Sunday, June 3, 2012

1987 killings of Muslim youths in Hashimpura by PAC....Swamy wants PC role probed in massacre

Subramanian Swamy, President of Janata Party, is a well-known Muslim baiter. He dutifully follows extremist Hindutva organisation RSS's agenda; at times exceeding RSS zeal and doggedness in pursuing Anti-Muslim projects. His latest case involved a judicial challenge to Kerala State's participation in an Islamic Non-Banking Financial project in Kerala. He lost on technicalities. It is therefore quite a surprise that the news has broken out in several media simultaneously, the Swamy has taken up the cause of Muslim victims of Hashimpura murder spree by PAC. Muslims have by and large castigated the Congress government for the blatant massacre of innocent Muslims. Swamy has focused on the role of current Home Minister, P. Chidambaram, who was a minister of state in Home Ministry at that time and had gone on for an Aeriel survey of the area one week before the massacre. Congress Party is widely believe to have been involved at some level with thousands of communal riots in which predominantly Muslims were targeted by both the mobs and police too. This is the first time, a single Congressman, with administrative responsibility has come under scrutiny. Swamy is thorough in his home work. If he has proof of the involvement of the present Home Minister in the 25 year old massacre of 41 innocent Muslims by Provincial Armed Constabulary, in the manner of Hitlerian executions, Swamy may get his ardent wish to see P. Chidambaram lose his ministry and pay for any acts of commission or omission during his long career at the top of Congress government. That would be a big blow to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh government and  the 2014 prospects of Sonia Congress, that heavily depends on Muslim vote bank endorsement to tide over it marginal electoral shortfalls. 

Swamy's hint to approach International Court of Justice under relevant Roman Statutes, should alert Muslims groups to study of the same approach in the case of Gujarat massacre.
Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai
<ghulammuhammed3@gmail.com>



Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2012 17:24:33 +0530
Subject: Fwd: Swamy wants PC role probed in massacre
From: arvind.lavakare@gmail.com
To: drmookhi@hotmail.com

This should interest you. And remember, Uttar Pradesh was, at the time of the massacre under reference, ruled by the Congress Party, with Veer Bahadur Singh as the Chief Minister.
 
Arvind Lavakare
: http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2012/06/swamy-wants-pc-role-probed-in-massacre.html

Swamy wants PC role probed in massacre
SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT  New Delhi | 3rd Jun
anata Party president Subramanian Swamy has accused Home Minister P. Chidambaram of having a hand in the shooting of 41 Muslim youth by the Police Armed Constabulary personnel during the communal riots in Meerut's Hashimpura in 1987. Swamy said he was going to file an application in the court to expand the scope of the inquiry to interrogate Chidambaram, who was then Minister of State for Internal Security.
"Not as an accused at the moment, but I am entering the matter with new material. He (Chidambaram) will definitely be made an accused. If you ask me, personally, I will say he is an accused," said Swamy. However, he said he would file the application on a later date.
Twenty-five years after the incident took place on 22 May 1987, the case is still going on at the Tees Hazari and the Ghaziabad Sessions Courts and the next date of hearing is 4 June.
"The Muslim youth, aged between 15-35 years, were picked up from Hashimpura by UP PAC (Provincial Armed Constabulary) personnel and taken by truck to Ganga Canal near Muradnagar, 20 km away, ordered to get off the truck one by one and shot. The bodies were thrown into the canal. But obviously some were not shot, but they feigned death," said Swamy. Some of these youth later turned witnesses to the cold-blooded killing.
Swamy said Chidambaram had visited Meerut during the communal tensions and even conducted an aerial survey of the area on 14 May 1987: "He (Chidambaram) admitted to this (aerial survey) in Parliament. On 20 May 1987, he took a meeting with the PAC people and the Chief Minister. He never admitted to this meeting. The then MP from the area, Mohsina Kidwai, was never called for the meeting."
Swamy said he has written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that a special probe should be instituted to investigate Chidambaram's role in the incident that became infamous as the Hashimpura massacre, failing which he would approach the International Court of Justice under Article 17 of the Rome Statutes.
Swamy had fasted unto death in August 1987, demanding an inquiry into the massacre by a Central agency. A year later, he took out a padayatra from Meerut to Lucknow demanding a probe in the killing.
HTTP://BHARATKALYAN97.BLOGSPOT.IN/2012/05/SEEKING-PC-AS-CO-ACCUSED-IN-GENOCIDE-OF.HTML

