Thursday, September 06, 2018
- Thursday, September 06, 2018
- Elder of Ziyon
- Forest Rain, history, Opinion
Jewish
Rights to Israel (part 1):
Declaration
of Independence
Once
Jewish rights to Israel were obvious. Even those who had no connection or
sympathy to Zionism knew where Jews came from, about Jewish connection to the
Holy Land. To top it off, Jew haters often demanded Jews “go home to Palestine.”
Then everyone knew that Palestine was just another name for Zion.
Now,
somehow, Jewish rights to Israel are not so obvious. Interestingly, both
anti-Semites and modern liberal Jews find themselves asking the same questions
(albeit for different reasons): Is it legitimate to found and maintain a
State specifically for the Jewish People?
The
antisemite denies the legitimacy of the Jewish State out of hatred for the
existence of the Jewish People. Jewish sovereignty is abhorrent because Jewish
existence is abhorrent.
The
liberal Jew on the other hand is taking into consideration the questions of
pluralism, equality and an innate aversion to anything that could remotely be
considered racism. In a time when political movements are calling for the
abolition of borders and nationalism is equated with extremism it can seem
difficult to defend the idea of a State for a single people.
Added
to this is the additional complexity of the Arab population both within and
without Israel, many of whom object to the existence of the Jewish State in its
entirety while others say that their objections are to specific laws and
policies of the Jewish State.
Many
of us find ourselves at a loss to explain Jewish rights to the Jewish land to
the modern progressive, post religion, low information (but loudly opinionated)
person. My friend Ryan Bellerose has gone to great lengths to teach us
effective terminology, explaining the concept
of indigeneity and
how this differs from people of longstanding presence in a land. Reference to
the Bible, while a very powerful motivator to the religious person, are
counterproductive in dialogue with the non or anti-religious. Indigenous status
is a whole different ballgame.
Surprisingly
(or maybe not so surprisingly), Israel’s Declaration of Independence spells out
Jewish rights to the land of Israel in exactly the format Ryan suggests. There
is no “Because God said so” while indigeneity is placed above all other
explanations. It also addresses the difference between the indigenous people
and the inhabitants who are not indigenous, while declaring that in the Jewish
State all individuals will have the same, equal rights. This is the precursor
to the recently passed Nation State Law which I will address in a separate
article (Jewish Rights to Israel: Part 2).
As
part of my work at the Israel Forever
Foundation I did
something few of us bother to do – I read the most basic document regarding the
foundation of the Jewish State – the Declaration of the Establishment of the
State of Israel. It fascinated me to discover that, although the document
was written before the questions of this time arose, it addresses them clearly
and concisely, spelling out the reasons for the legitimacy of the Jewish Nation
State.
Israel’s Declaration of Independence
“The Land of Israel was the birthplace
of the Jewish people. Here their spiritual, religious and political identity
was shaped. Here they first attained to statehood, created cultural values of
national and universal significance and gave to the world the eternal Book of
Books.”
In
Hebrew there is no word for indigenous however, the description that opens the
Declaration of Independence is the definition of indigeneity: the land in which
a nation was born, the place where that nation first formed their culture,
built spiritual, cultural and political institutions.
Israel
is the land in which the Jewish people were sovereign and the place from which,
as a Nation, the Jewish People influenced the world (through the ideas laid out
in the Bible).
Indigeneity
is the strongest claim any People can have to any specific land: this
specific piece of land and no other is the ancestral homeland of my People.
While lacking the word for indigenous in Hebrew it was clear that the writers
of Israel’s Declaration of Independence had clear understanding of the meaning
and the power of this concept.
“After being forcibly exiled from their
land, the people kept faith with it throughout their Dispersion and never
ceased to pray and hope for their return to it and for the restoration in it of
their political freedom.”
This
second paragraph reinforces the first with the explanation that the Jewish
People were forcibly removed from their ancestral homeland and did not leave or
abandon the land from their own free will. Despite centuries of exile, the Jewish
People never gave up the hope to return and regain sovereignty in their
ancestral homeland. This is an extraordinary and unparalleled testament to the
deep connection of a People to the land.
“Impelled by this historic and
traditional attachment, Jews strove in every successive generation to
re-establish themselves in their ancient homeland. In recent decades they
returned in their masses. Pioneers, defiant returnees, and defenders, they made
deserts bloom, revived the Hebrew language, built villages and towns, and
created a thriving community controlling its own economy and culture, loving
peace but knowing how to defend itself, bringing the blessings of progress to
all the country's inhabitants, and aspiring towards independent nationhood.”
This
paragraph takes Jewish hope to the realm of practicality: Impelled by
this historic and traditional attachment, impelled by Jewish history in
the land and the connection that was continued in exile through hope and
prayer, Jews strove in every successive generation to re-establish
themselves in their ancient homeland. Jews not only retained esoteric
hope but took action, in every generation, to re-establish
themselves in their ancient homeland. In recent decades (prior to the
Declaration of Independence) Jews returned in their masses. Following
this is a description mirroring the first paragraph of the document and
elaborating the revival of the Jewish People in their indigenous land –
reviving the language in which their original culture was articulated, building
thriving communities, taking custodianship of the land (making the desert
bloom), controlling their own economy and culture.
Here,
for the first time, the document refers to “all the country’s inhabitants” – in
other words, the Jews and non-Jews (Arabs). This was written after the Arab
massacres of their Jewish neighbors:
·
In 1920 a number of settlements in the
Galilee were attacked (among them Tel Hai where Trumpeldor and seven others
were murdered) and in Jerusalem. Some 30 Jews were murdered and hundreds
injured.
·
In 1921 Jews were attacked in Tel Aviv,
Petach Tikva and Mikveh Yisrael and other communities, dozens were murdered and
many more injured.
·
In August of 1929 Jews in Jerusalem
were attacked and entire neighborhoods were destroyed. In Hebron 69 Jews were
massacred, many others were severely injured and the community was wiped out.
Jews were also attacked in Haifa, Tel Aviv, Gaza, Ramleh, Akko, Beit Shean and
more.
