Sources of Leverage

accessed 19 Apr 2009, dated 10 Apr:

But what about pressure on Israel?  The United States has only rarely put (mild) pressure on Israel in recent decades (and never for very long), even when the Israeli government was engaged in actions (such as building settlements) that the U.S. government opposed.  The question is: if the Netanyahu/Lieberman government remains intransigent, what should Obama do?  Are there usable sources of leverage that the United States could employ to nudge Israel away from the vision of “Greater Israel” and towards a genuine two-state solution?  Here are a few ideas.

1. Cut the aid package? If you add it all up, Israel gets over $3 billion in U.S. economic and military aid each year, which works out to about $500 per Israeli citizen. There’s a lot of potential leverage here, but it’s probably not the best stick to use, at least not at first. Trying to trim or cut the aid package will trigger an open and undoubtedly ugly confrontation in Congress (where the influence of AIPAC and other hard-line groups in the Israel lobby is greatest). So that’s not where I’d start. Instead, I’d consider a few other options, such as:

2. Change the Rhetoric. The Obama administration could begin by using different language to describe certain Israeli policies.  While reaffirming America’s commitment to Israel’s existence as a Jewish-majority state, it could stop referring to settlement construction as “unhelpful,” a word that makes U.S. diplomats sound timid and mealy-mouthed.  Instead, we could start describing the settlements as “illegal” or as “violations of international law.”  The UN Charter forbids acquisition of territory by force and the Fourth Geneva Convention bars states from transfering their populations (even if voluntarily) to areas under belligerent occupation.  This is why earlier U.S. administrations described the settlements as illegal, and why the rest of the world has long regarded them in the same way.  U.S. officials could even describe Israel’s occupation as “contrary to democracy,” “unwise,” “cruel,” or “unjust.”  Altering the rhetoric would send a clear signal to the Israeli government and its citizens that their government’s opposition to a two-state solution was jeopardizing the special relationship.

3. Support a U.N. Resolution Condemning the Occupation.  Since 1972, the United States has vetoed forty-three U.N. Security Council resolutions that were critical of Israel (a number greater than the sum of all vetoes cast by the other permanent members).  If the Obama administration wanted to send a clear signal that it was unhappy with Israel’s actions, it could sponsor a resolution condemning the occupation and calling for a two-state solution.  Taking an active role in drafting such a measure would also ensure that it said exactly what we wanted, and avoided criticisms that we didn’t want included.

4. Downgrade existing arrangements for “strategic cooperation.”  There are now a number of institutionalized arrangements for security cooperation between the Pentagon and the Israel Defense Forces and between U.S. and Israeli intelligence. The Obama administration could postpone or suspend some of these meetings, or start sending lower-grade representatives to them. There is in fact a precedent for this step: after negotiating the original agreements for a “strategic partnership,” the Reagan administration suspended them following Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 1982. Today, such a step would surely get the attention of Israel’s security establishment.

5. Reduce U.S. purchases of Israeli military equipment. In addition to providing Israel with military assistance (some of which is then used to purchase U.S. arms), the Pentagon also buys millions of dollars of weaponry and other services from Israel’s own defense industry. Obama could instruct Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to slow or decrease these purchases, which would send an unmistakable signal that it was no longer “business-as-usual.” Given the battering Israel’s economy has taken in the current global recession, this step would get noticed too.

6. Get tough with private organizations that support settlement activity. As David Ignatius recently noted in the Washington Post, many private donations to charitable organizations operating in Israel are tax-deductible in the United States, including private donations that support settlement activity. This makes no sense: it means the American taxpayer is indirectly subsidizing activities that are contrary to stated U.S. policy and that actually threaten Israel’s long-term future.  Just as the United States has gone after charitable contributions flowing to terrorist organizations, the U.S. Treasury could crack down on charitable organizations (including those of some prominent Christian Zionists) that are supporting these illegal activities. 