23.5.12

Seeking PC as co-accused in Hashimpura, Meerut genocide of Muslim youths in UP - Dr. Swamy demands Special Court


Janata Party President Subramanian Swamy, who had walked from Makanpur to the national capital in June 1987 and sat on a fast for a week demanding justice, has not lost hope: “Justice for Hashimpura victim is crucial to the existence of India as we know it.” http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/meerut-hashimpura-massacre-victims-await-justice/1/187360.html
May 23, 2012. India Today Archive, NATION, May 14, 2012 Story

Statement of Dr. Subramanian Swamy,
President of the Janata Party.

I demand that the Government set up a Special Court on the lines of 2G Spectrum matter to prosecute the culprits responsible for the State-sponsored genocide of Muslim youths belonging to the Hashimpura area of Meerut. This incident took place 25 years ago on the night between 22nd and 23rd May, 1987 when the U.P.PAC engaged in targeted killing of 42 Muslim youths. After a 7-day fast unto death undertaken by me at the Boat Club in August, 1987, the then Prime Minister Mr. Rajiv Gandhi to persuade me to break the fast, ordered an Inquiry. The report of the Inquiry Committee confirmed the basic facts I had alleged in several of my press conferences and which has been further upheld recently in India Today in its 14th May issue (Both Hindi and English editions).

The Government’s reluctance to take speedy action arises out of the involvement of the then Union Minister of State for Home Affairs, Mr. P. Chidambaram who directed the State-sponsored genocide of Muslim youths carried by the Provincial Armed Constabulary of U.P.

Although the prosecution of low level police personnel who carried out the dastardly killings is being carried in legal proceedings in Tis Hazari Court and Ghaziabad Sessions Court, the proceedings are taking place a snail’s pace, while those who ordered the genocide.

The Hashimpura State-sponsored genocide is a black mark on our ancient civilization and unprecedented since 1947. If the Prime Minister fails to take action, I shall seek impleadment in the courts to expedite the matter and seek Mr. Chidambaram be made co-accused.

( SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY )

Hashimpura massacre: Victims await justice
MOHAMMAD WAQAS | May 5, 2012 | 09:37

Zulfiqar Nasir
Zulfiqar Nasir 40

Nasir runs his father's company, which makes tubewell parts. "All of us were begging for our lives to be spared. In return, they were abusing us.Then I was shot and thrown into the canal. I don't knowhowlong I was senseless. When I regained consciousness, I found myself wounded and floating."

In Muslim pockets of Meerut, when someone wants to know how many years have elapsed since the Hashimpura massacre, the answer is usually the same: "It is as old as Zaibun Nisa's daughter." Zaibun, 47, lives in Hashimpura mohalla with her mother and her three daughters. With her old mother on a charpoy, Zaibun recalls, "It was an Alwida Juma (the last Friday of Ramadan, the month of fasting). My third daughter, Uzma, was born that day. Uzma's abba (father) gave her a fond look before leaving for prayers. He never returned."

It was 1987. The mood was tense and the environment vitiated in the backdrop of the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid row. On May 19, a riot erupted in Meerut, to control which the army, Central Reserve Police Force and Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) were called in, besides the Uttar Pradesh Police. On May 22, soon after the Friday prayers, the army combed Hashimpura and other Muslim localities in the city. It arrested 644 people, of which 150 were from Hashimpura, and handed them over to PAC. At least 50 youngsters from Hashimpura were herded into a pac truck (URU 1493) and taken away to an unknown destination. Zaibun's husband, Iqbal, was one of them. Nineteen armed pac men had stood guard over them. Except for five youngsters, it turned out to be their last Alwida Juma. The pac men killed them and threw their bodies into the Upper Ganga Canal at Muradnagar near Delhi and some in the Hindon river in Ghaziabad. Iqbal, who used to work at a lathe machine in Jummanpura, was shot in the head. His body was later fished out of the Hindon.