·
The great Arab revolt of 1936-1939 in
which 630 Jews were murdered and some 2000 were injured. At first Jews hoped
that if they kept their heads down, the violence would subside. Then Orde
Wingate decided to help the Jews, teaching them self-defense tactics which
changed the balance of power (and have since become fundamental elements of the
IDF’s doctrine).
It is
within this context that the Declaration of Independence explains that the
Jewish community
while, loving peace knows how to defend itself and
will bring the blessings of progress to all the country's inhabitants.
“In the year 5657 (1897), at the
summons of the spiritual father of the Jewish State, Theodore Herzl, the First
Zionist Congress convened and proclaimed the right of the Jewish people to
national rebirth in its own country.
This right was recognized in the Balfour
Declaration of the 2nd November, 1917, and re-affirmed in the Mandate of the
League of Nations which, in particular, gave international sanction to the
historic connection between the Jewish people and Eretz-Israel and to the right
of the Jewish people to rebuild its National Home.”
Here
the document moves from the explanation of indigenous rights to the discussion
of Jewish rights under international law – from the first Zionist Congress, to
the Balfour Declaration, it’s reaffirmation by the League of Nations which
recognized the historic connection between the Jewish people and
Eretz-Israel and to the right of the Jewish people to rebuild its National
Home.
“The catastrophe which recently befell
the Jewish people - the massacre of millions of Jews in Europe - was another
clear demonstration of the urgency of solving the problem of its homelessness
by re-establishing in Eretz-Israel the Jewish State, which would open the gates
of the homeland wide to every Jew and confer upon the Jewish people the status
of a fully privileged member of the community of nations.”
The
Holocaust as an example, not a reason – in this paragraph the Declaration mentions
the Holocaust, explaining that this is a clear demonstration of the need to solve
the problem of homelessness by re-establishing in Eretz-Israel the Jewish
State. It is important to note that the Holocaust is not brought as a
reason or justification for the establishment of Israel but as an example
of what can happen when the Jewish People have no Israel and are not
seen by the community of nations as equal and with full privileges.
Survivors of the Nazi Holocaust in
Europe, as well as Jews from other parts of the world, continued to migrate to
Eretz-Israel, undaunted by difficulties, restrictions and dangers, and never
ceased to assert their right to a life of dignity, freedom and honest toil in
their national homeland.
Here
too as an example - also after the Holocaust, survivors and other Jews
continued to make aliyah undaunted by difficulties and never ceased to
assert their right to a life of dignity, freedom and honest toil in their
national homeland. It was not because of the Holocaust survivors that
the State of Israel was established but they, whose dignity had been stripped
from them, joined those already struggling to establish a life of Jewish
freedom and were followed by additional Jews who all came together in their national
homeland.
“In the Second World War, the Jewish
community of this country contributed its full share to the struggle of the
freedom- and peace-loving nations against the forces of Nazi wickedness and, by
the blood of its soldiers and its war effort, gained the right to be reckoned
among the peoples who founded the United Nations.”
This
paragraph is an interesting assertion of rights of Israel’s Jewish community,
not because they are freely given (as one might expect) but as something earned
due to behaving like other peace-loving nations and through the
blood of its soldiers.
“On the 29th November, 1947, the United
Nations General Assembly passed a resolution calling for the establishment of a
Jewish State in Eretz-Israel; the General Assembly required the inhabitants of
Eretz-Israel to take such steps as were necessary on their part for the implementation
of that resolution. This recognition by the United Nations of the right of the
Jewish people to establish their State is irrevocable.”
The
United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution calling for the
establishment of a Jewish State in Eretz-Israel but this was not something the
nations swooped in and did for the Jewish People; the General Assembly
required the inhabitants of Eretz-Israel to take such steps as were necessary
on their part for the implementation of that resolution – which they did.
Was the statement of legal fact, that the recognition by the
United Nations of the right of the Jewish people to establish their State is
irrevocable, a premonition of future questions regarding the legitimacy
of the Jewish State?
“This right is the natural right of the
Jewish people to be masters of their own fate, like all other nations, in their
own sovereign State.”
The
right to be master of your own fate is a natural right. The Jewish People, like
all other nations, have the right to their own sovereign State.
Accordingly we, members of the People's
Council, representatives of the Jewish Community of Eretz-Israel and of the
Zionist Movement, are here assembled on the day of the termination of the
British Mandate over Eretz-Israel and, by virtue of our natural and historic
right and on the strength of the resolution of the United Nations General
Assembly, hereby declare the establishment of a Jewish state in Eretz-Israel,
to be known as the State of Israel.
In
accordance with all the reasons given above, by virtue of our natural and
historic right and on the strength of the resolution of the United Nations
General Assembly, on the termination of the British Mandate over Eretz
Israel the representatives of the Jewish Community of Israel (not the Jewish
world community) and of the Zionist Movement (the National Movement for Jewish
self-determination) declare the establishment of a Jewish state in
Eretz-Israel, to be known as the State of Israel. This was an important
determination that the Jewish historic name of the land would be the name by
which the new State would be called.
“We declare that, with effect from the
moment of the termination of the Mandate being tonight, the eve of Sabbath, the
6th Iyar, 5708 (15th May, 1948), until the establishment of the elected,
regular authorities of the State in accordance with the Constitution which
shall be adopted by the Elected Constituent Assembly not later than the 1st
October 1948, the People's Council shall act as a Provisional Council of State,
and its executive organ, the People's Administration, shall be the Provisional
Government of the Jewish State, to be called "Israel."
The State of Israel will be open for
Jewish immigration and for the Ingathering of the Exiles; it will foster the
development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; it will be
based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; it
will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its
inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of
religion, conscience, language, education and culture; it will safeguard the
Holy Places of all religions; and it will be faithful to the principles of the
Charter of the United Nations.
Here
the document declares the State of Israel open to immigration of all Jews, the
basis for what is now called the “Law of Return”.
While
the document clearly discusses Jewish rights, it is important that here, we see
for the second time, mention of “all inhabitants.” The addition of these two
little words explains a crucial concept - the Jewish People are recognized as
indigenous and have the rights of an indigenous people returning to their
ancestral homeland. The other inhabitants, while not indigenous, are recognized
as having rights do to their residence within the land and thus, in accordance
with the visions of the prophets of Israel who described what the Jewish State
needs to look like and in accordance to the principles of the Charter of
the United Nations the State of Israel will provide for the benefit of
all, not just the Jews but for Jews and Arabs alike: the development of
the country, freedom, justice and peace, complete equality of
social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion,
race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language,
education and culture; it will safeguard the Holy Places of all religions.
