forward. We will certainly not find it by telling young Muslims that they are wrong to feel what they feel about the crimes that we commit, or are party to. From info at j-n-v.org Sun Jul 9 00:18:06 2006 From: info at j-n-v.org (JNV) Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2006 00:18:06 +0100 Subject: [JNV] New JNV Briefing: The Gaza Siege Message-ID: <14d1b41dd9c41b1071a7cff80bef31f2@j-n-v.org> Dear friends Please find below our latest briefing. We hope you find it useful. A fully referenced and linked version of this briefing is available on our website www.j-n-v.org. Please feel free to circulate this briefing. best wishes Milan Rai Justice Not Vengeance *** The Gaza Siege Europe’s Shameful Complicity In Israeli War Crimes JNV Anti-War Briefing 90 (8 July 2006) ISRAELI CRIMES AGAINST PEACE The Israeli Government bombs power stations (a war crime), bombs bridges with no military value (a war crime), kidnap ordinary citizens, elected representatives and Government ministers (more crimes), overflies the Syrian capital without permission (more criminality) and re-invades the Gaza Strip (another war crime). These crimes are not designed to secure the release of a captured Israeli soldier, but to destroy the threat of peace, and especially the growing moderation of the elected Hamas Government. ISRAELI STATE TERRORISM Israeli journalist Gideon Levy writes in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz: 'It is not legitimate to cut off 750,000 people from electricity. It is not legitimate to call on 20,000 people to run from their homes and turn their towns into ghost towns. It is not legitimate to kidnap half a government and a quarter of a parliament. A state that takes such steps is no longer distinguishable from a terror organisation.' The British group 'Jews for Justice for Palestinians' took out a full-page advertisement in The Times on 6 July (p. 33). It said, in part: 'We watch with horror the collective punishment of the people of Gaza. Everything reasonable must be done to secure [Israeli] Corporal Gilad Shilat's safe release but nothing Israel is doing contributes to that end. Instead it is using its enormously superior military might to terrorise an entire people.' We are witnessing Israeli state terrorism - and EU/British complicity. HOSTAGE SHALIT AND THE KIDNAPPED PALESTINIANS Corporal Gilad Shalit was captured, in uniform and on armed duty near a checkpoint, on 25 June 2006. Chris McGreal of the Guardian reported: 'To Palestinians he is a prisoner of war - a legitimate target as a soldier in the uniform of an army that has killed dozens of civilians in the Gaza Strip in recent weeks - and a bargaining chip.' McGreal pointed out that 'Israel holds about 9,000 Palestinian prisoners. One thousand of them are detained without charge or trial, and often exist in a Kafkaesque world of having to prove their innocence without ever being told what it is they are accused of.' The Israeli military see Cpl Shalit's capture by Palestinian militiamen as an act of war. 'But the Israelis themselves crossed the border just a couple of days before the corporal was taken to apprehend two Palestinian militiamen.' (McGreal, Guardian, 30 June) BREAKING THE PEACE Time magazine observes: 'it's difficult to see how some Israeli tactics, particularly the strike on the Gaza power supply, can do much other than deepen the Palestinians' misery.' (10 July, p. 35) What else can 'these tactics' do? They can break the elected Palestine Authority, and they can break the hope of peace. That is their purpose: 'A senior Israeli security official says some members of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's government believe the crisis is an opportunity to smash the authority of Hamas, the militant organization that won control of the Palestinian Authority earlier this year. That aim became evident when Israeli forces arrested eight Palestinian Cabinet ministers and 40 Hamas parliamentarians in the West Bank, who may be charged with membership in terrorist organizations, affiliation with terrorist leadership and other violations. Israeli Interior Minister Ronnie Bar-On tells Time that the arrests had been planned for weeks and that the ministers would not be used as bargaining tools to win Shalit's release.' (p. 34) According to knowledgeable Palestinians, bringing down the Hamas Government 'could boost the group's more militant factions, which would prefer to abandon the political process and return to armed struggle.' Time quotes Saied Zourob, an official from Gaza belonging to the Fatah party that was displaced from government by Hamas: 'now the Israelis are pushing people toward Hamas and the resistance.' (p. 35) Time notes: 'The fallout from the Shalit saga is only hardening attitudes on both sides.' (p. 34) These were the predictable, and therefore intended, consequences of the actions Israel has taken - actions which have undermined rather than strengthened Cpl Shalit's chances of survival. Journalist Con Couglin points out that when the last Israeli soldier was abducted - Nachshon Waxman in 1994 - all that happened was the West Bank was closed off to allow a rescue attempt by Israeli special forces. (Telegraph, 30 June) Pushing Hamas as an organization, and the Palestinians as a people, away from negotiations and towards violence is a rational goal for Israeli policy (in the short term), if Israel is set on domination rather than peace. HAMAS-FATAH Undermining the elected Government and the Hamas leadership was a particularly urgent task because of the signs that Hamas moderates were building a united front with the Fatah movement. On 27 June, after months of tortuous negotiation between the two political rivals, a deal was finally struck on the basis of a document drawn up by Palestinian political prisoners: 'Fears of an Israeli assault on Gaza have all but overshadowed the agreement between Hamas and Fatah over the so-called "prisoners' document", which brings to an end months of tensions that have seen gun battles between armed forces loyal to the two groups... the "prisoners' document" is hoped to address international concerns by toning down Hamas' insistence on armed force and its implacable opposition to the existence of Israel. Negotiator Salah Zeidan said preparations were being made for a formal signing ceremony. "All political groups are prepared for a mutual ceasefire with Israel," he said.' (Guardian, 27 June) It was a huge step for Hamas to formally accept a Palestine on the West Bank and Gaza Strip, implicitly accepting the right of Israel to exist, and to join the Palestine Liberation Organization, which explicitly acknowledges that right. Times Foreign Editor Bronwen Maddox remarks: 'From Hamas, which has steadily advocated the annihilation of Israel, this amounts to a dramatic about-turn.' (29 June, p. 36) The threat of a firm Palestinian ceasefire by the main armed groups, and a major diplomatic initiative from the Palestinian side involving a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders has been averted - perhaps permanently - by the violent Israeli assault on Gaza. Author Patrick Seale comments that Israel 'abhors the recent Hamas-Fatah accord... becuse it threatens to produce a Palestinian partner ready to negotiate the creation of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders. Israel has no intention of ever returning to those borders. It is no accident that its assault followed immediately on the Palestinian accord. Israel will do everything to avoid a negotiation. Hence, it deliberately inflicts inhumane hardships on the Palestinians in order to radicalise them and drive the moderates from the scene.' (Guardian, 3 July, p. 29) THE REAL HISTORY OF THE PEACE PROCESS Western apologists portray the Middle East 'peace process' as one of Israeli offers and Arab rejection. In fact, the Palestinians and their Arab sponsors gravitated towards the international consensus - a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders - by the mid-1970s (see Noam Chomsky, The Fateful Triangle). This solution has been blocked by the United States and Israel. It is said that the two-state solution was rejected by the Palestinians, who walked out of negotiations at Camp David in mid-2000, after being offered an allegedly reasonable deal. In fact, Israeli scholar Ron Pundak points out that the Israeli position at the end of Camp David was that 12 per cent of the West Bank should remain in Israeli hands, in two strips dividing the West Bank into three sections, and cutting off all three fragments from East Jerusalem, the centre of Palestinian life and institutions. This was clearly absolutely unacceptable to the Palestinians. (See map on p. 46 of Pundak's 'From Oslo To Taba: What Went Wrong', available as a pdf from The Peres Center for Peace which Pundak heads.) At subsequent negotiations in Taba in January 2001, Israeli negotiators tacitly conceded that they could have given more ground - and cut their demands in half. The talks were then called off by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, not by the Palestinians. (BBC, 29 Jan. 2001) THE SHAMEFUL ROLE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION The Financial Times comments: 'the lack of active mediation by the world community has made containment of the conflict all the more difficult. With the US and the EU ostracising Hamas, the scope for diplomatic intervention has been limited. Israel has apparently felt under little pressure to restrain its actions.' (30 June, p. 6) The current assault is in part due to the European Union's imposition of collective punishment on the Palestinians, breaking off aid and diplomatic relations because the 'wrong people' won the election. By removing the small EU brake on Israeli policy, we share responsibility for Israel's actions. *** Justice Not Vengeance relies on donations from activists. Please support us financially if you can. www.j-n-v.org From info at j-n-v.org Tue Jul 11 15:34:02 2006 From: info at j-n-v.org (JNV) Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 15:34:02 +0100 Subject: [JNV] Events and Action Message-ID: <1436dd3909a625768b657f02cb88b6f9@j-n-v.org> Dear Folks Please find below: 1) A list of upcoming events running up to late August. 2) An Action Point Thanks Maya Evans JNV **** 1) Upcoming Events Wed 12 July LONDON Demo outside the Foreign Office to protest against the ongoing Israeli attack on Gaza. 5.30 - 7pm. Wed 12 July LONDON A new role for the military? 'waging law, not war' * with MARY KALDOR Professor and Director of the Centre for the Study of Global Governance LSE (and a senior military figure, to be announced ) *HOUSE of COMMONS Portcullis House, Room T Wednesday July 12th 6 - 8pm .* For further information: telephone Christine Titmus, vice-chair of M.A.W. on 01767 651136 or see MAW website www.abolishwar.org.uk Thurs 13 July, LONDON IOF Meeting with guest speaker Hassan Juma'a, President of the general union of oil workers (GUOE) is Basra 7.30pm, Indian YMCA, 41 Fitzroy Square, WC1 (nearest tube Warren Street). This is a very important time for the GUOE - its bank account has been frozen and it is subject to repressive laws restricting public sector trade union activity. See www.iraqoccupationfocus.org.uk. Fri 14 July YEOVIL: No Attack on Iran - A Feminist Secular Perspective. Public meeting hosted by the Yeovil, Sherborne and Area Stop the War Coalition, Methodist Church hall, Cheap St, Sherborne, Friday 14 July at 7.30pm. With Azar Majedi, of the Organisation for Women's Liberation and the Iran Secular Society and Maryam Kousha, Editor of the Organisation for Women's Liberation English journal.For more information tel: 0845 456 1321 Sat 15 July LONDON Close Down Guantanamo demo. Assemble Marble Arch 12 noon to march to the embassy End detention without trial, illegality, torture, deaths and Guantanamo Bay as a whole. Called by the National Guantánamo Coalition. Demonstrations will also be held in the United States, Australia, Kuwait and Bahrain. For more details email: bhamguantanamocampaign@yahoo.co.uk Tel: 07721427690 Web: www.guantanamo.org Sun 16 July BRENT Fundraising Garden Party for Brent STW >From 4.00 pm in Kate & Jamies Willesden Green Garden. Tickets £10 waged / £5 concessions in advance £12 waged / £6 concessions on the door. Delicious food and entertainment. guests, poetry, music & magic. To reserve your tickets ring: 07840 357 482. Mon 17 July FARNBOROUGH Protest outside Farnborough International Arms Fair Please join Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT)'s protest outside the fair on Monday 17th July, from 11am. Farnborough is a small town in Surrey, 40 mins train journey from London (Waterloo station). Contact Anna anna@caat.org.uk or call 020 7281 0297 for more info. More info: http://www.caat.org.uk/events/farnborough2006.ph Mon 17 July LONDON Leading Iraqi women's rights activist to visit UK to raise awareness about threats to women under the new constitution. Sundus Abass, has been forced to flee the country following the assassination of a colleague. Women in Iraq are increasingly being harassed; their movements have been severely restricted and monitored, and some have been physically attacked.Women have also been prevented from driving and forced to wear conservative dress.Along with 37 Iraqi women's organisations, Sundus has been speaking out about the Iraqi constitution which many women in Iraq fear will enshrine the erosion of freedoms experienced since the American/British invasion. 6.30-9.30 in the Khalili Theatre of the School of Oriental and African Studies, Malet St, London Tues 18 July SOUTHEND Time To Go- Don't Attack Iran. Public meeting with Jeremy Corbyn MP and Lindsey German. 7:30pm, Leigh Community Centre, Elm Rd, Leigh-on-Sea, Essex. Organised by Southend Stop the War. More Info: ts006f5896@blueyonder.co.uk Tel: 07946 581 453 WED 19 July LONDON Sundus Abass will be talking from 5-7pm in the House of Commons at a meeting hosted by Clare Short MP. For more info or to arrange an interview with Sundus please contact Nadje Al-Ali, N.S.Al-Ali@ex.ac.uk, 07801-931 869, or Maysoon Pachachi, mailto:maysoon@oxymoronfilms.demon.co.uk, 07734 101142. National Women's Coalition of Iraq http://www.nwciraq.org/ Fri 21-Sun 23 July LONDON: UK Forum for non-violence - Dialogue for Action. A weekend of presentations, workshops, film showings, interchange among groups and individuals, etc., all related to the theme of non-violence: an opportunity for people working in the field of non-violence to hear each other's aims and activities and to create closer ties for the future. Cost £25/£20. Promoted by: The Centre of Cultures, Turning the Tide, Gandhi Foundation, International Sufi School, Esforal school of Latin American Culture and others. Contact: forum2006@ukforum4non-violence.org Sat 22 July LONDON gig Solidarity Park plus support acts at the Orange (Venue above the Fox pub 3 mins West Kensingto tube) 3, North End Crescent, West Kensington, London, W14 8TG LIVE REVIEW"When you hear 'anti-war protest band' you tend to think this is going to be heavy on the message and light on entertainment This bands live show has got it about right,its strong on message and its good rock entertainment too" Any profits the band makes will go to International Red Cross 5.00 Advance 7.00 on the door Buy Advance Tickets on line at www.ticketweb.co.uk search for solidarity park (85p booking fee) Sun 23 July, WANDSWORTH: PARTY4PEACE. Fund raising gig for Stop the War Coalition with FUNKY JAZZ 4 PEACE + Special Guests TBA. 7pm, The Bedford, 77 Bedford Hill, Balham SW12. Organised by Wandsworth Stop the War. Contact 020 8682 8940. Sun 23 July HACKNEY Peace picnic in Clissold Park. Organised by Hackney Stop the War. From 1pm. For more info call Despina on 0793 271 4833, Julie on 0793 044 2292 or Vivek on 0797 906 6447. Mon 24 July LONDON Brian Haw is due to appear in court for failing to comply with the conditions the police put on his protest since the SOCPA law became applicable to Brian. 