7. Place more limits on U.S. loan guarantees. The United States has provided billions of dollars of loan guarantees to Israel on several occasions, which enabled Israel to borrow money from commercial banks at lower interest rates.  Back in 1992, the first Bush administration held up nearly $10 billion in guarantees until Israel agreed to halt settlement construction and attend the Madrid peace conference, and the dispute helped undermine the hard-line Likud government of Yitzhak Shamir and bring Yitzhak Rabin to power, which in turn made the historic Oslo Agreement possible.  

8. Encourage other U.S. allies to use their influence too. In the past, the United States has often pressed other states to upgrade their own ties with Israel.  If pressure is needed, however, the United States could try a different tack.  For example, we could quietly encourage the EU not to upgrade its relations with Israel until it had agreed to end the occupation.”

Can the United States put pressure on Israel?: A user’s guide

Jewish State

accessed 17 Apr 2009, dated 16 Apr:

“Israel’s prime minister has told a visiting US envoy that the Palestinians must recognise Israel as a “Jewish state” before it will discuss establishing an independent Palestinian state.

…

Earlier, after meeting Avigdor Lieberman, the Israeli foreign minister, Mitchell had repeated Washington’s support for a Palestinian state.

“I reiterated to the foreign minister that US policy favours, with respect to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, a two-state solution which will have a Palestinian state living in peace alongside the Jewish state of Israel,” he said.”

Israel demands recognition

accessed 20 Apr, dated 19 Apr:

“Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is willing to begin negotiations with the Palestinians without demanding they first recognize Israel as a Jewish state, sources in his office said on Sunday.

However, the sources added that Netanyahu would condition future developments for a peace settlement on this demand.

The U.S. State Department on Sunday rejected as unacceptable the prime minister’s demand last week that Palestinians recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people as a condition for renewing peace talks. “

Netanyahu: Peace talks can begin before PA recognizes Israel as Jewish

Right to Protest

accessed 13 Apr 2009, dated 12 Apr:

“The Kiryat Gat Magistrate’s Court Sunday harshly criticized the detention of rightist activists during the Sderot march earlier in the day. The presiding judge, Nechama Netzer, ordered the immediate release of all seven detainees.

 

 

“The use of power and detention authority in order to avert this right of expression, beyond constituting a case of silencing others, indicates the arrival of very dark times across the State of Israel,” the judge said.

…

However, Justice Netzer was unconvinced by the police’s logic, stressing that the freedom to protest is a fundamental right.

 

 

“Is it imaginable that the accused, whose only sin was being in Sderot or planning to reach Sderot, will be held, arrested, and possibly detained for another night, just because of their desire to protest?” the judge said. “It appears that the answer to that is clear, and woe on us if we reach days where people are scared to legally expresses their views, even through a protest or taking part in a legal protest.”

…

The attorney for the seven suspects, David Halevy, also had harsh words for authorities.

 

 

“We are witnessing disturbing government conduct that is reminiscent of the conduct of states stuck in the dark ages, where police detain whoever wishes to exercise their fundamental rights without checking what’s going on,” he said. “The police used their powers in an improper and grave manner.”

 

 

Justice Netzer added that the information she was presented with made it difficult to understand what prompted the police decision to release some detainees while keeping others in detention.

 

 

“It appears that the utilization of the authority to hold up and detain suspects was only meant to ensure the accused won’t be able to exercise their right to demonstrate and express their legal and legitimate protest,” she said. “I regret the fact that at the end of the day, and as result of the way things were done, the police got what they wanted and the accusers were shunned their legal right to protest and express themselves.”

 

 

The judge added that the arrests were unreasonable and disproportional, thereby ordering the immediate release of all seven suspects. Meanwhile, National Union Knesset Member Michael Ben Ari turned to Internal Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch and demanded that he set up a commission of inquiry that would look into Sunday’s arrests. “

Court frees rightist detainees

Employment Discrimination

accessed 6 Apr 2009, dated 5 Apr:

“Mr Badarne of the Laborers’ Voice said he has heard similar stories from other Arab workers.

