House moves to cut Egypt military aid by $200m

Potentially a major development in US-Egypt relations, if it holds up:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The House of Representatives on Tuesday advanced legislation aimed at pressuring Egypt to improve its human rights record by withholding some military aid until progress is made.

The House Appropriations Committee approved a wide-ranging foreign aid bill for next year that would hold back $200 million in military funds for Egypt until the close U.S. ally takes steps to curb police abuses, reform its judicial system and stop weapons smuggling from Egypt to Gaza.

This appears for now to be essentially a threat, albeit a highly symbolic one:

“The $200 million cut is substantial,” said Rep. James Moran (news, bio, voting record), a Virginia Democrat on the House panel. “Our ally is not upholding the principles that define us.”

Rep. Nita Lowey (news, bio, voting record), a New York Democrat who will steer the foreign aid bill through the House, said she hoped Egypt would quickly get the message from Congress and make progress on human rights matters before lawmakers finish work on the legislation later this year.

I was in Washington a few weeks ago and interviewed several Egypt-watchers there — including administration officials — who did not think this would happen, and hence I tend to see this as a threat that is unlikely to actually be implemented. I have also received the same impression from Congressional staffers and other senior American officials I’ve recently spoken to on the subject. More on this in the morning…

Announcing Conflict Blotter

Those of you who’ve read this blog for a few years will remember Charles Levinson, who in 2004-2005 was a regular contributor. Charles left Egypt a couple of years ago and after a stint in Iraq ended up in Jerusalem, where he currently works for the Sunday Telegraph. Over the last week he’s set up a new blog of his own at www.conflictblotter.com. It already has some great live reporting from Gaza, where Charles currently is, including coverage of the renewed fighting between Fatah and Hamas:

Protracted firefights raged though the night and are continuing with no let up. We barely slept and were tossed from our beds multiple times by nearby explosions. The windows in the building next door shattered at one point. It’s 7 a.m. now and there is no sign that things are quieting. Loud explosions and the constant rattle of gunfire can be heard from near and far. We’re located just north of Abbas’ compound, and are pinned down for now in our apartment, but what we’re hearing is that this is going on throughout Gaza City and northern Gaza.

This is far more than a skirmish. This is a sustained hours long firefight. Unlike past infighting here, this fighting, for the first time, seems to have engaged the full strength and firepower of the Palestinian security services.

The latest bit of news we’ve heard is that Fatah spokesman Maher Mikdad, with whom we had an interview skedded for today, is caught in his house which is surrounded and under siege by Hamas.

Bookmark it now!

Norman Finkelstein denied tenure

I don’t really have anything to add to what Richard Silverstein has written on the subject. It’s sad for Finkelstein, sad for DePaul University, and sad for academia generally speaking, especially as it is generally recognized that Finkelstein is an accomplished scholar and it appears he was denied tenure essentially because of his personality. Finkelstein is an aggressive debater, some people (even among his ideological allies) may think he is too polemical but I think that kind of aggressivity is essential when the party he opposes (Alan Dershowitz and his ilk) had the resources to wage entire campaigns of obfuscation and slander.

See also Kafr al-Hanadwa and of course Finkelstein’s own website, where there is a statement of support by noted Holocaust historian Raul Hilberg as well as an interesting interview on the 1967 war I recently listened to.

And of course, if you haven’t already, read his books:


Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict, New and Revised Edition

The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering, New Edition 2nd Edition

Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History

P.S. Can someone explain to me whether this means it is unlikely Finkelstein will be hired anywhere else? Can a campaign be organized for him to be hired elsewhere? Perhaps in the region, since Finkelstein is interested in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict…

Iraq’s war economy

Finally, here’s (part of) the story behind the news: The authors Christopher Parker and Pete W. Moore in the latest MERIP issue analyze Iraq’s war economy and see much of the motives behind the insurgency against the US-led occupation in decades-old gray economic structures that are challenged by the new guys in power.

Throughout the 1990s, most of Iraq’s oil was transported in relatively small tanker trucks—to Jordan and Turkey with dispensation from Washington and undercover to Syria and the Gulf. As the pipelines to Turkey and the Gulf were turned back on in 2003, most of these truckers—many of whom had close ties with, and indeed colleagues in, neighboring countries—were out of a job. Hence, it is not surprising to learn that pipeline attacks “are now orchestrated by [insurgents and criminal gangs] to force the government to import and distribute as much fuel as possible using thousands of tanker trucks.

The authors challenge the mainstream view (and thereby also the whole reconstruction ideology) that in pre-invasion Iraq the state still functioned as a regulatory agent and controlled much of the Iraqi economy.

