Feed aggregator

Encore une remise en cause du modèle social français ? Il y a deux semaines, le conseil départemental du Haut-Rhin (LR) prenait la décision de conditionner (à partir de 2017) le versement du RSA à sept...

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+ Share on LinkedIn+var sbFBAPPID = '457641991045477';

The post #New Europe Shooting Gallery Issue 1153 appeared first on New Europe.

J Street's activities extend from politics and advocacy -- to education:
J Street University is circulating a map that restores the Green Line and working to get it into synagogues, Hebrew schools, and summer camps. Good for them. Of course, fighting (nonviolently) over maps is preferable to shooting over the borders of the territories they represent, but there’s no substitute for a one-map solution.Here is the map:

J Street has a lesson plan to go along with the map. I embedded a copy of the lesson plan at the end of the post.

The introduction in the lesson plan introduces what they see as the issue behind maps of Israel today:

The disappearance of the Green Line from our maps is a clear symptom of a larger problem. The vast majority of Jewish Americans, including our communal leaders, claim to support a two-state solution,recognizing that it is the only way to safeguard Israel’s future. Yet we often talk about and teach about Israel in a way that physically erases the Green Line, which forms the basis of that solution. When the Green Line disappears from our maps, it is also eroded from our consciousness.The plan then goes on to describe J Street's goal in a pretty straightforward way:
The goal of this lesson plan is to help learners, 9th graders and up, understand the realities of the status quo in Israel and the Palestinian territory. Recognizing that maps play an important role in reinforcing cultural narratives and national identities for both Israelis and Palestinians, and their supporters, we’ll look at various maps of this area that reflect different hopes, aspirations, and political perspectives.In order to frame those differing perspectives, J Street divides them into 3 groups in terms of whether the Green Line should appear on the map:

• Why the Green Line should not appear: map labels entire area as Israel
• Why the Green Line should appear: labeled as "Joint Perspective"
• Why the Green Line should not appear: map labels entire area as Palestine

Putting aside how the lesson plan organizes and structures how the actual discussion is carried out, there is the larger issue of how J Street frames the issue and the information it intends to pass on to the participants as fact.

On page 10 of the plan, is the section labeled: All About The Green Line, where the overall background on the Green Line is given as "the original armistice line of the 1948 Arab-Israel war." However, J Street writes in their lesson plan that among the consequences is that:
These territories [Gaza and the West Bank] are viewed by the international community as being under “military occupation,” although their status is more complicated within Israel.On the contrary, the fact is that the issue of "military occupation" is complicated -- period, regardless of whether you are Israeli or not. There is legal precedent for saying Gaza is not occupied and arguments that can be made about the West Bank, under control of the Palestinian Authority, as well. One doesn't have to going into details or surrender a balance of views in order to convey the complexity of the the issue of "occupation", but surely it should not be ignored either.

Another J Street claim in the general background of the lesson plan is:
All past negotiations over the future Israeli-Palestinian border have been based on the Green Line with land swaps.Not exactly all negotiations. After all, it was Abbas himself who turned down the idea of land swaps when he declared:  "No to Israel as a Jewish state, no to interim borders, no to land swaps" at the Fifth Fatah Revolutionary Council Convention in December 2010. The lesson plan thus overlooks the fact that the idea of land swaps itself is a new idea: the Palestinian Arabs did not accept the idea of land swaps -- and only "minor" swaps at that -- until 2013.

A final note on the general background section of the lesson plan is in the segment entitled "How Is Israel Blurring The Green Line?" Keep in mind that legally the Green Line is nothing more than an arbitrary armistice line indicating where the fighting stopped in 1948 -- in no way is it a border.