These
rights were later established in Israeli law but it is important to note that
those were a realization of this declaration which was based on the ancient
visions of what a Jewish State needs to be.
“The State of Israel is prepared to
cooperate with the agencies and representatives of the United Nations in
implementing the resolution of the General Assembly of the 29th November, 1947,
and will take steps to bring about the economic union of the whole of
Eretz-Israel.
We appeal to the United Nations to
assist the Jewish people in the building-up of its State and to receive the
State of Israel into the community of nations.”
The
declaration expresses the willingness of the new State to cooperate with
international bodies and requests that the United Nations assist the Jewish
People and receive the State of Israel into the community of nations.
“We appeal - in the very midst of the
onslaught launched against us now for months - to the Arab inhabitants of the
State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the upbuilding of the
State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all
its provisional and permanent institutions.”
Here,
for the first time, the Arab inhabitants of Israel are addressed directly, in
the context of the previous pogroms against the Jews of Israel and the winds of
war that were recognized by the declarers - with the request to preserve
peace and participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and
equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent
institutions.
“We extend our hand to all neighboring
states and their peoples in an offer of peace and good neighborliness, and
appeal to them to establish bonds of cooperation and mutual help with the
sovereign Jewish people settled in its own land. The State of Israel is
prepared to do its share in a common effort for the advancement of the entire
Middle East.”
The
declaration does not stop with the Arab inhabitants of Israel but extends a hand
of peace to all neighboring Arab countries and an offer of collaboration – that
they assist with the settling Jews in the sovereign Jewish State (a request
that includes the Jews living at the time in Arab lands) and a promise that the
State of Israel will do its share in a common effort for the advancement
of the entire Middle East.
“We appeal to the Jewish people
throughout the Diaspora to rally round the Jews of Eretz-Israel in the tasks of
immigration and upbuilding and to stand by them in the great struggle for the
realization of the age-old dream - the redemption of Israel.”
The
last request is to Jews around the world to assist with the tasks of
immigration and upbuilding and stand by the Jews of Israel in the great
struggle for the realization of the age-old dream - the redemption of
Israel.
Placing
our trust in the Almighty [the first and only time God is mentioned in the
document], we affix our signatures to this proclamation at this session of
the provisional Council of State, on the soil of the Homeland, in the city of
Tel-Aviv, on this Sabbath eve, the 5th day of Iyar, 5708 (14th May,
1948).
David Ben-Gurion
Daniel
Auster Mordekhai Bentov Yitzchak Ben Zvi Eliyahu Berligne Fritz Bernstein Rabbi
Wolf Gold Meir Grabovsky Yitzchak Gruenbaum Dr. Abraham Granovsky Eliyahu
Dobkin Meir Wilner-Kovner Zerach Wahrhaftig Herzl Vardi Rachel Cohen Rabbi
Kalman Kahana Saadia Kobashi Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Levin Meir David Loewenstein
Zvi Luria Golda Myerson Nachum Nir Zvi Segal Rabbi Yehuda Leib Hacohen Fishman
David Zvi Pinkas Aharon Zisling Moshe Kolodny Eliezer Kaplan Abraham Katznelson
Felix Rosenblueth David Remez Berl Repetur Mordekhai Shattner Ben Zion
Sternberg Bekhor Shitreet Moshe Shapira Moshe Shertok
- Thursday, September 06, 2018
- Elder of Ziyon
- Khan al-Ahmar
The BBC reports:
Israel's Supreme Court has rejected appeals against the demolition of a Bedouin village in the occupied West Bank whose fate has been a subject of international concern.The real story behind Khan al Ahmar can be seen in this video by Regavim and in a must-read article at JNS:
Judges upheld an order to raze Khan al-Ahmar, where about 180 people live in shacks between two Jewish settlements.
Israel's government says the structures were built illegally, but Palestinians say permits are impossible to obtain.
An injunction against the demolition will expire within seven days.
The United Nations has called on Israel to allow the Bedouin to remain on the land, saying such demolitions are against international law.
Khan al Ahmar is a huge symbol for Palestinians and their European fans, even though every structure there was built illegally and it is not at all against international law for Israel to enforce building regulations. Many members of the clan have already agreed to move to free, new houses built by Israel for them, houses hooked up to municipal plumbing and electricity.
An interesting story from Wafa today shows how much Palestinian leaders are willing to weaponize children to make Israel look bad:
The Palestinian Ministry of Education decided on Thursday to transfer Jordan Valley students to study at the School of Khan Al Ahmar.The PA is going to disrupt the studies of children and will bus them miles from their local schools to a shack near Jerusalem in the hope of getting some good photos of "children being evicted from their school."
The ministry pointed out that this step comes in conjunction with the decision of the Israeli High Court to demolish Al-Khan Al-Ahmar village and its only school, stressing that the decision of the Court is unfair and contrary to international resolutions that provide for children's right to education and ensure their access to a safe and stable educational environment .
This by itself shows that the PA cares nothing about its own people and will use them in any way possible as public relations pawns against Israel.
- Thursday, September 06, 2018
- Elder of Ziyon
From the Palestinian Authority's official Wafa news agency:
Wafa in Arabic has more, saying that the Jews were all "settlers" and that they "attacked" Muslims.
Even Jews taking pictures is considered a crime to the PA, as the article says that "The ultra-Orthodox rabbi Yehuda Glick led the storming of the Al-Aqsa Mosque yesterday and led silent Talmudic rituals, and took provocative commemorative pictures off the Dome of the Rock mosque."
The video above shows the "fanatics" and what they would do if allowed to pray. It doesn't bother anyone except Jew-haters who are looking to be offended.
It is important to point out that the official Wafa news agency, by calling any Jew who prays a "fanatic" and an "extremist," is antisemitic.
