The agreement with the
prisoners that was negotiated and signed can be seen here:
A few points are worth
mention before we move to other issues.
The leaders, in signing the
agreement, pledged to refrain from all activity that constitutes practical
support for terrorism, e.g., recruitment, providing
guidance. And yes, this is a laughable proposition.
It means about as much as the pledge signed by terrorists, released in
deals such the Shalit trade, that they will never return to terrorism.
Consider the implications of
this: From within their prison cells, prisoners who are terrorist leaders
have had sufficient access to the outside world to be able to get out messages
that foment or promote terrorism. This, for all their
laments.
The only advantage to securing
such pledges that I see is that if terrorist leaders are caught breaking it,
prison officials can declare the deal void. Whether they actually
would -- or, rather, will -- is another issue.
Key aspects are elimination or
reduction of solitary confinement and increased primary family visitation.
There is, obviously, a direct
connection between the pledge by the prisoners to not promote terrorism and the
concessions above.
Other issues relating to improved
conditions are to be examined after the strike ends. I would imagine
it is here that such matters as securing Israeli academic degrees while in
prison will be examined. There had been allusions to the possible release
of a few prisoners, but I have seen no more about this.
~~~~~~~~~~
There is, thankfully, no
mention of administrative detention in this agreement, and you might want to see
what the IDF has to say about it:
"[It] is a lawful security measure
allowing the deprivation of a person's liberty for a limited time.
Administrative detention orders are used as a preventative measure against
persons posing grave threats to the security of the West Bank or its population,
such as persons directly involved in terrorism, whose detention is considered to
be absolutely necessary for imperative reasons of security."
There are many safeguards
incorporated into the process of detaining someone who is deemed a security
risk, and a legal procedure must be followed. When you see this, you
understand that we are not talking about the IDF arbitrarily grabbing people and
locking them up.
~~~~~~~~~~
MK Danny Danon, who has been very
much a lone voice of protest lately, says he intends to bring the signed deal to
the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee in order to stop its
implementation.
Credit:
DannyDanon
Good thought, but his chances
of success are close to nil.
~~~~~~~~~~
Late yesterday the prime
minister's spokesman, Mark Regev, announced that the concessions to the
prisoners were made as a confidence-building gesture to PA president Abbas, in
the hopes that it would bring peace closer. Abbas had made a request that
the prisoners' demands be heeded, you see. (And, I will add, he also asked
Molcho for the return of the bodies of 100 terrorists buried here, and this is
to be done.)
This, even more than the
commitment secured from the prisoner leaders, is laughable. But so
pathetic, it's terribly hard to laugh.
~~~~~~~~~~
First, it's quite clear that
Israeli officials had other reasons for wanting to quiet things in the
prisons:
Today is Nakba day. Nakba
means catastrophe in Arabic, and refers to the day (in the secular
calendar) that modern Israel was founded. In the Palestinian Arab
world it is marked by demonstrations and violence, so that every year Israeli
police and security forces gear up for trouble.
Credit:
Nowtheendbegins
Today started with a rocket fired
from Gaza, and Molotov cocktails in Hevron. During the course of the day,
there have been clashes between Arab demonstrators and Israeli forces in several
locations. Most disturbing is that some of the 200 Arab demonstrators at
Kever Rachel (Rachel's Tomb) outside of Bethlehem threw rocks at Jewish
worshippers.
Repeatedly -- in the last couple
of days -- it was said that Israeli officials were hoping to quell unrest in the
prisons before Nakba day, when it was anticipated the situation would get
considerably out of hand.
~~~~~~~~~~
Then too there is our relationship
with Egypt with regard to the negotiations, which I've already dealt with.
Egypt was much praised by the Arab world yesterday for what was achieved.
And there
is that unfortunate sensitivity to international criticism
leveled at us because we are so "cruel" to our prisoners.
~~~~~~~~~~
Presenting the concessions as a
voluntary gesture towards peace might have been an attempt to counter the
celebrations in Gaza and PA areas regarding the "victory" over Israel: It
puts a different spin on matters if we were doing this by choice and not
because we were coerced.
But giving
something to Abbas?? How many unreciprocated gestures has Israel made by
now? And precisely where has it gotten us? Laughable? Or
shameful?