Despite this fact, J Street claims:

• Since 1967, Israel has politically and economically encourage Jewish settlement over the Green Line
• This is considered illegal according to Article 49 of the Geneva Convention

Actually, Article 49 of the Geneva Convention specifies the forcible transfer of populations -- a response to the Nazis who conducted massive transfers of people into occupied territories. Also, based on the British Mandate, the area given to the Jews included Judea and Samaria -- the area they were illegally forced to flee, the area that became known as "the West Bank" based on 19 years of Jordanian control. J Street is the blurring the facts, declaring as absolute, what is at best debatable

The lesson plan gives a historical time line in accordance with the Israeli, Palestinian and "Joint Perspective". According to the time line of the "Israel Perspective:
1920-1948: Mandatory Palestine, the British Mandate for Palestine transfers power from military rule to civil rule. The British rule continues to face resistance from both Palestinian and Jewish forces.This is how J Street summarizes how the League of Nations granted Britain the Mandate for reconstituting the Jewish homeland. But in fact, the fact sheet does not mention the League of Nations even once, and only uses the word "league" once -- in reference to the Arab League. The students are never told the basis for Britain's Mandate giving it control in then-Palestine. This omission not only denies context to the Arab opposition to the Mandate, but also the Jewish opposition -- which was based on changes made to the Mandate and on opposition to the 1939 White Paper. Surprisingly, mention of White Paper is also omitted from the lesson plan.

 According to the time line of the "Joint Perspective":

• 1916: Sykes–Picot Agreement, the UK and France promised Arab control over Palestine
  Not true: As someone corrected me, here J Street is confusing the Hussein-McMahon correspondence with the Sykes-Picot Agreement. About the latter, there is no argument and it is not related to the issue. Regarding the former, the claim that Arabs were promised Palestine is hotly debated, and the British government insisted that then-Palestine was not included.
  
  
• 1920s and 1930s: Violent clashes begin, as Jews continued to immigrate to Palestine, Zionist-Arab antagonism boiled over into violent clashes among Jews, the Palestinians, and the British Police.
  So according to J Street, even then it was a cycle of violence? This ignores both the initiation of the Arab massacres of Jews and the long history of Arab persecution of Jews during Ottoman rule
  
  
• 1920-1948: Mandatory Palestine, the British Mandate for Palestine transfers power from military rule to civil rule. The British rule continues to face resistance from both Palestinian and Jewish forces.
  There is no mention of Transjordan, which was cut out of the area originally part of the Palestine Mandate
  
  
• 1949: Armistice Lines are agreed upon. Gaza is under Egyptian control and The West Bank is under Jordanian control. The Green Line is drawn, which will become the basis for any future peace agreement.
  This misleads by implying that Egyptian control over Gaza and Jordanian control over the "West Bank" was internationally recognized, when in fact only Great Britain and Pakistan recognized the annexation as legal. Also, the Green was not the basis for all future peace agreements, since the current peace agreements Israel has with Egypt and Jordan are both based on the British Mandate -- not on the Green Line

In all three perspectives, the lesson plan claims:
1947: UN Resolution 181, partitions Palestine into two states: Arab and Jewish.This is not true. The UN did not create 2 states. After all, the British continued executing the Mandate into 1948. What the resolution did do was recommend a partition, as the resolution itself makes clear.

J Street is entitled to their opinion, but in their rush to push the idea of the centrality of the Green Line, the omission of important facts and the distortion of others prevent the balanced view that they claim as their goal. Instead of a lesson plan about a significant issue affecting Israel, J Street's project has been reduced to propaganda for their political agenda.

Hat tip: AB, for pointing out additional J Street errors.

-----
If you found this post interesting or informative, please it below. Thanks! Technorati Tag: Israel and J Street and Judea and Samaria and The West Bank.

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

Eine attraktive Bardame horchte Anfang der 1980er Jahre hochrangige Politiker aus. Doch Bundesbern zeigte kein Interesse an einer transparenten Aufklärung des skurrilen Falls – ein Blick zurück.

Faire une primaire à gauche quand on a un sortant à l'Elysée... Jusqu'à présent, Jean-Christophe Cambadélis n'était pas fan de l'idée ! Pourtant le premier secrétaire du PS vient de se prononcer « pour »....

C'est la première fois depuis Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, il y a 37 ans, qu'un président français se rend sur ce territoire. Prochaine étape de ce périple, la Polynésie française.

Patronat et syndicats se retrouvent à partir de ce lundi pour fixer de nouvelles règles d’indemnisation des chômeurs.