Recently the Israel Supreme Court decided it would listen to a petition to officially allow Jews to pray on the Temple Mount, drawing a strong condemnation from Jordan, which falsely claims that such a move would violate the peace agreement between Israel and Jordan.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Israeli police watched without intervening as a group of fanatic Jews held prayers on Thursday inside Al-Aqsa Mosque/Al-Haram Al-Sharif compound in Jerusalem’s Old City during visit hours breaking standing rules and provoking Muslim worshippers, according to Muslim Waqf (endowment) officials.The Fatah Facebook page has video:
They said the number of extremists visiting Al-Aqsa has increased as Jewish holidays approach and calls on fanatics to be present at the Muslim holy site in larger numbers.
The standing rules say that non-Muslims can visit the site during regular visit hours but are not allowed to perform any religious ritual.
While Israeli police, who accompany the extremists on their tours, have previously prevented breaking the law on this matter, they recently have become lax in implementing them.
Waqf officials said the police did not intervene when the fanatic Jews started to pray, but rather forced the Muslim security guards of the Mosque to keep away from the extremist Jews and not to interfere in their prayers.
Wafa in Arabic has more, saying that the Jews were all "settlers" and that they "attacked" Muslims.
Even Jews taking pictures is considered a crime to the PA, as the article says that "The ultra-Orthodox rabbi Yehuda Glick led the storming of the Al-Aqsa Mosque yesterday and led silent Talmudic rituals, and took provocative commemorative pictures off the Dome of the Rock mosque."
The video above shows the "fanatics" and what they would do if allowed to pray. It doesn't bother anyone except Jew-haters who are looking to be offended.
It is important to point out that the official Wafa news agency, by calling any Jew who prays a "fanatic" and an "extremist," is antisemitic.
Recently the Israel Supreme Court decided it would listen to a petition to officially allow Jews to pray on the Temple Mount, drawing a strong condemnation from Jordan, which falsely claims that such a move would violate the peace agreement between Israel and Jordan.
Wednesday, September 05, 2018
From Ian:
Ahead of 5779, Netanyahu Offers a Hopeful Message, Despite Threats Against Israel
Ahead of 5779, Netanyahu Offers a Hopeful Message, Despite Threats Against Israel
In advance of Rosh Hashanah, or the Jewish New Year, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu provided a message of hope despite the threats his country faces, such as Iran.On this day: Remembering the devastation of the Munich Massacre
“We live in a challenging area and we are equal to the task. We hit our enemies when necessary and we are capable of hitting them even more,” Netanyahu told the personnel who work under him in a toast, according to a spokesperson for the prime minister. “We are defending our borders, and we are also dealing with threats while they are far away and have yet to reach us, with foresight, preemptively.
“But I must tell you that while we are doing this, we are acquiring friends around the world and within the region here,” he continued. “They see our strength and they see our commitment to defend our state—to develop it and become an economic, technological, military, and intelligence power, and this brings us friends.”
“Who but you, the employees of the Prime Minister’s Office, knows this?” he asked rhetorically. “This tent is like a railway station; leaders from around the world arrive every day, sometimes several times a day, hundreds of leaders.”
46 years ago, September 5, 1972 Palestinian terrorist group Black September took hostage and later killed 11 Israelis Olympic athletes and a German police officer during the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich, West Germany.Why is Germany silent on Corbyn’s praise of Munich terrorists?
As the Israeli team member slept, eight members of the terrorist group scaled a fence to to enter the Olympic Village at 4:30 a.m. Clad in tracksuit and carrying duffel bags of weapons, the Black September members entered the two Israeli apartments with stolen keys.
Wrestling coach Moshe Weinberg and weightlifter Yossef Romano were killed during an initial struggle.
The intruders captured nine hostages: Yossef Gutfreund, a wrestling referee, sharpshooting coach Kehat Shorr, track and field coach Amitzur Shapira, fencing master Andre Spitzer, weightlifting judge Yakov Springer, wrestlers Eliezer Halfin and Mark Slavin, and weightlifters David Berger and Ze'ev Friedman.
Soon after the massacre began, a Black September spokesman called for the release 234 Palestinian prisoners and West German-held founders of the Red Army Faction, Andreas Baader and Ulrike Meinhof.
The barn-burning revelations in the British newspaper Daily Mail in August that Jeremy Corbyn – head of the UK’s Labour Party – laid a wreath at the graves of the Black September terrorists who executed 11 Israeli athletes and a German police officer 46 years ago today (September 5) raise unsettling questions about Germany’s reaction to the events of Munich in 1972.
Germany’s chancellor Angela Merkel and her social democratic Foreign Minister Heiko Maas have remained silent about Corbyn’s 2014 visit to Tunisia to commemorate the Black September Palestinian terrorists. Dr. Efraim Zuroff, director of the Jerusalem office of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, told The Jerusalem Post that Germany’s government “should have said something” because Black September murdered German police officer Anton Fliegerbauer.
“It was out-and-out terrorism in the heart of Europe, in Munich,” said Zuroff, of the Munich massacre. “This is something you would assume would get universal condemnation,” he added.
Zuroff, the Wiesenthal Center’s chief Nazi-hunter, believes “Germany is hoping to avoid any sort of confrontation with Corbyn because Brexit is not a done deal. If Corbyn comes to power, Corbyn could bring England back into the EU.” The German government is an energetic proponent of the European Union and opposes the UK’s decision to the exit the 28-state union.
Corbyn’s visit to honor the Black September terrorists prompted Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to tweet: “The laying of a wreath by Jeremy Corbyn on the graves of the terrorists who perpetrated the Munich massacre and his comparison of Israel to the Nazis deserves unequivocal condemnation from everyone – left, right and everything in between.”
- Wednesday, September 05, 2018
- Varda Meyers Epstein (Judean Rose)
- international law, Judean Rose, Nan Greer, Opinion, Varda
The curriculum vitae of Nan Marie Greer, Ph.D. at
eight pages long, is as long your arm (or more probably, your legs). It seems there’s
nothing she can’t do, and she does it all extremely well. Currently, an adjunct lecturer at the University of Redlands in
California, Greer teaches cultural and environmental anthropology in addition
to indigenous land rights.