10am at Horseferry Road Magistrates Courts. Supporters will be gathering outside and going into the court. Tues 25 July LONDON QPSW are hosting a special film screening of "The Last Atomic Bomb" which ties together the history of nuclear weapons and the experience of Hibakusha (survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki), with today's concerns over nuclear proliferation. The film offers an important contribution to the debate over nuclear weapons as the British government seeks to replace TridenT. FREE. all welcome:7pm at Friends House, 173 Euston Road, NW1 For more info contact Kat or David tel 020 7663 1067 email disarm@quaker.org.uk Sat 29 July NEWHA March Against Upcoming (2007) DSEI ARMS FAIR. Meet 12 noon, The Park, Balaam Street, Plaistow, E3. Supported by CAAT and various local groups. Sun 6- Mon 28 AUG, EDINBURGH What I heard about Iraq Special run of the anti-war play/prose poem by Eliot Weinberger. 2.20pm, Mon - Sun, Pleasance Courtyard. See ftheatre@aol.com Thurs 17 August BRIGHTON Womens Lives in Occupied Iraq What changes have war and occupation brought to the lives of Iraqi women? What are their particular difficulties and concerns? How are women responding? A talk and discussion with Nadje Al-Ali Brighthelm, North Road, BN1 1YD Fri 8- Sun 10 Sept ISLE OF WIGHT Following the hugely successful Stop the War Gig last December, when Rachid Taha, Brian Eno, Mick Jones from the Clash and others packed London's Astoria, we are a featured organisation at BESTIVAL, one of the musical highlights of the year. Petshop Boys and Scissor Sisters headline the 3-day Bestival when Rachid Taha with special guest Brian Eno will again be appearing for Stop the War. see for details 2) Take 'The Israel Challenge' and Help Margaret Beckett See the Light * Turn off your power supply at the mains * Turn off your water supply at the mains * Stop using all forms of transportation * Stop going to work, school or college * Reduce your food intake to a minimum and eat sporadically * Ask your neighbour to play loud music all through the night * Do this until we tell you to stop! If you take the challenge, you will have some idea of the conditions faced by thousands of Gazans right now. If you can't stomach the 'Israel Challenge', then we ask you to send a tealight/candle to Foreign Minister Margaret Beckett now, asking her to forward it to the people of Gaza. She has refused to condemn the Israeli attack against Gaza - maybe thousands of tealights will make her see the light. The Rt. Hon. Margaret Beckett Foreign Secretary Foreign and Commonwealth Office King Charles Street London SW1A 2AH Organised by Palestine Solidarity Campaign For more info contact Siama 020 7700 6192 or see www.palestinecampaign.org From info at j-n-v.org Tue Jul 18 10:06:40 2006 From: info at j-n-v.org (JNV) Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 10:06:40 +0100 Subject: [JNV] Israel/Gaza/Lebanon Crisis Message-ID: <4b35b522df391b84c1249b3581015c43@j-n-v.org> Warning: very long email 1) Gaza/Lebanon Demonstrations 2) Chomsky on Gaza/Lebanon (15 July) (long) 3) JNV Briefing on Gaza (8 July) (long) OUR POWER JNV spoke this morning to a key figure in the Welsh peace movement, who pointed out that the worst aspect of the current crisis is the feeling of powerlessness. That is a feeling we must fight against. In fact, Britain is playing an important role in supporting Israeli aggression. Look at the subheading on the Guardian front page: '[G8] Statement diluted following British pressure'. (We hope to produce a briefing by tomorrow on Britain and the Israel/Lebanon crisis.) Britain and the EU have played a significant role in creating the conditions that led to this disaster. We as British and European peace activists have a significant role to play in bringing it to an end, and in imposing a political cost that can deter future leaders from complicity with Israeli aggression. I have no doubt the public is either with us, or can very quickly be swung behind us. We have power. Not as much as we would like, but still a great deal more than the Lebanese who are being forced to flee their homes. Not to use that power, or to discount it, is to add to the tragedy. Milan Rai JNV *** 1) Gaza/Lebanon Demonstrations If you can't make it to one of these demonstrations, or even if you can, please consider organizing a protest yourself in your own town. You may want to download our briefing(s) on the Gaza events. (Note that the Aberystwyth events are weekday evening and lunchtime protests...) Aberystwyth: Wednesday 19 July Candlelit vigil 9-10pm Morlan (church) Contact: pryderi@btinternet.com Aberystwyth: Thursday 20 July Peace vigil 1pm-2pm Morlan (church) Contact: pryderi@btinternet.com Edinburgh: Saturday 22 July •Hands off Lebanon •Freedom for Palestine •Don't Attack Syria •Don't Attack Iran Assemble 2pm: The Mound precinct, Princes Street. Glasgow: Saturday 22 July •Hands off Lebanon •Freedom for Palestine •Don't Attack Syria •Don't Attack Iran Assemble 12 noon: George Square. London: Saturday 22 July •Hands off Lebanon •Freedom for Palestine •Don't Attack Syria •Don't Attack Iran Assemble Embankment 12 Noon Organised by Stop the War Coalition, Palestine Solidarity Campaign, Muslim Association of Britain, British Muslim Initiative, Lebanese organisations Manchester: Saturday 22 July •Hands off Lebanon •Freedom for Palestine •Don't Attack Syria •Don't Attack Iran Assemble 1.00pm: Outside the BBC. Oxford Road. *** 2) Chomsky on Gaza/Lebanon Taken from ZNet | Israel/Palestine Israel/Palestine by Noam Chomsky and Amy Goodman; Democracy Now; July 15, 2006 [Democracy Now is a fantastic radical US daily national radio programme, which you can access via the internet.] AMY GOODMAN: We're joined on the phone right now by Noam Chomsky, professor of linguistics and philosophy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, author of dozens of books. His latest is Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy. In May, he traveled to Beirut, where he met, among others, Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah. He joins us on the phone from Masachusetts. We welcome you to Democracy Now! NOAM CHOMSKY: Hi, Amy. AMY GOODMAN: It's good to have you with us. Well, can you talk about what is happening now, both in Lebanon and Gaza? NOAM CHOMSKY: Well, of course, I have no inside information, other than what's available to you and listeners. What's happening in Gaza, to start with that -- well, basically the current stage of what's going on -- there's a lot more -- begins with the Hamas election, back the end of January. Israel and the United States at once announced that they were going to punish the people of Palestine for voting the wrong way in a free election. And the punishment has been severe. At the same time, it's partly in Gaza, and sort of hidden in a way, but even more extreme in the West Bank, where Olmert announced his annexation program, what's euphemistically called "convergence" and described here often as a "withdrawal," but in fact it's a formalization of the program of annexing the valuable lands, most of the resources, including water, of the West Bank and cantonizing the rest and imprisoning it, since he also announced that Israel would take over the Jordan Valley. Well, that proceeds without extreme violence or nothing much said about it. Gaza, itself, the latest phase, began on June 24. It was when Israel abducted two Gaza civilians, a doctor and his brother. We don't know their names. You don't know the names of victims. They were taken to Israel, presumably, and nobody knows their fate. The next day, something happened, which we do know about, a lot. Militants in Gaza, probably Islamic Jihad, abducted an Israeli soldier across the border. That's Corporal Gilad Shalit. And that's well known; the first abduction is not. Then followed the escalation of Israeli attacks on Gaza, which I don't have to repeat. It's reported on adequately. The next stage was Hezbollah's abduction of two Israeli soldiers, they say on the border. Their official reason for this is that they are aiming for prisoner release. There are a few, nobody knows how many. Officially, there are three Lebanese prisoners in Israel. There's allegedly a couple hundred people missing. Who knows where they are? But the real reason, I think it's generally agreed by analysts, is that -- I'll read from the Financial Times, which happens to be right in front of me. "The timing and scale of its attack suggest it was partly intended to reduce the pressure on Palestinians by forcing Israel to fight on two fronts simultaneously." David Hirst, who knows this area well, describes it, I think this morning, as a display of solidarity with suffering people, the clinching impulse. It's a very -- mind you -- very irresponsible act. It subjects Lebanese to possible -- certainly to plenty of terror and possible extreme disaster. Whether it can achieve any result, either in the secondary question of freeing prisoners or the primary question of some form of solidarity with the people of Gaza, I hope so, but I wouldn't rank the probabilities very high. JUAN GONZALEZ: Noam Chomsky, in the commercial press here the last day, a lot of the focus has been pointing toward Iran and Syria as basically the ones engineering much of what's going on now in terms of the upsurge of fighting in Lebanon. Your thoughts on these analyses that seem to sort of downplay the actual resistance movement going on there and trying to reduce this once again to pointing toward Iran? NOAM CHOMSKY: Well, the fact is that we have no information about that, and I doubt very much that the people who are writing it have any information. And frankly, I doubt that U.S. intelligence has any information. It's certainly plausible. I mean, there's no doubt that there are connections, probably strong connections, between Hezbollah and Syria and Iran, but whether those connections were instrumental in motivating these latest actions, I don't think we have the slightest idea. You can guess anything you'd like. It's a possibility. In fact, even a probability. But on the other hand, there's every reason to believe that Hezbollah has its own motivations, maybe the ones that Hirst and the Financial Times and others are pointing to. That seems plausible, too. Much more plausible, in fact. AMY GOODMAN: There was even some reports yesterday that said that Hezbollah might try to send the Israeli soldiers that it had captured to Iran. JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, Israel actually claims that it has concrete evidence that that's what was going to happen. That's why it's attempting to blockade both the sea and bomb the airport. NOAM CHOMSKY: They are claiming that. That's true. But I repeat, we don't have any evidence. Claims by a state that's carrying out the military attacks don't really amount to very much, in terms of credibility. If they have evidence, it would be interesting to see it. And in fact, it might happen. Even if it does happen, it won't prove much. If Hezbollah, wherever they have the prisoners, the soldiers, if they decide that they can't keep them in Lebanon because of the scale of Israeli attacks, they might send them somewhere else. I'm skeptical that Syria or Iran would accept them at this point, or even if they can get them there, but they might want to. AMY GOODMAN: Noam Chomsky , we have to break. When we come back, we'll ask you about the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations comments about Lebanon. We'll also be joined by Mouin Rabbani, speaking to us from Jerusalem, Middle East analyst with the International Crisis Group. Then Ron Suskind joins us, author of The One Percent Doctrine: Deep Inside America's Pursuit of its Enemies Since 9/11. Stay with us. AMY GOODMAN: Our guest on the phone is Noam Chomsky, professor of linguistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. His latest book is Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy. I wanted to ask you about the comment of the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations. He defended Israel's actions as a justified response. This is Dan Gillerman. DAN GILLERMAN: As we sit here during these very difficult days, I urge you and I urge my colleagues to ask yourselves this question: What would do you if your countries found themselves under such attacks, if your neighbors infiltrated your borders to kidnap your people, and if hundreds of rockets were launched at your towns and villages? Would you just sit back and take it, or would you do exactly what Israel is doing at this very minute? AMY GOODMAN: That was Dan Gillerman, the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations. Noam Chomsky, your response? NOAM CHOMSKY: He was referring to Lebanon, rather than Gaza. AMY GOODMAN: He was. NOAM CHOMSKY: Yeah. Well, he's correct that hundreds of rockets have been fired, and naturally that has to be stopped. But he didn't mention, or maybe at least in this comment, that the rockets were fired after the heavy Israeli attacks against Lebanon, which killed -- well, latest reports, maybe 60 or so people and destroyed a lot of infrastructure. As always, things have precedents, and you have to decide which was the inciting event. In my view, the inciting event in the present case, events, are those that I mentioned -- the constant intense repression; plenty of abductions; plenty of atrocities in Gaza; the steady takeover of the West Bank, which, in effect, if it continues, is just the murder of a nation, the end of Palestine; the abduction on June 24 of the two Gaza civilians; and then the reaction to the abduction of Corporal Shalit. And there's a difference, incidentally, between abduction of civilians and abduction of soldiers. Even international humanitarian law makes that distinction. AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about what that distinction is? NOAM CHOMSKY: If there's a conflict going on, aside physical war, not in a military conflict going on, abduction -- if soldiers are captured, they are to be treated humanely. But it is not a crime at the level of capture of civilians and bringing them across the border into your own country. That's a serious crime. And that's the one that's not reported. And, in fact, remember that -- I mean, I don't have to tell you that there are constant attacks going on in Gaza, which is basically a prison, huge prison, under constant attack all the time: economic strangulation, military attack, assassinations, and so on. In comparison with that, abduction of a soldier, whatever one thinks about it, doesn't rank high in the scale of atrocities. JUAN GONZALEZ: We're also joined on the line by Mouin Rabbani, a senior Middle East analyst with the International Crisis Group and a contributing editor of Middle East Report. He joins us on the line from Jerusalem. Welcome to Democracy Now! MOUIN RABBANI: Hi. JUAN GONZALEZ: Could you tell us your perspective on this latest escalation of the conflict there and the possibility that Israel is going to be mired once again in war in Lebanon? MOUIN RABBANI: Well, it's difficult to say. I couldn't hear Professor Chomsky's comments. I could just make out every sixth word. But I think that Israel is now basically, if you will, trying to rewrite the rules of the game and set new terms for its adversaries, basically saying, you know, that no attacks of any sort on Israeli forces or otherwise will be permitted, and any such attack will invite a severe response that basically puts the entire civilian infrastructure of the entire country or territory from which that attack emanates at risk. Judging by what we've seen so far, it more or less enjoys tacit to explicit international sanction. And I think the possibilities that this conflict could further expand into a regional one, perhaps involving Syria, is at this point quite real. AMY GOODMAN: And can you talk about the UN resolution, a vote in the draft resolution, 10-to-1, on Gaza with the U.S. voting no and four countries abstaining -- Britain, Denmark, Peru and Slovakia? MOUIN RABBANI: Well, I think it would have been news if that resolution had actually passed. I think, you know, for the last decade, if not for much longer, it's basically become a reality in the United Nations that it's an organization incapable of discharging any of