Washing their hands of any responsibility for the violence that plagues Iraq, they present the insurgency as springing from a yearning for lost domination on the part of groups linked to the Saddam-era state. This is the statist narrative—the idea that Saddam’s regime controlled everything worth controlling before it was overthrown.

Highly interesting are the remarks on the links to Iraq’s neighbors, most notably Jordan:

The political and social histories of modern Iraq and Jordan are bound tightly together. The deep ties between families, tribes, political movements and economic actors across the borders of these two countries have a history that, by and large, has yet to be written.

From the article it also becomes clear that the 2003 invasion merely finished off what was left of the prosperous nation that Iraq was in 1980. The US got most of the job done by sponsoring Saddam in the 80s and engineering UN sanctions in the 90s.

Abunimah: It’s not just the occupation

The great Ali Abunimah has another excellent reflection on the debate around 1967 that cuts through the bullshit:

“Forty years ago today was the last day the citizens of Israel were a free people in their own land,” wrote Ha’aretz columnist Akiva Eldar on June 4. “It was the last day we lived here without living other peoples’ lives.”

This sums up the cherished mythology of what is still called the Israeli left and much of the international peace process industry — that prior to the 1967 war, Israel was pure and on the right path. Had it not “become an occupier” the region would have had a happier history and Israel would be an accepted member of the international community rather than a pariah wearing the “apartheid” label.

The exclusive focus on the occupation serves increasingly to obscure that the conflict in Palestine is at its core a colonial struggle whose boundaries do not conveniently coincide with the lines of June 4, 1967.

I do not often agree with leaders of the settler movement, but they speak a truth Israeli and American liberals prefer to ignore when they point out that the settlements in Gaza and the West Bank built after 1967 are not morally different from towns and kibbutzim inside Israel’s pre-1967 borders. The Israel that was created in 1948 was established on land violently expropriated from ethnically-cleansed Palestinians. Israel has been maintained as a “Jewish state” only by the imposition of numerous laws that maintain the inferior status of its Palestinian citizens and forcibly exclude Palestinian refugees.

Even Israelis who condemn the occupation support these racist laws. There is an Israeli consensus that it is legitimate to defend the Jewish state against the so-called “demographic threat” from Palestinians who will be again, as they were prior to 1948, the majority population group in Palestine-Israel despite six decades of Israeli efforts to reduce their numbers with expulsions, massacres and administrative ethnic cleansing. It is the imperative to gerrymander an enclave with a Jewish majority rather than any recognition of Palestinian equality that underpins whatever limited rhetorical Israeli support exists for a Palestinian state.

I would add that’s it’s also not just about the Palestinians, but about the fundamentally destabilizing role of an uneven regional balance of power that US-Israeli regional hegemony has created over the last half-century.

CoE report documents rendition program

More fine reporting by Stephen Grey, who literally wrote the book on rendition, about the upcoming Council of Europe findings on the CIA flights in Europe:

Although suspicions about the secret CIA prisons have existed for more than a year, the council’s report, seen by the Guardian, appears to offer the first concrete evidence. It also details the prisons’ operations and the identities of some of the prisoners.

The council has also established that within weeks of the 9/11 attacks, Nato signed an agreement with the US that allowed civilian jets used by the CIA during its so-called extraordinary rendition programme to move across member states’ airspace. Its report states: “We have sufficient grounds to declare that the highest state authorities were aware of the CIA’s illegal activities on their territories.” The council’s investigators believe that agreement may have been illegal.

. . .

The 19-month inquiry by the council, which promotes human rights across Europe, was headed by Dick Marty, a Swiss senator and former state prosecutor. He said: “What was previously just a set of allegations is now proven: large numbers of people have been abducted from various locations across the world and transferred to countries where they have been persecuted and where it is known that torture is common practice.”

His report says there is “now enough evidence to state that secret detention facilities run by the CIA [existed] in Europe from 2003 to 2005, in particular in Poland and Romania”.

Yet another reason I think the EU should have never expanded to include Eastern European countries.

Update: Also see HRW’s backgrounder on U.S. Responsibility for Enforced Disappearances in the “War on Terror”.

Shame on you, Tabsir

Without wanting to get into the recent decision by the British Academics’ Union to pass a motion encouraging a boycott of Israeli universities and academics (I fully support this show of solidarity which remains, after all, optional and provides a course of action for selective boycott of academics who are in bed with the Israeli security establishment), I was rather dismayed to see this critic of the boycott use a picture of Nazi persecution of Jews in the 1930s. It’s especially sad as this site, Tabsir, often has great posts on things Middle Eastern by well-known specialists in their fields. So what is that picture saying? That the majority of British academics who voted in favor of the boycott are Nazis? That they are anti-Semites? This is typical of the use of alleged anti-Semitism to deflect justified criticism of Israel, which after all has carried a brutal occupation for many decades. I expect it from Likudnik hacks like Abraham Foxman and the ADL, but not of Tabsir.