Nan reached out to me and my husband
a few years back, introducing herself. She wanted help exploring the indigenous
rights of the Jewish people, which she felt needed to be—deserved to
be—enshrined in law. Impressed with her sincerity and her knowledge, we
promised to do whatever we could to help her.
This two-part interview lays out Nan
Greer’s vision for the people of Israel. That vision points to a resolution to territorial disputes between Arabs and Jews, the protection of both Jewish and Arab rights, and the rights of indigenous peoples everywhere. Of course it all sounds far-fetched until you
read what Nan Greer has to say. And then it all makes perfect sense.
Judean
Rose: What does it mean to be an indigenous people? Are the Jews an indigenous
people?
Dr. Nan Marie Greer, Ph.D. |
Nan Greer: The ILO Convention 169
and the U.N. working definition are the most utilized and notable documents referring to
indigenous people, with the U.N.D.R.I.P.
established to identify rights of indigenous people under international law.
ILO Convention 169, finalized in 1989 has not been revised to contain the U.N.
definition of indigenous, listed on their websites and formal documents. However, ILO Convention 169 states: “Article
1: This convention applies to…”, it DOES NOT state, this convention “DEFINES”
indigenous.
All but one organization
of the U.N. maintains the definition developed by Martinez Cobo
as published in U.N. documents and websites. UNESCO is NOT
consistent with other U.N. organizations, and fails to utilize the U.N. working
definition of indigenous.
For the purposes of
international litigation, a working definition of indigenous people was
established and published in U.N. policy documents and websites deriving from
José Martinez Cobo’s definition:
1)
Self-identification
as indigenous people at the individual level and accepted by the community as
their member;
2)
Historical
continuity with pre-colonial and/or pre-settler societies;
3)
Strong link to
territories and surrounding natural resources;
4)
Distinct social,
economic, or political systems;
5)
Distinct
language, culture, and beliefs;
6)
Form non-dominant
groups of society; and,
7)
Resolve to
maintain and reproduce their ancestral environments and systems as distinct
communities.
Critical to this
definition is the identification of indigenous people having a language and
belief system distinct to the area claimed in its ancestral land rights, and
not generalizable to other areas, such as Arab-Muslim groups claiming lands in
multiple nation-states throughout the Middle East.
Judean
Rose: Why is it important for Jews to be accepted as an indigenous people? What
are the implications of being indigenous to Israel?
Nan Greer: Currently,
the observer state of Palestine has introduced several measures that are
replicas of specific articles of rights in the UNDRIP However, they have never
signed the UNDRIP, nor attempted to use the UN definition of indigenous in
international circles - wisely so, as they fall outside the bounds of this
critical, widely-used, and internationally recognized definition.
While the P.A. has not
pushed for legal recognition of its Arab-Muslim people as indigenous, they have
been awarded approximately U$1.8 billion for legal fees directed at attacking
Israel in international and national courts. If both Israel and the
international community allow populations of merely “long-standing presence” to
declare themselves indigenous, while not having a language, culture, or
religion distinct to the geographical locale/nation-state, it allows them to
jeopardize indigeneity everywhere. This
ultimately leads to the justification of colonial domination of indigenous
people throughout the world - a risk that is simply not acceptable to the U.N.
and the international community.
As such, the opportunity
exists for Israel to protect the indigenous Jews, and to delineate and protect
communities of long-standing presence in a manner not recognized under current
colonial and political formations. Indeed, much of the Arab-Muslim population
has been colonized by highly politicized P.A. structures aimed at the
elimination of the Jewish indigenous nation, using the Arab population, as it
were, in a political war - threatening children utilized as soldiers and human
shields in war, impoverishing families, and promoting lifestyles of terror. Under
international law, Druze, Bedouin, and other Arab groups may not be considered
indigenous as they do not have a language and religious beliefs distinct to
Israel. However, they deserve a humanitarian approach outside the bounds of
corruption of the current P.A. and Gaza political arrangement. Ultimately,
adjudicating each land dispute and presence claim of a given group ought to
occur in the legal system of the nation state, not outside of the country of
Israel.
Judean
Rose: Tell us about your work with other indigenous peoples.
Nan Greer: I have worked
with the Mayangna and Miskitú of Central America for over 25 years now - and I
continue to work with them to this day. Initially, I worked with these groups
on a consultation for writing a land law that would help them to protect their
lands (Law 445, Nicaragua),
which defined the indigenous right to land, outlined a procedure for making a
traditional land claim, and determined a phase of normalization of land tenure
in the indigenous autonomous regions of the North Atlantic Autonomous Region (RAAN)
and South Atlantic Autonomous Region (RAAS).
Mayangna Leaders meet with children from Orphanage - Nicaragua |
Data Analysis Awas Tingni - preparation for Court land defense, Mayangna |
Mapping Matumbak, Mayangna |
After this, we began
with documenting the right to land amid the BOSAWAS Biosphere Reserve, for the purpose of assisting the indigenous to
protect their lands, and also to help protect the rainforest (given a 18% rate
of annual cutting by illegal colonists, compared to a -1% of forest cutting by
indigenous). This work went on for
approximately 18 years, and as a result, all 9 territories of the Mayangna
Nation now have legal title to their lands, in addition to four Miskitú
territories. Other groups assisted by others, and some working on their own,
were also titled, with some remaining pending. As such, my task has now turned
to dealing with illegal colonists on indigenous lands, whereby lands are
inalienable to indigenous peoples (not able to be sold, under national law 445). Some indigenous territories have chosen to
allow illegal colonists to remain (those who do not destroy the forest), while
forcing others to leave - per Nicaraguan law 445, and 28).
Nan Greer with Brooklin Rivera - head indigenous representative Nicaragua; president YATAMA; Miskitu |
Nan Greer & Noe Coleman - Current Nicaragua Indigenous Representative to MesoAmerican Group of Indigenous; leader, Matumbak - Mayangna |
For approximately 5
years, I worked directly with Native Hawaiians and other ethnic groups on the
islands of Hawai`i Nei, as they struggled to defend their right to farm lands
where they grew taro/kalo (Colocasia esculenta) - the Hawaiian “staff of life” which is used in
making poi. The U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) had
been purchasing wetland areas used by traditional farmers as a method of protecting
endangered wetland birds. However, in so doing, USFWS often utilized methods
that were inconsistent with the local ecology, even threatening the wetland
bird populations themselves. As such, I worked with farmers to document the
wetland waterbird populations, in addition to tracking another 150
environmental variables with each farmer for over a period of a year and a half
(the average growth period of taro).