its duties or responsibilities towards maintaining or restoring peace and security in the Middle East, primarily because of the U.S. power of veto on the Security Council. And I think we've now reached the point where even a rhetorical condemnation of Israeli action, such as we've seen in Gaza over the past several weeks, even a rhetorical condemnation without practical consequence has become largely unthinkable, again, primarily because of the U.S. veto within the Security Council. AMY GOODMAN: Mouin, what do you think is going to happen right now, both in Gaza and in Lebanon? MOUIN RABBANI: Well, I think it's probably going to get significantly worse. I mean, in Lebanon, it seems to be a case where Hezbollah has a more restricted agenda of compelling Israel to conduct prisoner exchange, whereas Israel has a broader agenda of seeking to compel the disarmament of Hezbollah or at least to push it back several dozen kilometers from the Israeli-Lebanese border. You know, the Israeli and Hezbollah perspectives on this are entirely incompatible, and that means that this conflict is probably going to continue escalating, until some kind of mediation begins. In Gaza, it's somewhat different. I think there Hamas has a broader agenda, of which effecting a prisoner exchange with Israel is only one, and I would argue, even a secondary part. I think there Hamas's main objective is to compel Israel to accept a mutual cessation of hostilities, Israeli-Palestinian, and I think, even more important, of ensuring their right to govern. And I think, at least as far as the Israeli-Palestinian part of this is concerned, Hamas's main objective has been to send a very clear message, not only to Israel, but to all its adversaries, whether Israeli, Palestinian or foreign, to remind the world that political integration and democratic politics for them are an experiment, that they have alternatives, and if they're not allowed to exercise their democratic mandate, that they will not hesitate, if necessary, to exercise those alternatives. AMY GOODMAN: Finally, Noam Chomsky, right now industrial world leaders gathered in St. Petersburg for the G8 meeting. What role does the U.S. have in this? NOAM CHOMSKY: In the G8 meeting? AMY GOODMAN: No. What role -- they're just gathered together -- in this, certainly the issue of Lebanon, Gaza, the Middle East is going to dominate that discussion. But how significant is the U.S. in this? NOAM CHOMSKY: I think it will probably be very much like the UN resolution that you mentioned, which is -- I'm sorry, I couldn't hear what Mouin Rabbani was saying. But the UN resolution was -- the veto of the UN resolution is standard. That goes back decades. The U.S. has virtually alone been blocking the possibility of diplomatic settlement, censure of Israeli crimes and atrocities. When Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982, the US vetoed several resolutions right away, calling for an end to the fighting and so on, and that was a hideous invasion. And this continues through every administration. So I presume it will continue at the G8 meetings. The United States regards Israel as virtually a militarized offshoot, and it protects it from criticism or actions and supports passively and, in fact, overtly supports its expansion, its attacks on Palestinians, its progressive takeover of what remains of Palestinian territory, and its acts to, well, actually realize a comment that Moshe Dayan made back in the early '70s when he was responsible for the Occupied Territories. He said to his cabinet colleagues that we should tell the Palestinians that we have no solution for you, that you will live like dogs, and whoever will leave will leave, and we'll see where that leads. That's basically the policy. And I presume the U.S. will continue to advance that policy in one or another fashion. AMY GOODMAN: Noam Chomsky , I want to thank you for being with us. His latest book is Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy. And Mouin Rabbani, senior Middle East analyst with the International Crisis Group, joining us from Jerusalem. Thank you both. *** 3) JNV Briefing on Gaza The Gaza Siege: Europe's Shameful Complicity In Israeli War Crimes JNV Anti-War Briefing 90 (8 July 2006) ISRAELI CRIMES AGAINST PEACE The Israeli Government bombs power stations (a war crime), bombs bridges with no military value (a war crime), kidnap ordinary citizens, elected representatives and Government ministers (more crimes), overflies the Syrian capital without permission (more criminality) and re-invades the Gaza Strip (another war crime). These crimes are not designed to secure the release of a captured Israeli soldier, but to destroy the threat of peace, and especially the growing moderation of the elected Hamas Government. ISRAELI STATE TERRORISM Israeli journalist Gideon Levy writes in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz: 'It is not legitimate to cut off 750,000 people from electricity. It is not legitimate to call on 20,000 people to run from their homes and turn their towns into ghost towns. It is not legitimate to kidnap half a government and a quarter of a parliament. A state that takes such steps is no longer distinguishable from a terror organisation.' The British group 'Jews for Justice for Palestinians' took out a full-page advertisement in The Times on 6 July (p. 33). It said, in part: 'We watch with horror the collective punishment of the people of Gaza. Everything reasonable must be done to secure [Israeli] Corporal Gilad Shilat's safe release but nothing Israel is doing contributes to that end. Instead it is using its enormously superior military might to terrorise an entire people.' We are witnessing Israeli state terrorism - and EU/British complicity. HOSTAGE SHALIT AND THE KIDNAPPED PALESTINIANS Corporal Gilad Shalit was captured, in uniform and on armed duty near a checkpoint, on 25 June 2006. Chris McGreal of the Guardian reported: 'To Palestinians he is a prisoner of war - a legitimate target as a soldier in the uniform of an army that has killed dozens of civilians in the Gaza Strip in recent weeks - and a bargaining chip.' McGreal pointed out that 'Israel holds about 9,000 Palestinian prisoners. One thousand of them are detained without charge or trial, and often exist in a Kafkaesque world of having to prove their innocence without ever being told what it is they are accused of.' The Israeli military see Cpl Shalit's capture by Palestinian militiamen as an act of war. 'But the Israelis themselves crossed the border just a couple of days before the corporal was taken to apprehend two Palestinian militiamen.' (McGreal, Guardian, 30 June) BREAKING THE PEACE Time magazine observes: 'it's difficult to see how some Israeli tactics, particularly the strike on the Gaza power supply, can do much other than deepen the Palestinians' misery.' (10 July, p. 35) What else can 'these tactics' do? They can break the elected Palestine Authority, and they can break the hope of peace. That is their purpose: 'A senior Israeli security official says some members of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's government believe the crisis is an opportunity to smash the authority of Hamas, the militant organization that won control of the Palestinian Authority earlier this year. That aim became evident when Israeli forces arrested eight Palestinian Cabinet ministers and 40 Hamas parliamentarians in the West Bank, who may be charged with membership in terrorist organizations, affiliation with terrorist leadership and other violations. Israeli Interior Minister Ronnie Bar-On tells Time that the arrests had been planned for weeks and that the ministers would not be used as bargaining tools to win Shalit's release.' (p. 34) According to knowledgeable Palestinians, bringing down the Hamas Government 'could boost the group's more militant factions, which would prefer to abandon the political process and return to armed struggle.' Time quotes Saied Zourob, an official from Gaza belonging to the Fatah party that was displaced from government by Hamas: 'now the Israelis are pushing people toward Hamas and the resistance.' (p. 35) Time notes: 'The fallout from the Shalit saga is only hardening attitudes on both sides.' (p. 34) These were the predictable, and therefore intended, consequences of the actions Israel has taken - actions which have undermined rather than strengthened Cpl Shalit's chances of survival. Journalist Con Couglin points out that when the last Israeli soldier was abducted - Nachshon Waxman in 1994 - all that happened was the West Bank was closed off to allow a rescue attempt by Israeli special forces. (Telegraph, 30 June) Pushing Hamas as an organization, and the Palestinians as a people, away from negotiations and towards violence is a rational goal for Israeli policy (in the short term), if Israel is set on domination rather than peace. HAMAS-FATAH Undermining the elected Government and the Hamas leadership was a particularly urgent task because of the signs that Hamas moderates were building a united front with the Fatah movement. On 27 June, after months of tortuous negotiation between the two political rivals, a deal was finally struck on the basis of a document drawn up by Palestinian political prisoners: 'Fears of an Israeli assault on Gaza have all but overshadowed the agreement between Hamas and Fatah over the so-called "prisoners' document", which brings to an end months of tensions that have seen gun battles between armed forces loyal to the two groups... the "prisoners' document" is hoped to address international concerns by toning down Hamas' insistence on armed force and its implacable opposition to the existence of Israel. Negotiator Salah Zeidan said preparations were being made for a formal signing ceremony. "All political groups are prepared for a mutual ceasefire with Israel," he said.' (Guardian, 27 June) It was a huge step for Hamas to formally accept a Palestine on the West Bank and Gaza Strip, implicitly accepting the right of Israel to exist, and to join the Palestine Liberation Organization, which explicitly acknowledges that right. Times Foreign Editor Bronwen Maddox remarks: 'From Hamas, which has steadily advocated the annihilation of Israel, this amounts to a dramatic about-turn.' (29 June, p. 36) The threat of a firm Palestinian ceasefire by the main armed groups, and a major diplomatic initiative from the Palestinian side involving a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders has been averted - perhaps permanently - by the violent Israeli assault on Gaza. Author Patrick Seale comments that Israel 'abhors the recent Hamas-Fatah accord... becuse it threatens to produce a Palestinian partner ready to negotiate the creation of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders. Israel has no intention of ever returning to those borders. It is no accident that its assault followed immediately on the Palestinian accord. Israel will do everything to avoid a negotiation. Hence, it deliberately inflicts inhumane hardships on the Palestinians in order to radicalise them and drive the moderates from the scene.' (Guardian, 3 July, p. 29) THE REAL HISTORY OF THE PEACE PROCESS Western apologists portray the Middle East 'peace process' as one of Israeli offers and Arab rejection. In fact, the Palestinians and their Arab sponsors gravitated towards the international consensus - a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders - by the mid-1970s (see Noam Chomsky, The Fateful Triangle). This solution has been blocked by the United States and Israel. It is said that the two-state solution was rejected by the Palestinians, who walked out of negotiations at Camp David in mid-2000, after being offered an allegedly reasonable deal. In fact, Israeli scholar Ron Pundak points out that the Israeli position at the end of Camp David was that 12 per cent of the West Bank should remain in Israeli hands, in two strips dividing the West Bank into three sections, and cutting off all three fragments from East Jerusalem, the centre of Palestinian life and institutions. This was clearly absolutely unacceptable to the Palestinians. (See map on p. 46 of Pundak's 'From Oslo To Taba: What Went Wrong', available as a pdf from The Peres Center for Peace which Pundak heads.) At subsequent negotiations in Taba in January 2001, Israeli negotiators tacitly conceded that they could have given more ground - and cut their demands in half. The talks were then called off by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, not by the Palestinians. (BBC, 29 Jan. 2001) THE SHAMEFUL ROLE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION The Financial Times comments: 'the lack of active mediation by the world community has made containment of the conflict all the more difficult. With the US and the EU ostracising Hamas, the scope for diplomatic intervention has been limited. Israel has apparently felt under little pressure to restrain its actions.' (30 June, p. 6) The current assault is in part due to the European Union's imposition of collective punishment on the Palestinians, breaking off aid and diplomatic relations because the 'wrong people' won the election. By removing the small EU brake on Israeli policy, we share responsibility for Israel's actions. *** -- Justice Not Vengeance www.j-n-v.org 44 (0)1424 428 792 44 (0)7980 748 555 From info at j-n-v.org Thu Jul 27 12:56:28 2006 From: info at j-n-v.org (JNV) Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 12:56:28 +0100 Subject: [JNV] Please sign Oxfam call for immediate ceasefire - today Message-ID: <62d4bc0729e3d5f4f2d7d5f6ec96aa1e@j-n-v.org> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ----B68E6640433EE5CB5B150423C64AA644 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="none" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear friends Please visit this page immediately and add your name to Oxfam's call for an immediate ceasefire in the Israel/Gaza/Lebanon conflict. This is a very short term action that will most likely be presented to Blair sometime this week, and it's important to sign up before Blair meets Bush on Friday. Best wishes Maya Evans Emily Johns Milan Rai JNV *** OXFAM CALLS FOR IMMEDIATE CEASEFIRE or [Text on this page] The situation in the Middle East continues to deteriorate rapidly. Hundreds have already died and an estimated 500,000 people have had to flee their homes and have been forced to shelter in buildings with little or no help to meet their basic needs. This situation is unacceptable Fill in the form below and demand that Tony Blair add the British government's weight behind the international calls for an immediate ceasefire. *** Dear Prime Minister, I am deeply alarmed that the situation in the Lebanon, Gaza and Israel continues to deteriorate rapidly. I am concerned that the British government has yet to use its full influence to bring about an immediate ceasefire, and full compliance with international humanitarian law. By failing to back the UN and call for an immediate ceasefire the British government has reduced the impact of international calls for an immediate halt to the violence. As such, your current policy risks putting civilian lives at continued risk rather than helping to protect them. I ask that you take every opportunity available within the international community to push for an immediate ceasefire as a first step to end the suffering, which worsens each day. *** ----B68E6640433EE5CB5B150423C64AA644 Content-Type: message/rfc822 000000000000000000000000 Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 20:51:49 +0100 From: JNV To: JNV Subject: Please sign Oxfam call for immediate ceasefire - today Message-ID: <3ae47641641593521881da3dcccca68a@j-n-v.org> X-Mailer: IceWarp Web Mail 5.3.2 X-Originating-IP: 86.129.118.205 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="none" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear friends Please visit this page immediately and add your name to Oxfam's call for an immediate ceasefire in the Israel/Gaza/Lebanon conflict. This is a very short term action that will most likely be presented to Blair sometime this week, and it's important to sign up