“Laws against discrimination exist in Israel. The problem is that there appears to be no interest in enforcing them.

“If I go to the shopping mall, even the notices in the windows asking for sales assistants require army service from applicants.

“At least in these cases we can prove that it is racism we are dealing with.

“More sinister, however, is the more recent practice of employers telling Arab applicants that a position is already filled to avoid the threat of legal action. There the racism is veiled.”

Large sections of the economy are officially off limits to Arab workers because they fall within what Israel defines as its security industries, especially weapons manufacturers, the airports and national airline, ports and refineries, and the various security agencies.

But he said many large state-owned corporations that are not involved in security fields were also reluctant to employ Arabs, sending a message to smaller firms that discrimination was legitimate.

According to figures provided in 2004 by Nachman Tal, a former deputy head of the Shin Bet, the domestic security service, only six of the 13,000 employees of the Israeli Electricity Corp were Arabs.

Ehud Olmert, Israel’s former prime minister, admitted racial discrimination was rife in a speech to the parliament in December. “It is terrible that there is not even one Arab employee [out of 900] at the Bank of Israel.”

Of the civil service, he added: “There is no arguing that some government ministries did not hire Arabs for years.”

Government statistics show that 12.5 per cent of all Arab college graduates are unemployed, nearly four times the figure for Jewish graduates.

Even those who do work are often forced into low-paying and menial jobs, Mr Badarne said.

Mr Salami, who trained as a schoolteacher, said that, among the 20 guards from his village, four were lawyers.

Mr Badarne pointed out that the long-standing Zionist principle of “Hebrew labour”, or Jews employing only other Jews, still had great influence in Israeli society.

He was especially critical of the country’s trade union federation, the Histadrut, which has traditionally also been one of the country’s largest employers.

It did not allow any admission of Arab workers until a decade after Israel’s creation and even then it set up a separate, and marginal, Arab section within the organisation, he said.”

Arabs left on the wrong side of the tracks in Israel

accessed and dated 19 Apr:

“Israel Railways changed its story Sunday over the dismissal of at least 40 Arab employees, telling a court that mistakes made by the employees prompted it to introduce new employment conditions.

The government company said it made the decision in order to “improve the level of supervision,” the first time such a claim had been made since the workers lost their jobs.”

Israel Railways changes its story over dismissal of Arab employees

Land Confiscated, 2009

accessed 4 Apr 2009, dated 2 Apr, in full:

“Israeli authorities issued orders to confiscate more than one thousand dunums of Palestinian lands of the village of Qaryut south of Nablus, head of the villages and municipal affairs office in Nablus Ghassan Daghlas said on Thursday.

On the land a road will be constructed linking the three illegal settlements, He noted that “this decision aims at to construct a three kilometer road to link the Israeli illegal settlement of Shilo, and the illegal settlement outposts of Hayovel and a second known locally as the “Qaryut” outpost.

Daghlas noted that Israeli bulldozers had been surveying the area for days, and that there seemed to be a coordinated effort between soldiers and settlers, who constructed a road barrier near the village of Der Sharaf, while military crews expanded the Yitzhar road after confiscating Palestinian lands adjacent to it.

The village representative also mentioned that several home demolition orders were served in the past weeks in the nearby villages of Tana and At-Tawila, both south of Nablus.

Head of the village council of Qaryot, Abed An-Naser Badawi, told Ma’an that “the settlers along with the soldiers blocked the southern entrance of the village and began to confiscate the land.” The day before he said settlers distributed written orders saying the land would be confiscated.

Qaryot village has a population of more than 2700 people is surrounded with a number of Israeli settlements.”