Exchange between Native Hawaiian elder and Noe Coleman |
Noe Coleman meets with students and faculty of Kauai Community College, Nan Greer, right |
Taro Farmers: Alternative Wetlands Management
Fascinatingly, we found
taro farmers provided habitat to more endangered wetland birds per acre than
those found on the USFWS wetland refuge systems (USFWS data was acquired under
the Freedom of Information Act). Consecutively, we collectively examined the
economic viability of farming taro as an economically sustainable activity in
Hawai`i, and as an alternative to USFWS management of wetland areas, found to
be areas inhabited by Native Hawaiians going back to approximately 600 A.D.
After moving to
California in 2014, I have worked with elders of a group of Cahuilla-Serrano in the state of California. This work focused more on
the preservation of ethnoecological knowledge, in addition to protecting
religious and spiritual connections to land.
Judean
Rose: What steps have you taken toward having the Jewish people declared the
indigenous people of Israel?
Exchange between Leader Noe Coleman and Elder of Morongo Band of Mission Indians-Cahuilla-Serrano |
Nan Greer: Actually, a
very unusual series of events has occurred in Israel this summer (2018). The
Basic Law - Nation-State Law was signed and approved by Knesset. Combining the
Declaration of the Nation of Israel with this recent Nation-State Law, we can
see demonstratively, that the Jewish people have self-declared their status
under state laws, as an indigenous people.
Israel has declared its
Jewish population as indigenous to the Nation of Israel and to the world
through two critical documents:
1) The Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel (Official Gazette: No. 1; Tel Aviv, 5 Iyar 5708, 14.5 1948), stating: “The Land of Israel was the birthplace of the Jewish people. Here their spiritual, religious and political identity was shaped. Here they first attained statehood, created cultural values of national and universal significance…”
2) Basic Law-Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People.
“1-Basic principles:
A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.
B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.
C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.”
Israel has thus issued
laws recognizing Jewish indigeneity. While not possessing the word “indigenous”
in the Hebrew language, Israel has utilized all terminology under international
law to declare itself indigenous to its homelands, the Nation-State of Israel. Through
this self-declaration, Israel protects its indigenous population nationally as
a distinct people. Israel also protects itself as an indigenous nation under
the accepted working definition of the United Nations.
Signing UNDRIP
Israel is advised now to sign the U.N. Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), with reservations that under sovereignty, indigenous people do not lose their international indigenous status, where sovereignty represents the pinnacle goal of indigenous human rights.
The benefits of such a
declaration include the protection of the Jewish people as indigenous under
international law, in perpetuity, in addition to the permanent protection of
their lands and rights to those ancestral lands, as inalienable.
Consistent with
historical approaches, it is possible that Arab-Muslim populations in Israel
may attempt to thwart their declaration as an indigenous people in
international circles. Though numerous resolutions have passed the U.N. General
Assembly to Israel’s detriment, a self-declaration by Israel of Jews as
indigenous is paramount to their protection. Considering the above-mentioned
legislation declaring their indigeneity, and the great wealth of evidence
supporting this Jewish indigenous status, to deny the Jewish ethno-religious
group recognition in international circles, would be to go against U.N. laws
and policy.
Additionally, the
declaration of Jews as indigenous in no way denies the right of other ethnic
groups to their human rights, as such a declaration is without prejudice to
other cultural groups.
An Autochthonous Solution
By signing the UNDRIP
with reservations, the opportunity exists to litigate indigenous rights of Jews
to their homeland, sacred sites, and the upholding of their cultural
traditions. Despite sovereignty, by signing the UNDRIP with reservations, Israel
can further decisions and resolutions by the people of the land, for the land
and its people - an autochthonous solution, without the control and colonial
domination of other nation-states, politics, or international governance from
outside its borders - respecting and strengthening Israeli sovereignty, and
human rights.
With respect to recent
decisions by UNESCO to deny Jewish right to its sacred and historical sites,
Israel as a self-declared indigenous nation has the opportunity to request
immediate redress and revocation of these malicious political motions by the
U.N., demanding the respect of Jews to their own sacred sites and lands, as
indigenous people. Israel is within its rights to demand UNESCO resolve their
malicious discrimination, libel, slander, religious discrimination and
hostility. Current antisemitic, anti-historic resolutions that their sacred
sites are not theirs, changing their historical names and authoritative
management, are contrary to laws afforded to indigenous people under the U.N.
itself.
(Next
week, part two of this two-part series.)
- Wednesday, September 05, 2018
- Elder of Ziyon
Some photos of the closing ceremonies at Islamic Jihad's summer camps in Gaza.
Didn't your daily camp line-ups look like this?
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Didn't your daily camp line-ups look like this?
Their counselor looks like a nice chap.
In all seriousness, I don't understand this. It appears to be a paramilitary training camp for 17 year olds not quite ready to join the terror group in a full capacity. But the caption definitely said "summer camp."
(h/t Ibn Boutros)
From Ian:
NYPost Editorial: Trump is pushing the Middle East to face reality in Palestine
Former Israeli Labor MK: UNRWA Inflated Number of Refugees by a Factor of At Least Four
NYPost Editorial: Trump is pushing the Middle East to face reality in Palestine
In a blow to decades of myth-based policy, Team Trump last week cut all US funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency — a special body that does as much to distort the peace process as to help Palestinian refugees.Friedman: We’ve thrown $10b at Palestinians; peace isn’t a millimeter closer
Since its founding in 1949 to take care of, as The Post’s Benny Avni put it, the roughly “750,000 Arab refugees from the war Israel’s neighbors launched to erase it off the map,” UNRWA has worked not to end that refugee crisis but to prolong it.
Key to that perverse mission has been the decision to grant refugee status to the descendants of the original ones — a rule applied for no other refugees in all the decades since World War II and the founding of the United Nations.