before Blair meets Bush on Friday. Best wishes Maya Evans Emily Johns Milan Rai JNV *** OXFAM CALLS FOR IMMEDIATE CEASEFIRE or [Text on this page] The situation in the Middle East continues to deteriorate rapidly. Hundreds have already died and an estimated 500,000 people have had to flee their homes and have been forced to shelter in buildings with little or no help to meet their basic needs. This situation is unacceptable Fill in the form below and demand that Tony Blair add the British government's weight behind the international calls for an immediate ceasefire. *** Dear Prime Minister, I am deeply alarmed that the situation in the Lebanon, Gaza and Israel continues to deteriorate rapidly. I am concerned that the British government has yet to use its full influence to bring about an immediate ceasefire, and full compliance with international humanitarian law. By failing to back the UN and call for an immediate ceasefire the British government has reduced the impact of international calls for an immediate halt to the violence. As such, your current policy risks putting civilian lives at continued risk rather than helping to protect them. I ask that you take every opportunity available within the international community to push for an immediate ceasefire as a first step to end the suffering, which worsens each day. *** ----B68E6640433EE5CB5B150423C64AA644-- From info at j-n-v.org Mon Jul 31 08:33:27 2006 From: info at j-n-v.org (JNV) Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 08:33:27 +0100 Subject: [JNV] New Anti-War Briefing - Blair vs Peace - and other reports/events Message-ID: <6cedc36d3c73a8c0acc091728d6dca57@j-n-v.org> 1) Anti-War Petitioning Success 2) JNV Anti-War Briefing 94: Blair vs Peace 3) National Demo, London 5 August 4) National Emergency Assembly for Direct Action 5) Funding Appeal from Activist heading for Lebanon Dear friends, Please find here some responses to the current crisis. The new anti-war briefing 94 'Blair vs Peace' is, as usual, available as double-sided, formatted pdf from the JNV website www.j-n-v.org. (Incidentally, the recent briefings are designed to be read all together, and do not repeat information.) JNV is at a low ebb financially. Any donations, however large or small would be very gratefully received. Please make cheques payable to 'JNV' and send them to: JNV, 29 Gensing Road, St Leonards on Sea, East Sussex TN38 0HE. Best wishes Maya Evans Emily Johns Milan Rai JNV *** 1) Lebanon/Gaza Petitioning Success JNV is based in Hastings, not noted as a particularly radical or left-wing town (the British National Party had a significant showing in the local elections recently). We've cooperated with Hastings Against War, the local anti-war group with whom we have an overlapping membership, to launch a petition drive using the JNV petition on the Lebanon/Gaza crisis. (It's available from www.j-n-v.org) On our first test outing, on Friday 21 July, we gathered 73 signatures in an hour on a rather slow Friday lunchtime (it was very hot and few people were around). On Saturday 29 July, after deciding we'd try to collect 1000 signatures to present to our local MP at a public meeting we've jointly called with him on Friday 11 August, we collected 400 signatures in just two hours (12 noon-2pm). Now we are trying to mobilize sympathetic people to do their own signature collections amongst their friends, families, congregations and workplaces. There is an enormous demand in the British public for these wars - in Lebanon and Gaza - to end. 61 per cent of Britons rightly believe Israel 'has overreacted to the threats it faces'. (Guardian, 25 July ) The major challenge for the anti-war movement, in relation both to Lebanon/Gaza and the war in Iraq, is to turn such opinions and feelings into political pressure that can affect government policy. That can only be done by grassroots organising and mobilizing for both local and national initiatives. This effort can be assisted by nonviolent civil disobedience that galvanises such mobilization (but it can also be damaged by actions that merely alienate and offend). *** 2) JNV Anti-War Briefing 94 Blair vs. Peace Appeasing/Assisting Israel's War On Lebanon And Gaza (30 July 2006) SUMMARY: The US and UK are aiding Israel's wars in Lebanon and Gaza diplomatically and militarily. Hezbollah is ready for a ceasefire; Israel is not. THE BUSH/BLAIR 'PEACE PLAN' OR 'DELAY PLAN' 29 July: 'Tony Blair and George Bush last night defied the growing anger across the world by seeking a UN resolution that fell far short of a ceasefire to end the killing of Lebanese civilians.' (Independent, p. 1) 'The two leaders refused to denounce Israel's offensive.' (Times, p. 1) 'The draft peace deal involves two phases. In the first, Israel and Lebanon would agree a ceasefire and a small multinational force would be deployed on the border, allowing Israeli troops to withdraw. Then a much larger force of between 10,000 and 20,000 troops would be assigned to implement UN security council resolution 1559... under which militias such as Hizbullah would be disarmed and the authority of the Lebanese government forces extended to the country's southern border.' (Guardian, 29 July, p. 1) 'Mr Blair's spokesman was dismissive of calls for a ceasefire without an agreement on a new force as "just so much wind"... A French suggestion that the security zone straddled the border with Israel was rejected... It was clear, however, that many questions about the composition, size, extensive mandate and timing of deployment are unresolved.' (Independent, 29 July, p. 4) AIDING ISRAEL'S WAR MACHINE While these 'unresolved questions' are discussed, the onslaught on Lebanon, and on Gaza, is to continue unhindered - and in fact militarily aided by the US and UK. 'The [British] Government will allow more American aircraft carrying arms to Israel to stop over in Britain... Both the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Downing Street suggested that two more requests by America to send planes carrying missiles as well as components over the next fortnight will go through.' (Times, 28 July, p. 8) According to the Arms Trade Resource Center in New York, 'Israel has received more than $9.4 billion worth of military aid and equipment since President George Bush was elected in 2001. But despite its huge arsenal, Israel has urgently requested fresh supplies, in particular powerful bunker-busting bombs, as it strives to kill Hizbollah leaders sheltering underground.' 'The Israeli military is also looking for resupply of Hellfire anti-tank missiles that have been used against vehicles moving in south Lebanon, arms industry sources said.' (Telegraph, 28 July, p. 17) We know about those 'vehicles'. Furthermore, 'British arms companies are supplying key parts for Israel's Apache combat helicopters, F-15 and F-16 fighter jets deployed in southern Lebanon, Gaza and the West Bank despite government guidelines banning the sale of weapons likely to be used "aggressively against another country" or fuel regional tensions.' (Guardian, 29 July) WHY BRITAIN? So Britain is a conduit for US arms, via Prestwick airport in Scotland. 'Sources at Prestwick told The Times... that the number of freighter aircraft such as 747s and civil Hercules C130s landing there had become "absolutely unreal".' One aviation official said: "We get two or three a day." ' (Times, 28 July, p. 9) 'The US also has the option of using its leased bases in Britain at Fairford, Gloucs and Lakenheath, Suffolk, and others if the pressure on Prestwick becomes too intense.' (Telegraph, 28 July, p. 17) Why are arms coming through the UK? Because, 'Ireland turned down a United States request for planes carrying 600lb so-called bunker busters to refuel at Shannon airport in Co Clare.' Prestwick is now negotiating to take planes carrying hundreds of US military personnel on their way to Iraq. Shannon is currently the stopover airport, but this is being reviewed, 'following protests in Ireland which have resulted in some of the planes being vandalised.' (Scotland on Sunday, 30 July) This refers to the 'Pitstop Ploughshares' action against US warplanes, which resulted in an acquittal on 25 July 2006, almost exactly ten years after the 'Seeds of Hope Ploughshares' action led to an acquittal on 30 July 1996, after the disarmament of a Hawk fighter jet destined for Indonesia. (See also Angie Zelter's account.) WORSE THAN APPEASEMENT Tony Blair says that the war should only stop after the postwar peacekeeping has been agreed. Labour MP Alan Simpson says: 'It is like a plan to offer counselling after a hanging - the corpse is not too interested in what they have to offer.' (Times, 29 July, p. 2) Robert Fisk describes this as 'allowing Israel to destroy Lebanon and call it peace'. (Independent, 29 July, p. 39) Blair actually helps supply the weapons that Israel is using to attack Lebanon. This isn't just appeasing Israel, it is assisting Israeli terrorism. THE GREEN LIGHT 'Mr Bush and Mr Blair have been resisting calls for an immediate ceasefire in every international forum for the past fortnight. This has been seen by their critics in Europe and the Middle East as an implicit green light to Israel to carry on its military offensive against Hizbullah.' (Guardian, 29 July, p. 4) Correction 1: the military offensive (and land-sea-air blockade) is against the whole of Lebanon, not just Hezbollah. Correction 2: it is not just the 'critics' who see a 'green light'. 'The Israelis interpreted that [US/UK refusal to call for an immediate ceasefire] as a green light to continue their offensive in southern Lebanon' - and in Gaza. (Telegraph, 29 July, p. 1) After the international conference on the Lebanon/Gaza crisis held in Rome failed to call for an immediate ceasefire, 'Haim Ramon, the Israeli justice minister, said the conference gave "permission from the world... to continue the operation, this war, until Hizbollah won't be located in Lebanon and is disarmed".' (Telegraph, 28 July, p. 16) Actually, 'Delegates [at the Rome Conference] said that virtually all countries had sought a quick end to hostilities but were forced to agree to a milder statement by the US.' (FT, 28 July, p. 5) IS HEZBOLLAH THE PROBLEM? Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, aims 'to tempt Israel with a pledge to install the Lebanese army, backed by an international force, in southern Lebanon to stop Hizbullah rocket attacks, and to tempt Hizbullah with the return of the disputed Sheba'a Farms area [occupied by Israel]. Hizbullah will not have to disarm immediately.' (Guardian, 29 July, p. 4) But the US, Israel and the UK are all determined that Hezbollah should be disarmed and destroyed. In their view, Hezbollah is the 'root cause' of the current conflict, and should be the focus of international efforts. The rest of the world is focused on Israeli violence against Lebanon and Gaza. True, Hezbollah initiated the northern conflict on 12 July, by firing Katyusha rockets and kidnapping two Israeli soldiers. But it was Israel that then escalated the conflict by immediately bombing not just Hezbollah rocket positions in southern Lebanon, but civilian infrastructure throughout the country. Israel also imposed a land/sea/air blockade on the whole of Lebanon that has caused a humanitarian crisis. 61 per cent of Britons rightly believe Israel 'has overreacted to the threats it faces'. (Guardian, 25 July) Israel is also responsible for the overwhelming bulk of the violence. 403 Lebanese civilians are confirmed dead as the result of Israeli attacks (more are still buried in collapsed buildings), while in Israel only 19 civilians have been killed by Hezbollah rockets. (AP, 29 July) WHO IS BLOCKING THE CEASEFIRE? Most importantly of all, however, it is Israel that is standing in the way of a ceasefire. The Israeli position (as of 29 July) is that 'All those now in south Lebanon are terrorists who are related in some way to Hizbollah' (Israeli Justice Minister, Haim Ramon). The Telegraph: 'the area would now become effectively a free-fire zone and that anyone found in it would be regarded as a target.' (28 July, p. 16) 'The mass-circulation Yedioth Aharonoth headlined a quote from an unnamed military commander: "Every village from which a Katyusha is fired must be destroyed." ' (FT, 28 July, p. 5) Israel is not stopping. In contrast, 'The [Lebanese] cabinet, in which Hizbollah is represented, voted late on Thursday to back proposals calling for an immediate and compre-hensive ceasefire, followed by an exchange of prisoners and a withdrawal of Israeli soldiers from Lebanon. Israeli troops would then be replaced by UN forces in the Shebaa Farms region... The government plan reasserts its intention to extend its authority to the south of the country, now controlled by Hizbollah, by sending the army to the area and stipulates that no group will be allowed to bear arms.' (Financial Times, 29 July, p. 6) [Addition to pdf version: This Lebanese plan fulfills the terms of UN Resolution 1559, which is the stated objective of the Bush-Blair 'peace plan', though without the introduction of international forces. It was agreed, quite clearly, in order to be placed before Bush and Blair (and the world) before their meeting on 28 July. It was totally ignored by Bush and Blair, and almost completely ignored by the British media.] 'Hizbullah wants an immediate ceasefire and is ready to swap the two abducted Israeli soldiers "in six hours" after it comes into force, according to officials from Amal, a Shia party... a ceasefire has been part of Hizbullah's position virtually from the start of Israel's air attacks and before Israeli ground troops crossed the border in strength.' (Guardian, 28 July, p. 4) The Lebanese Government plan is being ignored. The Hezbollah offer is being ignored. Peace is being rejected by Israel, the US - and Tony Blair. *** 3) National Emergency Demonstration On Saturday 5 August there will be a national emergency demonstration in London organised by Stop the War and others, calling for an immediate, unconditional ceasefire in Lebanon and Gaza, the end of Israel's attacks and the end of Tony Blair's support for George Bush's wars. Saturday 5 August: Assemble 12 noon. Speakers' Corner, Hyde Park, London (Nearest tube Marble Arch) March to Parliament Square *** 4) National Emergency Assembly for Direct Action [NOTE: the following text was recently posted on the Indymedia.org.uk website. It's origins are otherwise unknown. Taken from Voices in the Wilderness UK email] In response to the actions of last Tuesday and Saturday it has become clear that there is an overwhelming desire to do more than peacefully protest the massacre happening in Lebanon and Palestine. Currently over 300 Lebanese have been killed while the governments and populations of the world watch. At the same time the media is speaking about balance, to try to fool us into their 'neutral' coverage. The systems of power are attempting to silence any form of unconventional dissent. Once again, demonstrations have been called in which people march along prescribed routes and listen to planned, boring speeches. We've seen this play before with the run up to the Iraq war. We now know that peaceful demonstrations alone are not sufficient to halt the war machine. To combat this, we are putting a call-out for an emergency assembly to plan direct action against the Israeli invasion of Lebanon and Palestine. The assembly will take place on Tuesday, 1st of August at 18:30. Venue: room H216, on the second floor of Connaught House, London School of Economics. Connaught House is on Aldwych; for a map and directions see *** 5) Funding Appeal from Activist heading for Lebanon [Note: the following appeal is from Caiomhe Butterly, a remarkable activist whom Voices in the Wilderness and JNV are happy to vouch for 100%] Dear friends, As I'm sure you all know, the situation in Lebanon is increasingly deteriorating. Next week I plan to travel to Beirut to do what I can to help. For this reason I am sending out this appeal: Though this appeal is being sent out mainly through activist networks and mailing lists where I know the recipients, on the off-chance that it is forwarded