BERLIN, BÉCS. Németország elutasítja a menedékkérők belépésére Ausztriában bevezetett napi kontingens intézményét, és kifogásait előterjeszti az uniós belügyminiszterek következő értekezletén - mondta a német belügyminiszter vasárnap az ARD országos közszolgálati televíziónak.

Azerbaijani diaspora activists have held a rally outside Armenia`s Embassy in Stockholm to commemorate the 24th anniversary of Khojaly Genocide, when the Armenian armed forced killed innocent Azerbaijani civilians.

Azerbaijani athlete Oleg Stepko has won a gold medal in the parallel bars event in the FIG World Artistic Gymnastics Challenge Cup in Baku.

Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu arrived in Tehran on Sunday where he will meet his Iranian counterpart Hossein Dehghan and other high-ranking officials, a source in the Russian Embassy in Tehran told Sputnik.

President of the European Council, Donald Tusk has phoned Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to express the EU’s support for Ankara against terrorism, the Turkish Presidency announced late Saturday.

Azerbaijan Britain Students Network has organized a march in London to commemorate the 24th anniversary of Khojaly Genocide, which was committed by Armenia’s armed forces against the Azerbaijani civilians in 1992, AzerTag reports.

The date of Azerbaijani president Ilham Aliyev's visit to Iran has been made public.

Baku has hosted the first workshop on tourism in Italy, AzerTag reports.

Le Secrétaire général de l'ONU, Ban Ki-moon, est arrivé lundi à Bujumbura, la capitale du Burundi, pour une visite d'environ 24 heures, au cours de laquelle il rencontrera le Président Pierre Nkurunziza et d'autres acteurs politiques afin d'aider le pays à résoudre la crise qu'il traverse depuis près d'un an.

Febuary 21, 2016 (JUBA) – The governor of South Sudan's Wau state, Elias Waya Nyipuoch announced on Sunday his long-awaited list of cabinet members.

Nyipuoch, in gubernatorial order number 17, appointed six ministers and three advisors.

The governor appointed Kon Victor Dimo minister for Finance, Maka Bushra Mohamed (Information, Communication and Technology), Angelina Anthony Ubur (Local Government) and Awadhia Yacub Munsur (Education Science and Technology).

Others appointed were Pasquale Dongo (Physical Infrastructure), Santino Uyu (Agriculture), while the health ministry has been reserved for the armed opposition.

Meanwhile, the governor appoined Taban John Gou as his advisor on political affairs, Bibaina Mario on peace and reconciliation and Madut Ngu Akuek as advisor on security.

(ST).

February 21, 2016 (JUBA) - South Sudanese peace partners have agreed to suspend the work of the national constitutional amendment committee until when the transitional government of national unity is formed without constitution, asserting it would use the peace agreement as the basis for running a new government.

SPLM-IO Chief Negotiator, Taban Deng Gai, leader of advance team, with David Deng Athorbei, chairman of national committee, hold a press conference in Juba airport upon arrival on Monday, 21 December 2015 (ST Photo)

The constitutional amendment committee, according to a statement released for public information with the approval of representatives of the stakeholders, has unanimously decided to suspend its activities after disagreements emerged when the key stakeholders failed to reach a consensus on the outstanding issues in the constitutional amendment process.

The national constitutional committee is one of the institutions mandated by the August 2015 peace agreement which president Salva Kiir and the leader of armed opposition, Riek Machar, as well as other stakeholders have signed and agreed to review the 2011 transitional constitution of South Sudan. The parties would incorporate the provisions of the deal so that it becomes the legally binding supreme law of the country during the transitional period of thirty months as stipulated in the peace deal.

The committee comprising representatives of the government, armed opposition, civil society organisations, faith based groups and other political forces who are the stakeholders in the agreement have unanimously agreed to suspend its work after several disagreements.

The committee said they completed phase one of its work and activities which were about reviewing all the articles of the entire constitution to assess compatibility with the peace agreement.