Where a normal accounting would have the population down to a few tens of thousands, UNRWA recognizes some 5 million Palestinian “refugees,” including even great-great-grandchildren whose families have been citizens of Jordan and other nations for decades.
And Palestinian leaders continue to claim that any final peace deal must grant a “right of return” to Israel to all 5 million. Worse, UNRWA-overseen schools, media and so on work to keep those grievances fresh. UNRWA staff are also regularly caught enabling terrorists in attacks on Israelis.
The UNRWA cutoff needn’t, and shouldn’t, mean an end to US aid to Palestinian communities in the West Bank and Gaza, but the State Department will have to find partners who can provide the help without the ideology.
The United States has “thrown more than $10 billion” in aid to the Palestinians, but that spending has brought the region no closer to peace or stability, the US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman charged Tuesday, in an address explaining why US President Donald Trump thought it was important to halt US funding to UNRWA, the UN’s Palestinian refugee agency.
Friedman lamented that US taxpayer funds, rather than be used positively, had been partly spent on Palestinian Authority stipends to terrorists, to fund inciteful education, and to finance an agency — UNRWA — that, by extending refugee status to descendants of Palestinian refugees, was perpetuating rather than helping solve the refugee problem.
“Since 1994, the United States has thrown more than $10 billion in humanitarian aid to the Palestinians,” Friedman said in a Rosh Hashanah speech. “Without minimizing the importance of medical treatment and quality education for children — and we don’t minimize that, not even for a minute — we found that these expenditures were bringing the region no closer to peace or stability, not even by a millimeter,” he said.
“To spend hard-earned taxpayer dollars to fund stipends to terrorists and their families, to expend funds to perpetuate rather than to mitigate refugee status, and to finance hate-filled textbooks — I ask you, how does that provide value to the United States or the region?”
Friedman added that the US would continue to seek other ways of supporting Palestinians.
“Make no mistake, the USA is a generous nation and we would love, truly love, to invest in this region for the return on investment of peace and stability in Israel and a better quality of life for the Palestinians,” he said. “Indeed, we continue to provide funding, 40 percent of the funding for the UN High Commission on Refugees. UNHCR, in contrast to UNRWA, seeks to end statelessness, not deploy it as a political weapon.”
U.S. Amb. @NikkiHaley: UNRWA should not be the one taking care of the people in Gaza. The Palestinian Authority should be taking care of the people in Gaza. We would much rather work directly with the Palestinian Authority and directly with Jordanians than we would with @UNRWA. pic.twitter.com/pXDBP2qxVW
— UN Watch (@UNWatch) September 4, 2018
Former Israeli Labor MK: UNRWA Inflated Number of Refugees by a Factor of At Least Four
The number of Palestinians registered by UNRWA as refugees is at least four times inflated, Dr. Einat Wilf, a former Labor Knesset member who served on the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, told The Israel Project on Tuesday.
Of the 1.8 million Palestinians living in Gaza, 1.4 million are registered by UNRWA as refugees. "Almost all of them have been born in Gaza and lived there all their lives. By now their parents have been born in Gaza. Their grandparents have been born in Gaza. And yet they claim to be refugees from Palestine. I think we can all agree that Gaza is Palestine."
Of the 5.3 million Palestinian refugees that UNRWA currently services, 40% live in Jordan as citizens and enjoy full access to state services, including health and education. "So 80% of Palestinians east and west of the Jordan River are not even refugees," Wilf said.
She added that attempts to appease Gaza through financial investments and economic initiatives have failed because the vast majority of Gazans don't care about the future of Gaza. They see it "as a temporary" home, before they can resettle in what is now Israel.
UNRWA is "wholly devoted to one political goal, which is the goal of return," Wilf said. "But return was established at the end of the [1947-49] war as the continuation of the war by other means."
- Wednesday, September 05, 2018
- Elder of Ziyon
From a paper at the UNHRC website called "The UN surrogate state and refugee policy in the Middle East "by Michael Kagan:
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
A desire by Arab states to maintain the visibility of the Palestinian refugee issue in international politics has long been noted as a reason why Arab states preferred to maintain a separate UN apparatus in the form of UNRWA rather than incorporate Palestinians into the new international refugee regime in 1950-1951...
Palestinians were not the first refugee group to be blocked from integration in host countries. ...What was new in the Palestinian case was that a new narrative discourse developed by which host states could better justify this limbo status.
This idea of a third party sponsor is important for understanding how Arab states have responded to the presence of refugees in their countries, beginning with the Palestinians in 1948. At the birth of the Palestinian refugee crisis, Arab states faced a political challenge. There was, and largely still is, a popular Arab consensus insistent on Palestinian return as the only acceptable solution to the refugee problem. Yet while Arab states have supported and often encouraged this sentiment among their peoples, Arab governments have lacked the power to force Israel to accept repatriation. Arab host states found themselves insisting that Palestinian refugees should go home even though they lacked the power to make this happen.
Shifting responsibility for the refugees to the UN defused this tension. It accommodated the practical reality of long term exile without surrendering in principle the insistence on the return as the only acceptable permanent solution.For this political strategy to work it would not have been adequate for Arab states to simply persuade the international community to share the resource burden of hosting the refugees via humanitarian or development aid. Arab states wanted the shift of responsibility for the refugees to the international community to be highly visible, what Jalal Husseini calls “the necessary public emphasis on UN involvement.” This symbolism was important enough that when UNRWA was established Arab states asked that “UN” be added to its name, instead of the original suggestion that it be called “Near East Relief and Works Agency (NERWA).”
...This UN responsibility thesis is fairly unique to the Palestinian case, but the general pattern of state-to-UN responsibility shift is the common foundation of refugee policy for both Palestinian and non-Palestinian refugees in Arab host states. ...UNRWA... set up registration, education, health and other social welfare systems separate from those operated by the host governments.
UNRWA remains central to Palestinain [sic] welfare throughout the region. As Nicholas Morris has written, “UNRWA has direct responsibilities broadly analogous to those of a government‟s health, education and social welfare authorities.”