furthur afield, I'll briefly introduce myself. My name is Caoimhe Butterly. I'm an Irish social justice activist who has spent the last five years working in Palestine, Iraq and with Palestinian diaspora communities in South America and Asia, as well as European-based Palestine and Iraq solidarity campaigns. Though presently in London I plan to travel to Damascus and then by road to Beirut early next week. I spent time in Palestinian refugee camps in Beirut and the South of Lebanon last year and have maintained contact with families and community groups that I met while there and, speaking to them over the past few days, have listened with growing frustration to their accounts of the disparity between what they are witnessing as the Israeli bombardment of Lebanon intensifies, and the mainstream media's sanitised, biased reporting of the situation. It is estimated that up to a half a million people from the South of Lebanon are on the move, fleeing the relentless bombing, and are presently seeking refuge in schools, open-air parks, mosques, churches etc. in Beirut. Most of these centres that are receiving people are staffed by volunteers and are relying on local communities for donations of food and medicines. As the spectre of another Israeli ground invasion of Lebanon grows more likely, Lebanese and Palestinian communities are facing the reality of having been, once again, collectively abandoned by the outside world. They are being abandoned both by our governments, who refuse to censure Israel's continual violation of international law; and by us, as civil society groups, in our failure to reflect the courage of people enduring siege and disposession by upping the ante of our own resistance to our governments' complicity in the situation. I'm travelling to Lebanon principally to bear witness to what people are being forced to live through- to document - through articles, photos and footage, the onslaught and it's aftermath - testimonies, interviews etc. I plan to send this out through various mailing lists, web pages and mainstream and independant media and will ask you all to forward on. I also intend to volunteer, as an extra pair of hands, at some of the centres that have been set up to receive families. As Lebanese and Palestinian communities are presently pooling together their resources, ingenuity and collective solidarity to receive displaced people fleeing the South, and as yet more families prepare to flee Beirut to the mountains and Syria, we have a responsibility to demonstrate that we are not oblivious to what they are suffering. We must show them that we will accompany them now - through direct action, demonstrations and campaigning out here - and in their struggle to eventually rebuild their lives. On that note, I'll get to the point of this appeal - which is for funds. Before leaving for Damascus onMonday I hope to raise money to bring with me to donate to both crisis community centres and to give as small solidarity crisis donations to families I meet along the way (for example at the border with Syria, and in Palestinian, already impoverished, refugee camps etc.). >From the accounts of friends in Beirut that are volunteering in some of the converted schools etc., the main needs are for food, basic medicines (bandages, pain-killers, sedatives, antibiotics etc.), blankets, floor mats, nappies, baby formula, diesel generators etc. Although there are a number of humanitarian organisations still active in Lebanon, the massive influx of displaced people into Beirut means that many of the small community centre aid projects are still lacking in basic necessities. In the present conditions whatever folks can donate will assist in a direct and immediate way in helping a few families from not having to face - on top of being homeless and under siege - the precarity of not having the money to buy food and basic necessities. In order to maintain a level of transparency with your donations I can send reports as to whom (centres/families) your donations are going, and for what. Obviously justice, not aid, is what is more urgently needed, but in a crisis situation, fund-raising and solidarity donations to support families are also essential. If individuals or solidarity groups are interested in donating money, you can either contact me on sahara78@hotmail.co.uk or at 00447922901696? or lodge money directly into the account of a dear friend and dedicated activist Yasmin, who will withdraw it and Western Union it to me while in Syria and Lebanon. Her account details are : Miss Yasmin Ataullah Lloyds TSB 40 Woodcote Rd. Wallington Surrey SM6 ONR Account Num: 00 236 209 Sort Code: 309904 Or, for folks in Ireland, Caoimhe Butterly Bank of Ireland 32 South Mall, Cork account num:41818255 sort code:902768 or via the Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign, ear-marked as a donation to Lebanon. Again, any donation, small or smaller will be helpful. In solidarity, Caoimhe From info at j-n-v.org Fri Aug 4 14:40:14 2006 From: info at j-n-v.org (JNV) Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 14:40:14 +0100 Subject: [JNV] JNV Help needed / Chomsky interview / other material Message-ID: <8c47d53ac4bbc5cdfc01155c053a10eb@j-n-v.org> 1) Help needed for JNV and Voices material distribution tomorrow 2) Lebanon/Gaza Direct Action Assembly 3) Organizing - wise words from the US 4) Chomsky interview on Lebanon / Gaza Dear friends We're grateful for the generous donations that have been made. If you haven't already made a financial contribution, and are able to, we would really appreciate your support, as we are still on financial thin ice. We hope you find the following selection useful. Best wishes Maya Evans Emily Johns Milan Rai JNV ***** 1) HELP NEEDED AT THIS SATURDAY'S EMERGENCY LEBANON / GAZA DEMONSTRATION Meet 12 noon, Saturday 5th August, under Marble Arch, London Voices, JNV and friends will be distributing materials at this Saturday's emergency national demonstration in London demanding an unconditional ceasefire in Israel's war on Lebanon, including JNV's "Ceasefire Now, No Arms to Israel" postcard, leaflets about this October's "No More Fallujahs" weekend of nonviolent resistance to the occupation of Iraq (see www.rememberfallujah.org) and a new sign-up card for a just-forming campaign "Stop Arming Israel" (supported by the Campaign Against Arms Trade, the Palestine Solidarity Campaign and the Radical Activist Network). We would be grateful for as much help as possible in distributing materials. PLEASE BRING CHILDREN'S SHOES Stop the War are calling for demonstrators to bring children's shoes to dump outside Downing Street tomorrow - Report on the Guardian website: 'Demonstrators to protest over UK stance on Lebanon', Matthew Tempest and Oliver King Friday August 4, 2006, Guardian Unlimited 'Tony Blair's diplomatic calls to secure a new United Nations resolution on the Israel-Lebanon conflict could well be disrupted by noisy demonstrators tomorrow. Anti-war demonstrators plan to dump a mountain of children's shoes outside Downing Street to symbolise the victims of Israeli bombing and protest against the government's stance on the Lebanon crisis.' 'The Stop The War coalition, which is organising the march, claims that up to 50,000 peace protestors will make it to the capital tomorrow to object to the UK's stance on refusing to call for an immediate ceasefire. The demonstration - following a similar one two weeks ago - comes after Tony Blair announced he was delaying his holiday and staying in Downing Street to make diplomatic phone calls in an attempt to secure a new UN resolution.' 'Demonstrators will also hand in a petition signed by more than 20,000 people.' ***** 2) LEBANON / GAZA EMERGENCY DIRECT ACTION ASSEMBLY THIS SUNDAY (6 AUGUST) 3pm, Ramparts Social Centre, London E1 2LA (near Whitechapel, off Commercial Rd). Once again, a direct action assembly is taking place without too much information about it being available. Voices reports: 'A similar assembly, attended by 50+ people, took place on Tuesday and organised an action to take place yesterday (though we don't have any reports on what happened), agreed to leaflet the march on Saturday (according to the information we've received these folk will be meeting up under Marble Arch at 11.30am on Saturday ie. 1/2 hour *before* the Voices and JNV folk) and discussed organising some sort of action at Brize Norton (one of the UK airbases through which US arms shipments to Israel have apparently been routed).' More information may be posted on Indymedia: www.indymedia.org.uk ***** 3) EXCERPTS FROM 'Five Guidelines for Our Organizing' by Cynthia Peters, ZNet a) As well as civil disobedience '... if you are willing to spend hours getting civil disobedience training, and then many more hours laying in the streets, getting arrested, sitting around in the local jail, and then showing up for court appearances, you should also be willing to spend a similar number of hours knocking on doors and doing the nitty gritty work of growing a movement.' b) The meeting 'Every day I struggle to hold the following two pieces of information in my head: 1) the U.S. and its "willing" (or coerced?) allies are unleashing death and destruction on innocent civilians in an unjust and illegal war, and 2) the best, indeed the only, thing I can do about it is go to a meeting. 'It will be a more or less productive meeting. We will plan local and national actions. We will spend hours haggling over differences, working out details, and asking already overworked volunteers to take on more. We will hope that the collective wisdom of those in the room will lead to effective organizing, and good long- and short-term strategy. 'And we will deal with the tension of witnessing a crisis unfold, and having no choice but to do the slow and plodding work of building a mass movement that is powerful enough to stop it.' ***** 4) CHOMSKY INTERVIEW ON LEBANON/GAZA [The following excerpt is from the Epilogue to Perilous Power: The Middle East and U.S. Foreign Policy, by Noam Chomsky & Gilbert Achcar, edited with a Preface by Stephen R. Shalom, to be published by Paradigm Publishers September 15, 2006, Hardcover $22.95.] Taken from ZNet Q: How would you assess the Israeli and U.S. responses to the election of Hamas, and to the ensuing conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon? Noam Chomsky: The U.S. response reveals, once again, that the United States supports democracy if and only if it conforms to U.S. strategic and economic objectives. Perhaps it would be useful to review some highlights since Hamas was elected in late January 2006. On February 12, the statements of Osama bin Laden were reviewed in the New York Times by NYU law professor Noah Feldman. He described bin Laden's descent into utter barbarism, reaching the depths when he advanced "the perverse claim that since the United States is a democracy, all citizens bear responsibility for its government's actions, and civilians are therefore fair targets." Utter depravity, no doubt. Two days later, the lead story in the Times casually reported that the United States and Israel are joining bin Laden in the lower depths of depravity. Palestinians offended the masters by voting the wrong way in a free election. The population must therefore be punished for this crime. The "intention," the correspondent observed, "is to starve the Palestinian Authority of money and international connections" so that President Mahmoud Abbas will be "compelled to call a new election. The hope is that Palestinians will be so unhappy with life under Hamas that they will return to office a reformed and chastened Fatah movement." Mechanisms of punishment of the population are outlined. The article also reports that Condoleezza Rice will visit the oil producers to ensure that they do not relieve the torture of the Palestinians. In short, bin Laden's "perverse claim"; but when the United States advances the claim, it is not ultimate evil but rather righteous dedication to "democracy promotion."1 These paired articles elicited no comment that I could discover. Also overlooked was the fact that bin Laden's "perverse claim" is standard operating procedure. Familiar examples are "making the economy scream" when Chileans had the effrontery to elect Salvador Allende -- the "soft track"; the "hard track" brought Pinochet. Another pertinent illustration is the U.S.-UK sanctions regime that murdered hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, devastated the country, and probably saved Saddam Hussein from the fate of other monsters like him (often supported by the United States and Britain to the very end). Not quite bin Laden's doctrine; rather, much more perverse, not only in terms of scale but also because Iraqis could not by any stretch of the imagination be held responsible for Saddam Hussein. The most venerable illustration is Washington's forty-seven-year campaign of terror and economic strangulation against Cuba. From the internal record, we learn that the Eisenhower and Kennedy administrations determined that "[t]he Cuban people are responsible for the regime," so they must be punished with the expectation that "[r]ising discomfort among hungry Cubans" will cause them to throw Castro out (JFK). The State Department advised that "[e]very possible means should be undertaken promptly to weaken the economic life of Cuba [in order to] bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of the government."2 The doctrine remains in force. Without continuing, we find ample evidence that it is no departure from the norm to adopt bin Laden's most perverse claim in order to punish Palestinians for their democratic misdeeds. The United States and Israel then proceeded to implement their "intention," with scrupulous care. Thus, for example, an EU proposal to provide some desperately needed aid for health care was stalled when U.S. "officials expressed concerns that some of this money might end up paying nurses, doctors, teachers and others previously on the government payroll, thereby helping to finance Hamas." Another achievement of the "war on terror." With U.S. backing, Israel also continued its terrorist atrocities and other crimes in Gaza and the West Bank -- in some cases, perhaps, in an attempt to induce Hamas to violate its embarrassing cease-fire, so that Israel could respond in "self-defense," another familiar pattern.3 In May 2006, Israeli Prime Minister Olmert announced his plan to formalize Sharon's West Bank expansion programs, which were announced along with the "Gaza disengagement." Olmert chose the term "convergence" ("hitkansut") as a euphemism for annexation of valuable land and resources (including water) of the West Bank, programs designed to break the continually shrinking Palestinian areas into separated cantons, virtually isolated from one another and from whatever corner of Jerusalem will be left to Palestinians, all imprisoned as Israel takes over the Jordan valley and controls air space and any external access. In a stunning public relations triumph, Olmert won praise for his courage in "withdrawing" from the West Bank as he put the finishing touches on the project of destroying any hope for recognition of Palestinian national rights. We were enjoined to lament the "anguish" of the residents of scattered settlements that would be abandoned as they "converge" into the territories illegally annexed behind the cruel and illegal "Separation Wall." All of this proceeds, as usual, with a kindly nod from Washington, which is expected to fork up the billions of dollars needed to carry out the plans, though there are occasional admonitions that the destruction of Palestine should not be "unilateral": It would be preferable for President Mahmoud Abbas to sign a surrender declaration, in which case everything would be just fine. The people of Gaza and the West Bank are supposed to observe all of this submissively, rotting in their virtual prisons. Otherwise they are sadistic terrorists. The latest phase began on June 24, when the Israeli army kidnapped two civilians, a doctor and his brother, from their home in Gaza. They were "detained" according to brief notes in the British