Thousands of dunums confiscated for Israeli settler road near Nablus

Mevasseret Adumim – E1

accessed and dated 4 Apr 2009:

“Israeli army radio reported that the deal was struck between Mr Netanyahu and Mr Lieberman as part of the negotiations to form a government, and it would allow 3,000 homes to be built on E1.”

New town may be death blow to hopes for Israel peace

Israel and Occupation/Warfare

accessed 4 Apr 2009, dated 2 Apr:

“Israel pressed the shift to justify its assassinations of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories, which clearly violated settled international law. Israel had practiced “targeted killings” since the 1970s – always denying that it did so – but had recently stepped up their frequency, by spectacular means (such as air strikes) that rendered denial futile.

President Bill Clinton charged the 2001 Mitchell Committee with investigating the causes of the second Palestinian uprising and recommending how to restore calm in the region. Israeli lawyers pleaded their case to the committee for armed conflict. The committee responded by criticizing the blanket application of the model to the uprising, but did not repudiate it altogether.

…

Israel’s campaign to rewrite international law to its advantage is deliberate and knowing. As the former head of Israel’s 20-lawyer International Law Division in the Military Advocate General’s office, Daniel Reisner, recently stated: “If you do something for long enough, the world will accept it. The whole of international law is now based on the notion that an act that is forbidden today becomes permissible if executed by enough countries … International law progresses through violations. We invented the targeted assassination thesis and we had to push it. At first there were protrusions that made it hard to insert easily into the legal molds. Eight years later, it is in the center of the bounds of legitimacy.”

In the Gaza fighting, Israel has again tried to transform international law through violations. For example, its military lawyers authorized the bombing of a police cadet graduation ceremony, killing at least 63 young Palestinian men. Under international law, such deliberate killings of civilian police are war crimes. Yet Israel treats all employees of the Hamas-led government in the Gaza Strip as terrorists, and thus combatants. Secretaries, court clerks, housing officials, judges – all were, in Israeli eyes, legitimate targets for liquidation.

Israeli jurists also instructed military commanders that any Palestinian who failed to evacuate a building or area after warnings of an impending bombardment was a “voluntary human shield” and thus a participant in combat, subject to lawful attack. One method of warning employed by Israeli gunners, dubbed “knocking on the roof,” was to fire first at a building’s corner, then, a few minutes later, to strike more structurally vulnerable points. To imagine that Gazan civilians – penned into the tiny Gaza Strip by Israeli troops, and surrounded by the chaos of battle – understood this signal is fanciful at best.”

Israel’s Impunity Must End: Changing the Rules of War

Israelis Killed – 2009

Civilian – Settler:  1 (Israeli boy killed in axe attack )

___

Minor:  1 (Israeli boy killed in axe attack )

Tax-Exempt Donations for West Bank Settlements

accessed 30 Mar 2009, dated 26 Mar:

“For many years, the United States has had a policy against spending aid money to fund Israeli settlements in the West Bank, which successive administrations have regarded as an obstacle to peace. Yet private organizations in the United States continue to raise tax-exempt contributions for the very activities that the government opposes.

There’s nothing illegal about the charitable contributions to pro-settlement organizations, which are documented in filings with the Internal Revenue Service. They’re similar to tax-exempt donations made to thousands of foreign organizations around the world through groups that are often described as “American friends of” the recipient.

But critics of Israeli settlements question why American taxpayers are supporting indirectly, through the exempt contributions, a process that the government condemns. A search of IRS records identified 28 U.S. charitable groups that made a total of $33.4 million in tax-exempt contributions to settlements and related organizations between 2004 and 2007.

…

One of the Israeli organizations that has led the way in developing this area of East Jerusalem is called Ir David, or City of David. Like other pro-settlement groups, it has an active fundraising effort in the United States. According to Form 990s filed with the IRS, Friends of Ir David raised $8.7 million in 2004, $1.2 million in 2005 and $2.7 million in 2006.