A key lesson from the early days of UNRWA is that responsibility shift offers symbolic political benefits to host states, in addition to its utility in facilitating shifting of resource burdens. .... In addition to helping to defray the resource burdens of hosting refugees, state avoidance of responsibility helped to deal with political sensitivities. The fact that refugees in the Arab world typically come from other Arab League states poses a political problem for host governments that do not want to accuse fellow Arab states of persecution. It is politically expedient to leave this task to UNHCR, and to portray the refugees‟ presence as temporary, just as was done first with Palestinians.
...In general, the theory I am suggesting is that Arab governments are likely to acquiesce to the presence of refugees on their territory only so long as responsibility for their maintenance and ultimate departure from the country is visibly assigned to an international body or other third party
The Arabs have been using the UN to avoid their own responsibilities of supporting their brethren (Palestinian and other) for decades.
- Wednesday, September 05, 2018
- Elder of Ziyon
From Palestine Today:
The new ambassador to Jordan, Amir Weissbrod, said in his first statement on Wednesday that Israel is no longer as an isolated state.This is the truth that the Arabs want to hide from their own people. Israel does not cause instability - on the contrary, it is the most stable state in the region, and one that can be relied upon by Arab countries more than they can trust each other.
"Israel is no longer an isolated state in the region as it was in the past. We have not succeeded in solving all of our problems in the region. It is clear that there are opponents of peace with Israel. They are calling for boycotting it and prohibiting communication with it. But more Jordanians have recognized that Israel is an important and credible partner to the challenges facing the Kingdom in the region.
"Even if we do not agree on some bilateral issues between Amman and Tel Aviv, Israel is a true and honest partner for Jordan in light of the difficult reality in which the Kingdom lives, and our task today is to translate this constructive cooperation at the official level between our two peoples ".
- Wednesday, September 05, 2018
- Elder of Ziyon
- unrwa
From JPost:
Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat threatened to expel UNRWA from Jerusalem, in the first public statement by an Israeli official that called on the government to use its power to shut down the agency that services Palestinian refugees.When I interviewed Mayor Barkat five years ago I asked him this question specifically, why the Shuafat UNRWA camp is allowed to exist in Jerusalem when his goal was to unify the city. Unfortunately, he did not answer the question on the record, but as I recall the answer was simply that international politics made such a move impossible even though he would like to have done it.
“UNRWA is a foreign and unnecessary organization that has failed miserably,” Barkat said in a speech he delivered Monday morning in Jerusalem at a conference sponsored by Channel 2. “I intend to expel it from Jerusalem.”
Barkat explained that he had already instructed his municipal staff to come up with a plan to replace the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, which he plans to present to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
He spoke just three days after the US State Department announced that it intends to permanently halt its annual contributions to UNRWA, which last year amounted to $360 million out of the organization’s one billion dollar budget.
The mayor said the 30,000 Palestinians in Shuafat are dissatisfied with the organization’s services, including welfare, cleaning and education.
Only one percent of the pupils there go to UNRWA schools, where incitement is high, he said.
“We will close their schools and provide pupils with hope,” said Barkat, adding the pupils could study for and take the matriculation exams in existing schools throughout the city.
“Wherever the municipality operates, the Arab public is more satisfied and less violent. UNRWA’s treatment of residents as refugees is a barrier to their advancement and has no place,” Barkat said. “The time has come transform them from refugees to residents and to rehabilitate them. It is possible. The removal of UNRWA will reduce incitement and terrorism, improve service to the residents, increase Israelization in east Jerusalem and contribute to [Israeli] unity and sovereignty in Jerusalem.”
UNRWA said in response that it “has received no notification about this alleged plan and UNRWA’s schools and other core services in the city remain operational.”
It seems clear that the US antipathy towards UNRWA has changed the political situation enough to allow him to now consider doing what should have been done long ago.
UNRWA describes Shauafat this way:
Today, approximately 12,500 Palestine refugees are registered as living in Shu'fat camp. However, UNRWA estimates that the actual number of residents in the camp is around 24,000.The camp has been a major problem for years. Israel cannot pick up the trash because the collectors get attacked, and UNRWA doesn't bother:
Shu'fat camp was illegally annexed by Israel after the 1967 hostilities when Israel unilaterally established new municipal boundaries for Jerusalem. Camp residents still hold Jerusalem IDs and, unlike West Bank ID holders, are allowed to reside in Jerusalem. Because the Israeli Ministry of the Interior has a policy of revoking Jerusalem IDs from Palestinians who do not have their ‘centre of life’ in Jerusalem, the camp has become a popular place of residence for Palestinians (non-refugees) with Jerusalem IDs who might not otherwise afford the high living costs of Jerusalem.
This has contributed to the extreme overcrowding in the camp. In 2003, Israel began the construction of the West Bank Barrier in East Jerusalem, routing it so that Shu'fat camp and surrounding areas ended up on the ‘West Bank side’ of the Barrier. This cut off Shu'fat residents from East Jerusalem. Today, residents have to pass through a crowded checkpoint to access Jerusalem.
Nur ad-Din, 43 and a father of six, was arrested during the First Intifada and served 12 years in an Israeli prison. He has no need to express his frustration and anger in words; one glance at the trash heap near the gate of his home says it all.It appears that UNRWA's only contribution is a few schools, schools where the children are taught hate. It provides no other services for the camp. If Jerusalem is to be united, then UNRWA needs to be expelled, the camp needs to be dismantled and proper homes built.
“There was a metal bin, but it was too small. Many years have gone by, the population here has grown, and the bin is still the same bin. Garbage collects here by the ton,” he says in the pure Hebrew of a native Jerusalemite. “UNRWA does not pick it up because they say they can’t, that they do not have enough workers and resources to deal with our needs. UNRWA’s manager in the camp, who sits in his office all day, cut off from the people who live here, says that as far as the scope of its work is concerned, nothing has changed since 1967.
“The Palestinian groups do not contribute anything either. Fatah does not exist in the camp; that is a fiction. There is a ‘popular committee’ of the PLO that is supposed to handle the day-to-day issues of the camp, but they do not do their jobs. I went to the institutions that transfer money to the popular committee and asked them to stop their funding because they do not do a thing.”
But anything Israel does to improve the lives of the people in Shuafat will be denounced anyway.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)