press. The U.S. media mostly preferred silence.4 They will presumably join the 9,000 other Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails, 1,000 reportedly in prison without charges, hence kidnapped -- as were many of the rest, in that they were sentenced by Israeli courts, which are a disgrace, harshly condemned by legal commentators in Israel. Among them are hundreds of women and children, their numbers and fate of little interest. Also of little interest are Israel's secret prisons. The Israeli press reported that these have been "the entry gate to Israel for Lebanese, especially those who were suspected of membership in Hezbollah, who were transferred to the southern side of the border," some captured in battle in Lebanon, others "abducted at Israel's initiative" and sometimes held as hostages, with torture under interrogation. The secret Camp 1391, possibly one of several, was discovered accidentally in 2003, since forgotten.5 The next day, June 25, Palestinians kidnapped an Israeli soldier just across the border from Gaza. That did happen, very definitely. Every literate reader also knows the name of corporal Gilad Shalit, and wants him released. The nameless kidnapped Gaza civilians are ignored; international law, while rightly insisting that captured soldiers be treated humanely, absolutely prohibits the extrajudicial seizure of civilians. Israel responded by "bombing and shelling, darkening and destroying, imposing a siege and kidnapping like the worst of terrorists and nobody breaks the silence to ask, what the hell for, and according to what right?" as the fine Israeli journalist Gideon Levy wrote, adding that "[a] state that takes such steps is no longer distinguishable from a terror organization." Israel also kidnapped a large part of the Palestinian government, destroyed most of the Gaza electrical and water systems, and committed numerous other crimes. These acts of collective punishment, condemned by Amnesty International as "war crimes," compounded the punishment of Palestinians for having voted the wrong way. Within a few days, UN agencies working in Gaza warned of a "public health disaster" as a result of developments "which have seen innocent civilians, including children, killed, brought increased misery to hundreds of thousands of people and which will wreak far-reaching harm on Palestinian society. An already alarming situation in Gaza, with poverty rates at nearly eighty per cent and unemployment at nearly forty per cent, is likely to deteriorate rapidly, unless immediate and urgent action is taken."6 The pretext for punishing Palestinians is that Hamas refuses to accept three demands: to recognize Israel, cease all acts of violence, and accept earlier agreements. The editors of the New York Times instruct Hamas leaders that they must accept the "ground rules that have already been accepted by Egypt and Jordan and by the Arab League as a whole in its 2002 Beirut peace initiative" and, furthermore, that they must do so "not as some kind of ideological concession" but "as an admission ticket to the real world, a necessary rite of passage in the progression from a lawless opposition to a lawful government" -- like us.7 Unmentioned is that Israel and the United States flatly reject all of these conditions. They do not recognize Palestine; they refused to end their violence even when Hamas observed a unilateral truce for a year and a half and called for a long-term truce while negotiations proceed for a two-state settlement; and they dismissed with utter contempt the 2002 Arab League call for normalization of relations, along with all other proposals for a meaningful diplomatic settlement. Even when it accepted the "Road Map" that is supposed to define U.S. policy, Israel added fourteen "reservations" that rendered it entirely meaningless, eliciting the usual tacit approval in Washington and silence in commentary.8 The Hamas electoral victory was eagerly exploited by the United States and Israel. Previously, they had to pretend that there was "no partner" for negotiations, so they had no choice but to continue their project of taking over the West Bank, as they had been doing systematically since the Oslo Accords were signed (extending earlier actions). The pace of settlement peaked in 2000, the last year of Clinton and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, then escalated under Bush-Sharon. With Hamas in office, Olmert and his cohorts can lament that there is "no partner." Therefore, they must proceed with annexation and destruction of Palestine, counting on articulate Western opinion to applaud politely, perhaps with mild reservations about unilateral "convergence," and to suppress the fact that while Hamas's programs are in many respects entirely unacceptable, their own are comparable or much worse, and are not just rhetoric: They are systematically implementing their denial of any meaningful Palestinian rights, a crucial difference. The next act in this hideous drama opened on July 12, when Hezbollah launched a raid in which it captured two Israeli soldiers and killed several others, leading to an all-out Israeli attack, killing hundreds and destroying much of what Lebanon has painfully reconstructed from the wreckage of its civil wars and the Israeli invasions. Whatever its motives, Hezbollah took a frightful gamble, for which Lebanon would surely pay dearly. Here we see the danger of processes that have led to the rise of "parallel or alternative leaderships that can protect [civilian populations] and deliver essential services" with their own military wings, as veteran Middle East correspondent Rami Khouri has noted.9 On the motives, analysts differ. "Hezbollah's official line," the Financial Times reports, "was that the capture was aimed at winning the release of the few remaining Lebanese prisoners in Israeli jails. But the timing and scale of its attack suggest it was partly intended to reduce the pressure on the Palestinians by forcing Israel to fight on two fronts simultaneously." Many agree, recalling Hezbollah's reaction to the outbreak of the al-Aqsa Intifada in September 2000 -- when it seized soldiers in a cross-border raid that led to a prisoner exchange -- as well as its response to Israel's devastating attacks in the West Bank in 2002 (Amos Harel).10 Others highlight the prisoner motive, which is also suggested by the exchange in 2000, by the fact that Hezbollah had attempted capture of soldiers before the recent crisis, and by the matter of Israel's secret prisons, mentioned earlier. Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, a Lebanese academic specialist on Hezbollah, regards the Gaza connection as primary, but argues that one should not ignore "the domestic significance of these hostages."11 Still others regard Iran and/or Syria as the main actors. Many experts and Iranian dissidents disagree, though few doubt that Iran and Syria authorized Hezbollah's actions. Most Arab rulers place the blame on Iran. At an emergency Arab League summit, they were willing "to openly defy Arab public opinion" because of their concerns about Iranian influence. One Dubai military specialist commented that the Iranians, by means of Hezbollah, "are embarrassing the hell out of the Arab governments," who are doing nothing while "[t]he peace process has collapsed, the Palestinians are being killed. . . . And here comes Hezbollah, which is actually scoring hits against Israel." The criticism of Hezbollah was opposed by Syria, Yemen, Algeria, and Lebanon; the Iraqi parliament, "in a rare show of unity," condemned the Israeli attack as "criminal aggression," and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, whose designation Washington applauded, "call[ed] on the world to take quick stands to stop the Israeli aggression." The fact that most Arab leaders, however, are willing to "defy public opinion" may have large-scale regional implications, strengthening radical Islamist groups. It is noteworthy that the "Supreme Guide" of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, Mahdi Akef, sharply condemned the Arab states. "The Brotherhood would win a comfortable majority" in a free election in Egypt, according to Middle East scholar Fawwaz Gerges, and has broad influence elsewhere, including with Hamas, one of its offshoots.12 A broader analysis is suggested by retired colonel Pat Lang, former head of the Middle East and terrorism desk at the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency: "This is basically tribal warfare. If you have someone who's hostile to you and you're unwilling to accept a temporary truce, as Hamas offered, then you have to destroy them. The Israeli response is so disproportionate to the abduction of the three men it appears it's a rather clever excuse designed to appeal both to their public and to the U.S."13 Speculation about motives and conflicting factors should not blind us to the tragedy that is unfolding. Lebanon is being destroyed, Israel's Gaza prison is suffering still more savage blows, and on the West Bank, mostly out of sight, the United States and Israel are consummating their project of the murder of a nation, a grim and rare event in history. These actions, and the Western response, illustrate all too clearly the amalgam of savage cruelty, self-righteousness, and injured innocence that is so deeply rooted in the imperial mentality as to be beyond awareness. One can easily understand why Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization, is alleged to have said that he thought it might be a good idea. -- July 20, 2006 Notes 1. Noah Feldman, "Becoming bin Laden" (review of Messages to the World: The Statements of Osama bin Laden), New York Times Book Review, February 12, 2006, p. 12; Steven Erlanger, "U.S. and Israelis Are Said to Talk of Hamas Ouster," New York Times, February 14, 2006, p. A1. 2. Louis Pérez, "Fear and Loathing of Fidel Castro: Sources of U.S. Policy Toward Cuba," Journal of Latin American Studies 34, no. 2 (May 2002), pp. 227–254. 3. Steven R. Weisman, "Europe Plan to Aid Palestinians Stalls Over U.S. Salary Sanctions," New York Times, June 15, 2006, p. A10. See also Tanya Reinhart, "A Week of Israeli Restraint," Yediot Ahronot, June 21, 2006. A striking illustration of this pattern is the intense (and failed) effort to elicit Palestinian violence to justify the planned 1982 invasion. Palestinian violence does continue, however, notably in the form of Qassam rocket attacks from Gaza by groups that refused to accept the Hamas truce -- actions both criminal and foolish. 4. Jonathan Cook, "The British Media and the Invasion of Gaza," Medialens (UK), June 30, 2006; Josh Brannon, "IDF Commandos Enter Gaza, Capture Two Hamas Terrorists," Jerusalem Post, June 25, 2006; Ken Ellingwood, "2 Palestinians Held in Israel's First Arrest Raid in Gaza Since Pullout," Los Angeles Times, June 25, 2006, p. A20. Apart from the Los Angeles Times, there were only a few marginal words in the Baltimore Sun (June 25) and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch (June 25). Moreover, no mainstream media source chose to refer to this event when discussing Shalit's capture. The only serious coverage I know of in the English-language press appeared in the Turkish Daily News (June 25). (Database search by David Peterson.) 5. Aviv Lavie, "Inside Israel's Secret Prison," Ha'aretz, August 22, 2003; Jonathan Cook, "Facility 1391: Israel's Guantanamo," Le Monde Diplomatique, November 2003; Chris McGreal, "Facility 1391: Israel's Secret Prison," Guardian, November 14, 2003, p. 2. 6. Gideon Levy, "A Black Flag," Ha'aretz, July 2, 2006; Christopher Gunness, "Statements by the United Nations Agencies Working in the Occupied Palestinian Territory," July 8, 2006; Amnesty International press release, "Israel/Occupied Territories: Deliberate Attacks a War Crime," AI Index: MDE 15/061/2006 (Public), News Service No. 169, June 30, 2006. 7. Editorial, "A Problem That Can't Be Ignored," New York Times, June 17, 2006, p. A12. 8. Israeli Cabinet Statement on Road Map and 14 Reservations by State of Israel, July 9, 2004, originally released on May 25, 2003. 9. Rami G. Khouri, "The Mideast Death Dance," Salon, July 15, 2006. 10. Roula Khalaf, "Hizbollah's Bold Attack Raises Stakes in Middle East," Financial Times, July 13, 2006, p. 5; David Hirst, "Overnight Lebanon Has Been Plunged into a Role It Endured for 25 Years -- That of a Hapless Arena for Other People's Wars," Guardian, July 14, 2006, p. 29; Megan K. Stack and Rania Abouzeid, "The Nation of Hezbollah," Los Angeles Times, July 13, 2006, p. A1; Neil MacFarquhar and Hassan Fattah, "In Hezbollah Mix of Politics and Arms, Arms Win Out," New York Times, July 16, 2006, pp. I:1; Amos Harel, "Israel Faces a Wide Military Escalation," Ha'aretz, July 12, 2006; Uri Avnery, "The Real Aim," July 15, 2006, Gush Shalom Web site. 11. Mouin Rabbani, Democracy Now!, July 14, 2006, transcript available online; Saad-Ghorayeb, quoted in Halpern and Blanford, "A Second Front Opens for Israel," p. 1. [The number of prisoners is unknown, apart from the one or two officially admitted. In what may be the first mainstream reference, Ha'aretz commentator Nehemia Shtrasler writes that in the course of the six years since Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon, "no one found it correct to neutralize the central demand of Hezbollah: freeing the Lebanese prisoners. The head of the Lebanese government, Fuad Siniora, stated two days ago that freeing these prisoners is a central condition for any agreement. In addition to Samir Quntar, Israel holds about 15 Lebanese prisoners, who have been held here for many years. It was possible to free them long before -- to the hands of the moderate Siniora." See Shtrasler, "A Path to Strengthen the Extremists," Ha'aretz, July 21, 2006 (in Hebrew). (Information added July 22, 2006.)] 12. Hassan Fattah, "Militia Rebuked by Some Arab Countries," New York Times, July 17, 2006, p. A1; Dan Murphy and Sameh NaGuib, "Hizbullah Winning over Arab Street," Christian Science Monitor, July 18, 2006, p. 1; Edward Wong and Michael Slackman, "Iraqi Prime Minister Denounces Israel's Actions," New York Times, October 20, 2006, p. A1; Fawwaz Gerges, Journey of the Jihadist: Inside Muslim Militancy (Orlando, FL: Harcourt Inc., 2006), p. 26. 13. Lang, quoted in Dan Murphy, "Escalation Ripples Through Middle East," Christian Science Monitor, July 14, 2006, p. 1. From info at j-n-v.org Thu Aug 10 10:55:57 2006 From: info at j-n-v.org (JNV) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 10:55:57 +0100 Subject: [JNV] Lebanon: Nonviolent Resistance / Critical Information and Action Message-ID: <48aa50c25f4850586be85e0539f16518@j-n-v.org> 1) Nonviolent Resistance in the UK 2) Nonviolent Resistance in Lebanon 3) Lebanon: Noam Chomsky interview 8 August 4) Lebanon: Stephen Shalom briefing 5) Lebanon: George Monbiot article 6) Online ceasefire petitions ***** 1) Nonviolent Resistance in the UK Dear friends We salute the tenacity and commitment of the Citizens Weapons Inspectors/War Crimes Detectives who have broken into Prestwick Airport in Scotland three times to protest against the transport of US weapons to Israel! Read all about it at: Also: read this report of the CND protests at USAF Mildenhall, against the flights diverted from Prestwick: Last night, Wednesday 9 August (Nagasaki Day), there was a protest at the other British airbase being used for weapons flights to Israel, Brize Norton (6pm at the main gates), organised by Oxford CND and Farringdon Peace Group. Seven JNV supporters were also arrested for a nonviolent at the demonstration in London last Saturday: Future events (from the Voices in the Wilderness UK roundup): 11 AUGUST, LONDON: END ISRAEL'S ATTACKS ON LEBANON AND PALESTINE. 5-7pm Downing Street. Please bring flowers to commemorate the dead, and call on Tony Blair to end Britain's complicity with Israel's brutal, barbaric and illegal actions. Organised by Palestine Solidarity Campaign, Stop the War Coalition, CND and the British Muslim Initiative. 