They were unable to reach consensus on a number of issues including the fate of 28 states, number of presidential advisers which are not in the peace agreement as well as who should chair the first session of the transitional parliament to allow members to elect parliamentary leadership.

Other issues include how a parliamentary seat should be filled in the event it falls vacant due to any circumstances.

The members of armed opposition and other stakeholders prefer filling of parliamentary seats which had fallen vacant through election but the government preferred direct appointment by the president.

These four issues, according to the statement, would be addressed by the transitional government of national unity based on the spirit and directives spelt out in the recent communique of the council of ministers of the member countries of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD).

“Once the four matters are resolved, the committee shall be directed by the new government to proceed to incorporate the agreed versions of the then contested provisions. That will take only half a day,” the statement extended to Sudan Tribune by the committee reads in part.

Formation of transitional government is expected to be done in mid-March due to the delays in the implementation of the security arrangements in Juba, a priority preceding phase in the peace deal.

(ST)

February 21, 2016 (KHARTOUM) - The Sudan Liberation Movement- Abdel Wahid al-Nur (SLM-AW) condemned a statement by the U.S. State Department saying that the rebel group initiated attacks on the government troops in Darfur area of Jebel Marra.

SLM-AW rebels look on during a visit by former joint special representative Ibrahim Gambari to West Darfur's Fanga Suk village in East Jebel Marra on 18 March 2011 (Photo: Reuters)

In a press statement Thursday, the US States Department spokesperson, John Kirby, said the “United States is deeply concerned about the increased violence against civilians and the grave humanitarian situation in and around Jebel Marra, Darfur”.

''Initial attacks by the Sudan Liberation Army-Abdul Wahid opposition group on Sudanese armed forces prompted a response by Sudan's military that included aerial bombardments despite the UN Security Council demand that Sudan cease offensive military flights over Darfur,''. Kibry further said.

In a communiqué issued on Saturday, the rebel group strongly rejected the "the baseless and unfounded accusations" saying it is "clear and unambiguous act" of “give the victim a bad name and victimize him more policy”.

The SLM-AW "did not initiated the attacks on Jebel Marra," further stressed the statement, pointing that Washington seeks normalize relations with the Sudanese government.

"U.S State Department wants to find an excuse to its administration's dealing with a pariah state like Sudan and therefore; it must criminalize SLM/A".

Since last January, the government forces launched a large scale offensive on the Sudan Liberation Movement - Abdel Wahid al-Nur (SLM-AW) positions in Jebel Marra, accusing the rebels of looting and attacking civilian, military and commercial convoys in the area.

The Sudanese officials also refused to stop the military operation saying the group is not part of the peace process.

The U.S. statement Department said the attacks have forced “73,000 people to flee their homes, and thousands more are trapped in the conflict zone of Jebel Marra without access to aid”.

In addition it called on both the Government of Sudan and the armed movements of the Sudanese Revolutionary Front (SRF) to re-commit to their cessation of hostilities declarations for Darfur and in South Kordofan and Blue Nile states.

Sudanese government this week announced the extension of the national dialogue and called on the political and armed opposition groups to join the process.

SLM-AW rebels, refuse to join the African Union brokered peace talks. They demand the government to repair first the consequences the 13-year armed conflict unilaterally, after what peace talks can discuss the root causes of the crisis.

The State Department said that there is no military solution to Sudan's internal conflicts and urged the Sudanese parties to work with the African Union mediators to end the hostilities and allow humanitarian access to civilians in the war affected areas in Darfur, South Kordofan, and Blue Nile.

Washington also urged the Sudanese government to create an environment conducive to the participation of armed groups and other political opposition parties in “a comprehensive and inclusive national dialogue that addresses systemic governance issues in Sudan”.

Last October, the Sudanese government has inaugurated an internal dialogue conference but main opposition groups and armed movements refuse to take part in it before the creation of a conducive environment and the implementation of specific confidence-building measures provided in a roadmap proposed by the African Union mediation.

The Sudanese army has been fighting the Sudanese People's Liberation Movement/North (SPLM-N) in South Kordofan and Blue Nile since 2011 and a group of armed movements in Darfur since 2003.

(ST)