Tony Blair, the dictators’ sharmouta

Tony Blair on the recent allegations that Saudi Prince Bandar pocketed a $2 billion commission on an arms deal with BAe:

“This investigation, if it had it gone ahead, would have involved the most serious allegations in investigations being made into the Saudi royal family,” Blair said at a meeting of the Group of Eight nations in Germany.

He added that, “My job is to give advice as to whether that is a sensible thing in circumstances where I don’t believe the investigation incidentally would have led anywhere except to the complete wreckage of a vital strategic relationship for our country. . . . Quite apart from the fact that we would have lost thousands, thousands of British jobs.”

This a week after Tony Blair heaps praise on the regime of Muammar Qadhafi in Libya as a major oil deal is signed with BP.

Corruption, the Arab world’s number one export. In fact when you think about it, between the Arabs’ petrodollars and the Israelis’ various mafias (diamonds, ecstasy, weapons, etc.), this region is probably the world’s nexus of sleaze.

Update: This story has more details on the Bandar-BAe-Blair scandal. And a note: sharmouta is Arabic slang for slut or whore.

MERIP roundtable on 1967

MERIP has a roundtable of Israeli and Palestinian views on 1967. I thought this point by Samera Esmeir was particularly worth highlighting:

1967 was a year of setback for the Palestinians not only because Israel occupied the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, but also because the new occupation effectively set the older one of 1948 in stone. As political attention quickly turned to the newly occupied areas, it became more difficult to mount challenges to the earlier stages of the occupation, or even to name them occupation. The “occupied Palestinian territories” became the name of the Palestinian areas occupied in 1967, not in 1948. While Israel, in many of its official narratives, refers to the events of 1948 as occupation, the reference to 1948 as occupation dropped from the international vocabulary, effectively naturalizing the existence of Israel and concealing the violence constitutive of its creation.

Since then, attempts constantly to “catch up” with new forms of Israeli subjugation shaped much of Palestinian politics, as Israel consistently raised the stakes on its dispossession of the Palestinians. If the settlements and green areas were the main vehicle for dispossessing Palestinians and confiscating their lands, soon the networks of highways and the separation wall became new mechanisms. But among many Palestinians, this “catching up” produced tragic politics characterized by amnesia. For, if the Palestinians were expected to respond systematically to the newly enacted empirical ends of the occupation, they had to suspend their responses to previous ends. The trouble was that new ends were always being introduced.

Chilling is the great Palestinian analyst Mouin Rabbani’s look at what we might be commemorating on the 50th anniversary of the 1967 war:

June 5, 2007 may well be the last time we commemorate a further decade of Israeli military occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. At the rate things are going — the accelerated colonization of West Bank territory most visibly represented by the wall that Israel is building, and unprecedented levels of international neglect/support for such policies — these are unlikely to remain occupied territories for much longer.

Prolonged military occupation lasting successive decades was an untenable proposition to begin with, and has been sustained only by international law, the refusal of the international community to formally recognize Israel’s territorial claims and, most pertinently, the presence and resistance of the Palestinians in the form of individual communities and, until recently, a coherent national movement.

By 2017 that is likely to change. How the international community seeks to accommodate Israel’s claims to strategic portions of the West Bank while maintaining effective control over the rest, and how the Palestinians and others in the region will respond, are interesting questions. The answers are likely to combine elements of the nineteenth, twentieth and twenty-first centuries: the colonialism and ethnic structures of the first, the formal adherence to independence of the second, and the belief of the third that advanced technology can resolve the political challenge resulting from the inherent contradictions of the first two.

Absent drastic changes, remaining doubts about the feasibility of a two-state settlement are also going to be removed in the coming years. Many believe the point of no return has already been passed. Most view it as imminent. The one certainty is that the two-state settlement paradigm is not going to be replaced by that of a secular democratic state — desirable as the latter may be. Rather, the more likely scenario is a regression toward existential conflict, on a more bloody scale than seen thus far and probably with a greater regional dimension than in recent decades.

As a generally pro-Oslo person in my student days in the 1990s, I increasingly believe that another regional war over Israel is not only likely but perhaps the only way to resolve the conflict. But because of the festering occupation and international irresponsibility towards Israel (from both the US and EU), it is probably going to be resolved in a bloodier and more radical way than any of the previous conflicts over that wretched piece of land.