12 AUGUST, BRIZE NORTON 12:00 noon main gate RAF Brize Norton. Picket as protest against RAF base being used to refuel flights taking American weapons to Israel. Info from Andy on 01793 520 903. EVERY DAY THIS WEEK, CAMBRIDGE. Stop the War stall every day this week 12.30-2 Market Sq 12 AUGUST, CAMBRIDGE Demonstration - 'Unconditional Ceasefire Now' Saturday 12th Aug 12.30 Market Sq (hope to present petition to David Howarth MP). Phone Tom: 0771 2893552 / 01223 473943 12 AUGUST, HACKNEY: UNCONDITIONAL CEASEFIRE NOW DEMONSTRATION Assemble 1pm corner Balls Pond Road/Kingsbury Road, nr Dalston Junction. March to Stoke Newington Common for rally with speakers. Contact 07932 714 833 12 AUGUST, PRESTON: MARCH & DEMO 2pm, Preston City Centre, starting at the Flag Market at 2.30pm. Tel: 07956 100 786 12 AUGUST, MANCHESTER Assembles 1pm Piccadilly Gardens, tel 07765 122 829 12 AUGUST, EDINBURGH: END ISRAELI TERROR IN LEBANON & GAZA, TROOPS OUT OF IRAQ, DON'T ATTACK IRAN AND SYRIA. Assemble at the foot of Middle Meadow Walk on the Meadows at 2pm to march to Edinburgh City Centre. Please pass this information on to friends and workmates. Called by Stop the War and supported by PSC, CND, Peace and Justice Centre and many more. Stalls every day: There will be stalls everyday next week at the Mound precinct from 5pm to 7pm to advertise the Scottish demonstration on August 12th. Please come and help if you can. Leaflets, petitions etc will be available for collection. 19 AUGUST, CAMBRIDGE March and Rally - 'Unconditional Ceasefire Now' 12.30pm, Market Sq. Phone Tom: 0771 2893552 / 01223 473943 PEACE CAMPS: Prestwick: 07966 649 370 Mildenhall: 07760 161 755 Brize Norton: 07760 161 755 ***** 2) Nonviolent Resistance in Lebanon In Lebanon itself, an extraordinary nonviolent initiative is taking place. This is an excerpt from the founding Call To Action: 'Building on our belief in our country, the efforts of the civil resistance, and on the arrival of the internationals coming to Lebanon for solidarity, we declare that Lebanon is an open country for civil resistance, starting from August 12. 'On August 12 at 7 am, we will gather in Martyrs? Square to form a civilian convoy to the south of Lebanon. Hundreds of Lebanese and international civilians will carry relief as an expression of solidarity for the inhabitants of the heavily destroyed south who have been bravely withstanding the assault of the Israeli military. 'After August 12th, the campaign will continue with a series of civil actions for which your presence and participation is needed. Working together in solidarity we will overcome the complacency, inaction, and complicity of the international community and we will deny Israel its goal of removing Lebanese from their land and destroying the fabric of our country.' ***** 3) Lebanon: Chomsky interview 8 August Excerpt: 'The "moral justification" is supposed to be that capturing soldiers in a cross-border raid, and killing others, is an outrageous crime. We know, for certain, that Israel, the United States and other Western governments, as well as the mainstream of articulate Western opinion, do not believe a word of that. Sufficient evidence is their tolerance for many years of US-backed Israeli crimes in Lebanon, including four invasions before this one, occupation in violation of Security Council orders for 22 years, and regular killings and abductions. To mention just one question that every journal should be answering: When did Nasrallah assume a leadership role? Answer: When the Rabin government escalated its crimes in Lebanon, murdering Sheikh Abbas Mussawi and his wife and child with missiles fired from a US helicopter. Nasrallah was chosen as his successor. Only one of innumerable cases. There is, after all, a good reason why last February, 70% of Lebanese called for the capture of Israeli soldiers for prisoner exchange.'. ***** 4) Lebanon: Stephen Shalom briefing This is a brilliant briefing, with very important information about Hezbollah rocket attacks on Israel, among other insights and facts. Excerpt: 'This table makes a number of points clear. First, Not a single Israeli civilian was killed by a rocket from Lebanon from May 2000 to July 12, 2006. And second, until May 28, 2006, there was not a single confirmed rocket fired at civilians by Hezbollah. (True, in some of the cases where the responsible party was unidentified, it might have been Hezbollah, but that's inconsistent with the group's usual policy of proudly taking responsibility for its attacks.) Often the perpetrators were Palestinians, responding to events in Palestine (for example, the bloody Israeli offensive on the West Bank in Spring 2002).' 'On May 28, 2006, during the exchange of fire between the Israeli military and Hezbollah in which two Lebanese but no Israeli civilians were injured, Israeli civilians in the north were ordered by the IDF "to take to the safety of bomb shelters -- some so out of use that it was difficult to locate the keys." ' 'So this war can hardly be justified as a war to stop Hezbollah from launching Katyushas against Israeli civilians. Moreover, the simplest way for Israel to stop the rockets that are now hitting its population is to accept a ceasefire. Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, has declared that his organization would stop firing its rockets if Israel stopped its air-raids.' ***** 5) Lebanon: George Monbiot article First lines: 'Whatever we think of Israel's assault on Lebanon, all of us seem to agree about one fact: that it was a response, however disproportionate, to an unprovoked attack by Hizbullah. I repeated this "fact" in my last column, when I wrote that "Hizbullah fired the first shots". This being so, the Israeli government's supporters ask peaceniks like me, what would you have done? It's an important question. But its premise, I have now discovered, is flawed.' ***** 6) Ceasefire petitions International: UK: To your MP ***** Justice Not Vengeance www.j-n-v.org From info at j-n-v.org Thu Sep 7 15:14:59 2006 From: info at j-n-v.org (JNV) Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 15:14:59 +0100 Subject: [JNV] Events listings Message-ID: <64e08d063b6351fccc549a2139f46104@j-n-v.org> Dear all Here are some events we hope you find useful in your work. Hope to see you at the Remember Fallujah weekend 28-29 October in London! Best wishes Maya Evans JNV *** Every Wednesday! Noise Demonstrations at EDO MBM, Home Farm Road, 4-6pm Mon 4- Mon 18 Sept BRISTOL Trial Of Fairford Peace Disarmers. Trial of peace activists Paul Milling and Margaret Jones, who nonviolently disabled support vehicles for the B-52s in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. Bristol Crown Court. Please put this date in your diary and come and support them! More info contact nabataat@yahoo.co.uk Mon 4 Sept ISLINGTON Public Rally with MOAZZAM BEGG AND HAIFA ZANGANA. 7pm Islington Central Library with Moazzam Begg (ex-Guantanamo prisoner), Andrew Murray (STWC chair), Haifa Zangana (Iraqi novelist/Guardian columnist) and Jeremy Corbyn MP. More Info: 07747 744 921 Thurs 7 Sept HACKNEY Public meeting with MOAZAAM BEGG. Speakers include ex-Guantanamo detainee Moazzam Begg and Chris Nineham, Stop the War Coalition. 7.30 in the Round Chapel at the corner of Lower Clapton Road & Powerscroft Road E5. Mon 11 Sep MANCHESTER Day of Protest at the European Microwave Conference From 8.30am at GMEX, Manchester EDO MBM, along with other war profiteers, is participating in this conference. Greater Manchester CND is organising a Day of Action. Contact: +44(0)161 273 8283 Fax.: +44 (0)161 273 8293 E-Mail: gmdcndATgn.apc.org, www.gmdcnd.org.uk Wed 11 Oct BRIGHTON Smash Edo Fundraiser at the Freebutt. Bands playing will be the Inner Terrestrials, Babar Luck, The King Blues & Big Dance. Organised by 'Hair of the Dog'. Watch this space for more info... Mon 11 Sept EXETER Has the "war on terror" made the world a safer place?Speakers from Military Families Against the War and Stop The War Coalition;7pm, Mint Methodist, Church Fore Street, Exeter. Contact Mike 07738 563 398. Tues 12 Sept REDBRIDGE Public Meeting 7pm East Ham Town Hall. Speakers: Tony Benn, George Galloway MP, Rose Gentle, Lindsey German and Dr Azzam Tamini. Sponsored by Newham UNISON Wed 13 Sept HAMMERSMITH Public Meeting Speakers: John McDonnell, Labour MP ,Dr. Siddiqui, Leader of the Muslim Parliament, Lindsey German, Convenor of Stop The War Coalition, Haifa Zangana, Iraqi Writer/Guardian Columnist, Dahabo Isse, Somali activist. 7pm, The Small Hall, Hammersmith Town Hall, King Street W6. Nearest tube:: Hammersmith / Ravenscourt Park. Info: 07879 424 631 / 07984 405 307 - Email: stwc_ham_sb@yahoo.co.uk. Wed 13 Sept BRIGHTON Time to Go:Blair out, Troops out of Iraq, Don't attack Iran Speakers: Caroline Lucas MEP Chris Nineham (Stop the War) and speakers from the local antiwar movement (tbc) 7.30pm Royal Albion Hotel Old Steine, Brighton Organised by Sussex Action for Peace Sat 16 Sept BRIGHTON Mass Demo to protest against local arms company EDO MBM's complicity in war Crimes in Gaza and Lebanon. Meet 12 noon at the Level. See www.smashedo.org.uk Wed 20 Sept LONDON SHS evening meeting: Imperialist Intervention in the Middle East - Iran:Regime Change, Resistance and International Solidarity. Speakers: Stan Newens, one time Euro MP and President of Liberation; Dilip Hiro, author and Middle East commentator. 7.00 pm, Marx House, Clerkenwell Green (nearest tube Farringdon) Sat 23 Sept MANCHESTER Military Families Against the War Peace Camp outside the Labour Party Conference See www.mfaw.org.uk Sat 23 Sept MANCHESTER National Anti-Occupation Demo. Timed to take place just before the Labour Party Conference in Manchester. See www.stopwar.org.uk. Tues 26 Sept NATIONAL Phone Blockade-Ring the arms dealers to ask them any questions you might have on the arms trade - 01273 810500 tell EDO MBM what you think about profiting from murder. If the switchboard isn't working call 810 501, 810 502, 810 510, 810 511 etc or send a fax on 810 600 141 to withhold your number (or preferably call from a payphone) Fri 29 Sept BRIGHTON Peace Not War @ Sussex Uni Fresher's Ball Mandela Hall, Sussex University 9:30pm - 2:00am Excentral Tempest and Friends United Vibrations with The Rub, Bad Science, More TBC Sat 7 Oct CROUGHTON Keep Spearce for Peace, No bases for War Rally and picnic outside "RAF" Croughton (a major US communications facility supporting US military operations in Europe and the Middle East). 12noon - 3pm. With John McDonnell MP and Felicity Arbuthnot.Transport from Oxford & Bicester rail stations. For more information: 07949 320 026 or e-mail oxonpeace@yahoo.co.uk Sun 8 Oct LONDON Nonviolent Direct Action Workshop and Legal Briefing for the 28/29 Oct "No More Fallujahs" weekend of nonviolent resistance to the occupation (see www.rememberfallujah.org). 11am - 4pm, Diorama Gallery 1, 34 Osnaburgh Street, NW1 3ND (tube: Great Portland Street). Workshop run by Seeds for Change: www.seedsforchange.org.uk. Sun 8 Oct BRIGHTON Action Training Day 1pm at the Friends Meeting House, Ship St, Brighton Fri 13 Oct LONDON Peace Not War @ The Synergy Project SeOne Club, London 10:00pm - 8:00am Line-up TBC Mon 16 Oct LONDON Day of Action to shut DESO (the Defence Export Services Organisation). Meet 11am, Bloomsbury Central Baptist Church, 235 Shaftesbury Avenue, London WC2H, to help encircle DESO and designate it as a "global danger zone." Organised by Campaign Against Arms Trade: 0207 281 0297, anna@caat.org.uk or www.caat.org.uk. Wed 25 Oct BRIGHTON Remember the Palestinian victims of EDO MBM. 4-6pm EDO MBM have admitted that they profit from selling equipment for the illegal occupation of Palestine and the bombing of Lebanon. Organized by Smash EDO Sat 28 Oct LONDON Nonviolent Direct Action Workshop and Legal Briefing for the 24-hour "unauthorised" peace camp in Parliament Square om 29 Oct (see below). 4.30pm - 7.30pm, Diorama Gallery 1, 34 Osnaburgh Street, NW1 3ND (tube: Great Portland Street). Workshop run by Seeds for Change: www.seedsforchange.org.uk. Sat 28-Sun 29 Oct LONDON "No More Fallujahs" A weekend of nonviolent resistance to the occupation of Iraq on the 2nd anniversary of the November 2004 US/UK attack on Fallujah. Events include: * PEACE JOURNEY FROM THE UK MILITARY NERVE CENTRE IN NORTHWOOD (nearest tube Northwood) on 28 Oct. Meet 11am, Northwood tube station. * "UNAUTHORISED" 24-HOUR PEACE CAMP IN PARLIAMENT SQUARE to demand an end to the occupation on 29 Oct (MEET 12 NOON, PARLIAMENT SQUARE). The camp will begin Maya Evans and Milan Rai reading the names of 100 Iraqis who have died as a result of the occupation - one year after their arrest for doing this in Oct 05. NB Under the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act participation in such an “unauthorised” demonstration is a criminal offence punishable by a fine of up to £1000. Accommodation will be available on request on the evenings of 27 and 28 Oct.Org. by the Mass Action Group and supported by Iraq Occupation Focus, JNV and Voices UK. Contact 0845 458 2564 or e-mail voices@voicesuk.org. For more info see www.rememberfallujah.org. Sat 2 Dec BRIZE NORTON National Demo outside the RAF base used to ferry British troops to Iraq and Afghanistan and US bombs to Israel (during its recent attack on Lebanon). Assemble 12:00 noon in Carterton. From info at j-n-v.org Tue Sep 19 11:20:13 2006 From: info at j-n-v.org (JNV) Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 11:20:13 +0100 Subject: [JNV] Iran Negotiations - JNV Briefings Message-ID: <40c3f4748e8e8b2587cd9ce3876d58f4@j-n-v.org> Dear friends Today President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is speaking before the UN General Assembly (not long after President George W. Bush). He is likely to make an important statement in relation to the nuclear crisis. The two briefings below (which will shortly be on the JNV website) give some of the relevant background to whatever may be said today. I hope you find them useful. Best wishes Milan Rai JNV *** IRAN CRISIS: NEGOTIATING PEACE JNV Anti-War Briefing 96 18 September 2006 CUTTING THROUGH THE CONFUSION The Iran nuclear crisis has been subject to government propaganda, media misrepresentation, and straightforward confusion. The US Government has made alarming allegations. For its part, the Western media has reinforced such propaganda, and seriously misrepresented the Iranian scene. To cut through the confusion, we need to understand the structure of power in Iran, and the actual foreign policy orientation and negotiating strategy of the Iranian leadership. The 'Supreme Leader' of Iran is committed to a negotiated solution to the current crisis, and his leadership is willing to give up many of Iran's nuclear ambitions to achieve this objective, despite the bluster we have sometimes heard from President Ahmadinejad. We also need to see through US propaganda. For example, Condoleezza Rice's highly conditional offer to sit down with Iran at the negotiating table was not a serious attempt to create a diplomatic solution, but an effort to isolate Iran, and to derail any possible diplomatic solution. Much now turns on minute details obscured by both sides. THE SUPREME LEADER As we pointed out in Briefing 87, in Iran, 'It is the Supreme Leader, not the president, who controls the armed forces and makes decisions on security, defence and major foreign policy issues.' (BBC, ) We know that the current Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, offered the US a 'grand bargain' in 2003 in a fax sent directly to the US State Department. Flynt Leverett, then a senior director on the US National Security Council, saw the proposal, which he described as 'a serious effort.' Iran wanted an end to US sanctions, full access to peaceful nuclear technology, and a recognition of its 'legitimate security interests.' In return, Iran was willing to offer nuclear safeguards, 'decisive action' against terrorists, coordination in Iraq, an end to 'material support' for Palestinian militias, and support for the Saudi initiative for a two-state Israeli-Palestine solution. (Washington Post, 18 June 2006 ) This is far from the angry rhetoric of Ahmadinejad, but it continues to be the basic position of the Iranian leadership, which is far from 'fanatical'. This was confirmed during the visit of former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami to the US in Sept., when Khatami re-affirmed Iran's acceptance of the two-state solution: 'I think Hamas itself, which has come to power today in a democratic process, is ready to live alongside Israel... Of course whatever Palestinians think is respected by us.' (FT, 5 Sept. 2006, p. 12) 100 CENTRIFUGES Gareth Smyth, Financial Times correspondent in Tehran, is well-connected. On 19 June, two Iranian 'insiders' told him 'a majority in the leadership would, once talks developed, accept a compromise over the nuclear programme that allowed it to keep some uranium enrichment in Iran'. There was some uncertainty over numbers. 