…

Hebron is another controversial area where settlements have received substantial tax-exempt gifts from America. According to IRS records, the Hebron Fund donated $860,637 in 2005 and $967,954 in 2006 for “social and educational well-being”; the fund’s online mission statement makes clear this is for Israeli settlers inside the city. The Hebron settlement of Kiryat Arba received $730,000 in 2006 from a group called American Friends of Yeshiva High School of Kiryat Arba.

Often the U.S. charities will specify that their gifts are going to charities in Israel, even though the recipients are in the West Bank, which the United States regards as occupied territory. American Friends of the College of Judea and Samaria, for example, said its donations were “to provide for the expansion and furtherance of the needs of educational institutions in Israel,” even though the college is in the settlement of Ariel. Similarly, other filings speak of gifts to “Elon Moreh, Israel,” “Gush Etzion, Israel,” “Karnei Shomron, Israel,” “Efrat, Israel,” and “Bat Ayin, Israel,” even though those settlements are all in the West Bank.

A 2005 report by the Congressional Research Service stated: “The United States stipulates that U.S. aid funds cannot be used in the occupied territories.” The issue came to a head during a 1992 dispute over the use of U.S. loan guarantees. A Jan. 25, 1992, story in the New York Times said that Secretary of State James A. Baker had cautioned Israel’s ambassador “that the administration was not going to underwrite Israeli policies that fundamentally contradict its own principles and long-stated policies.” “

A Tax Break Fuels Middle East Friction

accessed and dated 1 Apr, in full:

“A US civil rights group has filed several official complaints challenging the tax-exempt status of groups raising funds for the development of illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) filed the complaints on 27 March with the US Department of the Treasury, including the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) calling for investigations into the activities of several organizations.

Among other allegations, the ADC is alleging that these groups are using funds in violation of their stated purpose “and to support illegal and terrorist activities abroad,” according to an ADC statement.

“The construction of settlements in occupied territory is illegal under international humanitarian law. The use of tax-exempt status to raise funds for these types of activities is also illegal under US law,” the ADC said.

The ADC also noted that stated US policy is against all forms of settlement activity. Every US president since Jimmy Carter has criticized Israeli settlement in the occupied West Bank. Most recently, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton criticized Israeli government initiatives to expand these settlements. “

US civil rights group challenges tax-exempt status of pro-settler organizations

Spain Opens Torture Investigation

accessed 30 Mar 2009, dated 28 Mar:

“A Spanish court has taken the first steps toward opening a criminal investigation into allegations that six former high-level Bush administration officials violated international law by providing the legal framework to justify the torture of prisoners at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, an official close to the case said.

Baltasar Garzón, front, in Madrid. He has built an international reputation by bringing cases against human rights violators.

The case, against former Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and others, was sent to the prosecutor’s office for review by Baltasar Garzón, the crusading investigative judge who ordered the arrest of the former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet. The official said that it was “highly probable” that the case would go forward and that it could lead to arrest warrants.

…

The complaint under review also names John C. Yoo, the former Justice Department lawyer who wrote secret legal opinions saying the president had the authority to circumvent the Geneva Conventions, and Douglas J. Feith, the former under secretary of defense for policy.”

Spanish Court Weighs Inquiry on Torture for 6 Bush-Era Officials

the article also mentions this, which I had missed:

“This year for the first time, the United States used a law that allows it to prosecute torture in other countries. On Jan. 10, a federal court in Miami sentenced Chuckie Taylor, the son of the former Liberian president, to 97 years in a federal prison for torture, even though the crimes were committed in Liberia. “

accessed 25 Apr, dated 23 Apr:

“A Spanish court considering whether to investigate former Bush administration officials for allegedly sanctioning torture of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay assigned the case to a new judge Thursday, a National Court spokeswoman told CNN.

Prosecutors at the court argued last week that the case should be dropped in Spain, but the new judge, investigating magistrate Eloy Velasco, will now have to decide whether to proceed or not, the spokeswoman said.”

Spanish court sends Guantanamo case to new judge