Let's circle back for a moment to
the matter of Nakba Day, which Abbas's Palestinian Authority observes.
This is not an expression of longing for all the lands beyond the '67 lines, in
which to establish a state. The premise here is that Israel does not have
a right to the lands within the '67 lines -- that is, that
Israel is not legitimate in any configuration.
How is peace possible with an
entity that maintains this position? And how is it imagined that "gestures' such
as giving murders of Jews more privileges in Israeli prisons will bring us even
remotely closer to peace?
~~~~~~~~~~
It's not difficult to understand
what's going on, however. And this allows me to segue right into my next,
related, topic:
Prime Minister Netanyahu is back
in his "Look world, I'm the good guy and not the impediment to peace"
mode.
Just a couple of days ago,
Netanyahu's envoy, Yitzhak Molcho, carried a letter from the prime minister to
Abbas. Its contents were not revealed, officially. But as is the way in
such situations, portions of the letter were leaked. Haaretz, citing
someone who saw the letter, said it "included a pledge by Netanyahu to
establish a demilitarized Palestinian state in keeping with the principle of a
two-state solution."
~~~~~~~~~~
A great deal has been made of this
by media sources, who are saying that the letter, in writing on official
stationery, represents a step forward in his commitment to the two-state
solution. I'm not at all certain that this is the case: Netanyahu has made
similar statements in various public pronouncements, most notably in his speech
at Ben Gurion University.
Yes, it's in writing. But it is
not a document that -- to the very best of my knowledge -- had the official
backing of the Cabinet or the Inner Cabinet or the Knesset. It was
Netanyahu's letter, and debate centers around whether this carries much in the
way of "official" weight. Not so very long ago, Minister Benny
Begin declared that Netanyahu's Ben Gurion speech "did not speak for the
government."
Is it a small additional slide
down that slippery slope upon which the prime minister situates himself?
Possibly.
``
The point is made in some quarters
that while he expresses commitment to a peace deal, he sets out security
parameters, including that business of a "demilitarized state," that the PLO
will never, ever accept.
~~~~~~~~~~
With regard to being
"demilitarized," please read what Jonathan Tobin has written regarding the fact
that the PA is currently armed to the teeth and seeking additional
weapons.
They'll not agree to being
demilitarized in our lifetimes.
The bottom line, says Tobin, is
that "Abbas has demonstrated time and again that he isn't willing or capable of
signing a peace agreement that would recognize the legitimacy of a Jewish state
no matter where its borders are drawn."
Netanyahu full well knows
this.
~~~~~~~~~~
I think in part the prime minister
may be playing to the left flank of his enlarged coalition. But even more
he's playing to this:
The EU, after the monthly meeting
of its foreign ministers on Monday, issued a statement that -- even after an
effort by Italy to modify it -- was sharply critical of Israel, which is
allegedly a stumbling block to "peace." Allusions were
made to marked acceleration of settlement construction, formalization of
the status of three outposts, and the proposal to relocate Migron to another
hill "within the occupied Palestinian territory."
The EU is totally devoid of the
integrity that permits comments on these issues. And I would prefer a
different response here in Jerusalem.
But our prime minister handles
matters as is his wont.
~~~~~~~~~~
I had written about two similar
versions of the "Illegal Outposts" legislation that were to be brought to the
Knesset this week. A decision on doing this is awaiting the word from the
prime minister regarding allowing people to vote their consciences and not
adhere to party or coalition lines.
In light of what I've just written
above, I have the feeling that this is not going to be forthcoming right
now. And that will be very unfortunate, very sad, if it is
so.
~~~~~~~~~~
Let me close with this short good
news clip about Israel from the people who brought you "Israel
Inside":
Always, always, the good news
too.
~~~~~~~~~~
©
Arlene Kushner. This material is produced by Arlene Kushner,
functioning as an independent journalist. Permission is granted for it to be
reproduced only
with
proper attribution.
This material
is transmitted by Arlene only to persons who have requested it or agreed to
receive it. If you are on the list and wish to be removed, contact Arlene and
include your name in the text of the
message.
No comments:
Post a Comment