'One of the insiders said Iran might settle for a limit as low as three cascades of 164 centrifuges [492 centrifuges in total], with the vast bulk of uranium for its planned nuclear reactors enriched in Russia, as Moscow first proposed last year.' The other 'insider' said: 'Around 70 per cent of senior people' might accept a limit of 'hundreds or thousands' of centrifuges - 'adding that President Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad was in the minority'. (FT, 19 June, p. 8 ) Originally, Iran wanted 54,000 centrifuges. A few days later, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei 'established a new body to supervise foreign policy in a move seen by some politicians in Tehran as a way to counterbalance the government of President Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad.' The head of the new 'Strategic Committee for Foreign Policy', Kamal Kharrazi, former Foreign Minister under reformist President Khatami, spoke of 'including experts from previous governments.' The former Vice-President Mohammad Ali Abtahi 'said the body's composition meant "the continuation of detente".' (FT, 28 June, p. 13) Interestingly, the Supreme Leader said that the new body should 'help facilitate macro-decision making... find new horizons... and make use of intellectuals.' Khamenei also said the term 'principle-ist', usually claimed by fundamentalists such as Ahmadinejad, should apply to anyone 'of any trend... committed to the principles of the revolution'. (FT, 28 June, p. 13) Ahmadinejad (like Bush) is noted for ignoring the intelligentsia (see Smyth, 'Iran's intellectuals left in cold by populist president', FT, 21 June, p. 13) In setting up the new Strategic Committee for Foreign Policy, Smyth reported, 'Ayatollah Khamenei may also be acting to build consensus within Iran's leadership, where different tactics have been aired in recent months over how to proceed with the nuclear programme.' (FT, 28 June, p. 13) In late Aug., Smyth reported: 'after public disagreements among top officials over policy earlier this year, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader, has quietly built a consensus among the political elite, including the leadership group of about eight that takes key decisions.' At the end of Aug., Smyth reported that Iranian officials had 'closed ranks over the country's nuclear programme', quoting Mohammad Atrianfar, editor of Shargh, the reformist newspaper: 'The leadership is thinking together, with the leader at the core.' (FT, 31 Aug., p. 7) The consensus was expressed in terms of the suspension of enrichment (see below), and the low number of centrifuges Iran was willing to accept. 'In July, Sadegh Kharazzi, a former ambassador to Paris... told the FT the leadership was ready to negotiate a deal in which Iran limited enrichment inside the country to "some 100" centrifuges.' (13 Sept., p. 9) This is completely inadequate for the production of weapons-grade uranium. (See US nuclear designer R. Garwin for relevant figures.) NUCLEAR SUSPENSION A lot of the recent controversy has turned around the issue of suspending Iran's uranium enrichment programme before negotiations can begin. Under US pressure, this demand was incorporated into UN Security Council Resolution 1696 . Iran, in contrast, (correctly) sees uranium enrichment as its legal right, under Article IV of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty . This is a popular, nationalist issue. The Guardian's Simon Tisdall reports from Tehran: 'For Ahmadinejad and the heirs to Khomeini, the nuclear issue is about much more than nuclear bombs. It is about national pride.' (8 Sept., ) Iranian national pride suffered a real blow when the government suspended uranium enrichment between Nov. 2004 and Jan. 2006 with no tangible benefits. It therefore became politically impossible in Tehran to accept the demand for suspension-before-negotiations. That is why the US has focused on this demand. (See Briefing 95: Designed To Be Refused.) The Iranian leadership has responded by resolutely refusing to suspend enrichment before negotiations take place, but agreeing to suspend during negotiations, both processes starting simultaneously. The first hint of such a breakthrough came (demonstrating the new consensus) from President Ahmadinejad. When asked by a reporter from Etelaat newspaper if Iran might announce the suspension of uranium enrichment during Kofi Annan's visit to the country, he said: 'Please accept you will receive an answer later.' (FT, 30 Aug., p. 8) NEGOTIATING SUSPENSION The West demands that Iran suspend enrichment. In 2004, Western negotiators spelled out 'suspension' in detail. In June 2006, the demand has been left vague. 'Diplomats involved in the talks said that Iran's six potential negotiating partners - the United States, Russia, China, France, Britain and Germany - left the definition of suspension vague to maintain unity on their side and to lure the Iranians back to the negotiating table.' Defined narrowly, 'suspension' could mean allowing Iran to continuing running the centrifuges, but in a vacuum, without injecting uranium gas, and therefore without actual enrichment. (For more details of the enrichment process, see JNV Catalogue: Drawing Paradise on the 'Axis of Evil'.) (Note that even running centrifuges in vacuum can increase skills and knowledge for operating large-scale enrichment programmes. ) Defined broadly, suspension could mean halting the spinning centrifuges (risking their damage or destruction), ending the production of centrifuges and their parts, and so on. (NYT, 18 June ) Iran is in effect seeking pre-negotiations on such questions, while holding out the offer of up to two months' suspension. (See Iran's very important official response to the 6 June proposals .) Iran is attempting to negotiate a way out of the crisis. The US is not. (See Briefing 95, below.) ***** DESIGNED TO BE REFUSED: The Phony US Diplomatic 'Offer' To Iran JNV Anti-War Briefing 95 27 July 2006 A RICE U-TURN? On 31 May, US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice made a dramatic announcement regarding US policy towards Iran. After steadfastly refusing to contemplate face-to-face talks with the Iranian government over its nuclear power programme, the United States was now ready to join in multilateral talks with Iran, alongside members of the European Union. Presented in much of the British press as a 'U-turn', there was in fact less to the offer than it appeared at first sight. The US is taking a gamble in making this offer to Iran, but the risk it is taking is that Tehran will accept the poison chalice being presented by Washington. The US is only making this offer because it is confident that the Iranian government will refuse to accept the preconditions to negotiations that the US is trying to impose. ENRICHMENT SUSPENSION The Iranian government has been adamant that its uranium enrichment programme, which is entirely legal under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, must be preserved in some form in any negotiated settlement. The US is demanding that enrichment be 'fully and verifiably' suspended before it will start negotiations. In other words: 'give up your main bargaining chip before you sit down to talk'. The Financial Times reported the (foreseeable) reaction under the headline, 'Rice talks offer set to deepen scepticism in Tehran'. The 'offer' was creating negative rather than positive feelings in Iranian ruling circles. THREATENING LANGUAGE There were two main reasons. Firstly, Condoleezza Rice's 'insistence that "all options", including threatened military strikes, were on the table will increase the deep scepticism in Tehran over US motives and rally those in outright opposition to any talks. (FT, 31 May 2006 ) Rice had been asked in her press conference: 'you have always refused to rule out the military option against Iran. But are you prepared to consider taking that option off the table, at least temporarily while negotiations go ahead?' She replied: 'The President is not going to take any of his options off the table, temporarily or otherwise.' Rice was even more threatening: 'we're not going to stop work on - with our friends and allies - on what we might do if Iran makes the wrong choice.... We have options that are very near-term options should they not make the right choice.' THE PRECONDITION The second reason for Iranian concern was the suspension precondition. The FT reported: 'Even those arguing that any successful negotiations over Iran's atomic programme must involve the US are likely to reject Ms Rice's demand that Iran first end all uranium enrichment. Iran's bottom line for its nuclear programme appears, at the very least, to be continuing the research project resumed in January at the Natanz plant, which enriches uranium in 164 centrifuges.' Even the most conciliatory elements in ruling circles are likely to refuse to accept the US proposal. Given the previous history of Iranian suspension during EU negotiations, which produced nothing tangible from an Iranian point of view, and cost the government considerable public anger, this was foreseeable. The US imposed this precondition knowing it was likely to be rejected by even the most 'open' parts of the Iranian foreign policy establishment. TIMING THE PROPOSAL It seems entirely likely that the US proposal came when it did because of a recent hardening of the Iranian position on negotiations, increasing the chances of rejection. For some time now the idea has been in the air of negotiations between Washington and Tehran on the situation in Iraq, where the US has major troop deployment and a substantial political investment, on the one hand, and where Iran has major security concerns (as a neighbouring country) on the other. The US has blown hot and cold on whether to hold these talks for some time. Iran was initially positive, but on 26 May the Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said they were no longer prepared to hold such discussions: 'The American side tried to use this decision as propaganda, and they raised some other issues, they tried to create a negative atmosphere, and that is why the decision which was taken is for the time being suspended.' (BBC, 26 May 2006, ) SUMMARY The US chose a moment when Iran seemed to be moving away from the idea of engaging with the West, to launch a diplomatic initiative. The initiative was accompanied by threatening language warning of imminent attack options, and it demanded of the Iranians a concession which even the most conciliatory elements in Iranian ruling circles are known to regard as unacceptable. What conclusion can one draw other than that the proposal was made to be refused? CONFIRMATION: THE TIMES This indeed is the analysis, reading between the lines, of The Times columnist Gerard Baker (Times, 2 June 2006, ): 'the symbolism of Dr Rice's gambit was more important than the substance. The State Department is now into the most critical phase yet of a delicate and high-risk game. It is a game that some in Washington feel is destined to fail; but, for the time being at least, the President has ruled that it is the game that the US will play. Few people in Washington believe Iran is going to abandon its attempts to join the nuclear club without serious international pressure or even the deeply unattractive military option. The only hope of avoiding the apocalyptic choice is a regime of eye-wateringly tight international economic and diplomatic pressure. But to achieve that, the US has to be seen to be working overtime on the diplomacy.' Because of the Iraq war, the world is sceptical regarding US policy towards Iran. The opportunity is there for a propaganda victory, however, according to Baker: 'With Iran, the US has to succeed where it largely failed in Iraq, in demonstrating to a sceptical world that the US really wants to give diplomacy a chance to work, and to ensure that if (and when) it fails, it will not be the US that will be responsible. The argument at the State Department is that, having thus demonstrated its bona fides the US will be able to persuade the rest of the world to get tough with the Iranians.' The point is not to achieve a diplomatic solution, resolving the concerns around Iran's nuclear programme by negotiation. The point is to use diplomatic trickery to shift responsibility for the crisis away from the US and towards Iran. So far there have been considerable gains in this area, as many countries fall in line with the US demand. CHINA Not everyone is falling into line, however, including at least one permanent member of the Security Council. Wang Guangya, China's ambassador to the UN, said the United States should provide Iran with security assurances and drop its demand that Iran cease uranium enrichment before such talks could begin: 'I think it in a way proves that the U.S. is more serious about the negotiations than about other options, but I do hope that this offer could be less conditional,' he said. Wang also stressed the need for the US to offer more "attractive carrots" to the Iranians, including crucial security assurances, and a pledge to allow Tehran to pursue a peaceful nuclear energy program, including a small research-and-development project on uranium enrichment. (Washington Post, 1 June 2006; ) This seems an entirely sensible approach, but is being drowned out by US propaganda, amplified by the world's media. From info at j-n-v.org Thu Sep 21 22:20:17 2006 From: info at j-n-v.org (JNV) Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 22:20:17 +0100 Subject: [JNV] Anti-War events in Manchester this weekend Message-ID: <265895692d05bd5883a4986906fb2c28@j-n-v.org> Anti-War events in Manchester this weekend 1) Time To Go Demonstration (and die-in) >JNV materials being distributed - please help if you can Saturday 23 September 2006 (1pm) March start point: Albert Square, Manchester > JNV materials: if you can pick up some materials to distribute on the demonstration, please come to the steps of the Central Library, St Peter's Square, just along Mount Street two minutes away from Albert Square, between 12.30pm and 1.30pm. Phone contact: 07980 748 555. March organised by Stop the War Coalition, CND, BMI and MAB, and supported by Islam Channel, Friends of Al Aqsa, CWU, PCS, NUJ, TGWU, RMT, BECTU, UCU. The organisers are holding a symbolic die-in for a few minutes at 2.30pm, and they ask participants to wear white. *** 2) Stop The War Coalition Conference Sunday 24 September 2006 (10.30am-6pm) Venue: Roscoe Building, University of Manchester, Brunswick Street, Manchester M13 9PL Crisis in the Middle East / Islamophobia & the Strategy of Tension / The Humanitarian & Economic Costs of War / The Media & War. Speakers include: George Galloway MP, Jeremy Corbyn MP, Hala Nasreddine (Lebanese journalist), John Rees (Respect Coalition), Craig Murray (ex-UK ambassador Uzbekistan), Moazzam Begg (Guantanamo Bay prisoner), Tariq Ali, Rose Gentle (Military Families Against the War), Betty Hunter (Palestine Solidarity Campaign). Further information: Telephone 07951 579 064 *** 3) Labour Against The War Fringe Meeting > includes JNV speaker Milan Rai Sunday 24 September 2006 (7pm) Venue: Friends Meeting House, 6 Mount Street, Manchester M2 5NS. Entrance: £2 Chair: Alan Simpson MP. Speakers: Tony Benn, Rose Gentle (MFAW), Billy Hayes (Gen Sec, CWU), Jeremy Corbyn MP, Christine Shawcroft (LP NEC), John McDonnell MP, Milan Rai (JNV), Andrew Murray (StWC), Walter Wolfgang (LP NEC).