Zaibun Nisa
Zaibun Nisa 47

Her husband Iqbal, who used to work in Jummanpura, was shot in the head.His bodywas later fished out of the Hindon river."After five years of married life, it has been a long 25 years of dreary existence as a widow."
Besides these, eight people were beaten to death in police custody. They were: Zahir Ahmad, Moinuddin, Salim aka Sallu, Minu, Mohammad Usman, Jamil Ahmad, Din Mohammad and Master Hanif.

After Independence, this is the largest number of custodial deaths in a single episode. The state machinery aided, abetted, or overlooked ghastly crimes during the anti-Sikh riots of 1984 and Gujarat's anti-Muslim riots of 2002. In Hashimpura, the state was the executioner. Ironically, many culprits of the 1984 and 2002 killings have been brought to justice, but the killers of Hashimpura have not been touched.

Established as a mohalla in 1933 by Mufti Hashmi, Hashimpura has around 600 households. Zulfiqar Nasir lives at the end of Zaibun's lane. Mohammad Usman, Mohammad Naim, Babuddin, Mujibur Rahman and Nasir were all shot at and flung into the canal. But they were alive and managed to escape. One of them got in touch with then MP Syed Shahabuddin, who with then MP Chandra Shekhar brought the massacre out in the open. Protests erupted, forcing then chief minister Veer Bahadur Singh to order an inquiry by Crime Branch's Crime Investigation Department (CBCID).


Mujibur Rehman
Mujibur Rehman 44

The migrant from Bihar is a factoryworker. He was shot in the chest. The father of two says he received no compensation. He filed an FIR in Murad Nagar police station, Ghaziabad.
"I am always ready to depose in the case. We want justice to be done to the victims and the culprits to be punished."

With that began a game by the police and administration to save the guilty. The system did its best to protect guilty policemen. cbcid took six long years before filing its report in 1994. The government filed a case against 19 PAC jawans in a Ghaziabad court in 1996. The court issued six bailable and 17 non-bailable warrants against the accused, but they never turned up even though they were still in government service. After a lot of media pressure, in May 2000, 16 of the 19 turned up in court. Between June and July all of them were freed on bail, the court reasoning that being government servants, they would not abscond.

In 2002, the Supreme Court, on the plea of the victims, transferred the case to Delhi's Tees Hazari court. From 2002 to 2004, the Uttar Pradesh government did not appoint a Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) for the case. From March 2004 to 2006, two SPPs were appointed. Currently, Satish Tamta is SPP and the hearing in the case is near completion.


Babuddin
Babuddin 42


The migrant worker was shot at twice,presumed dead and thrown into the river.He was fished out by a team led by then SP of Ghaziabad,Vibhuti Narain Rai.He lodged an FIR in the LinkRoad police station."Three labourers from Bihar were killed that day.None of their families got compensation."

The accused jawans were suspended from service for up to six months in 2000, only to be taken back later. Lawyer Vrinda Grover, who represented the victims during 2002-04, says, "We have learnt through rti that their annual confidential reports from 1987 to 2002 do not mention the criminal investigation going on against them. Not even the fact that they are charged with murder. These reports say they are disciplined policemen and fine kabaddi players. This is the real face of our police," she says.

Three of the accused are already dead. The rest are still weapon-carrying policemen. Shahabuddin, now 77, says, "All of them were on active service, deployed even on election duty. People accused of communal killing in custody were not dismissed." "There is an institutionalised anti-minority bias in the country's police. Only a handful of them commit the crime but the whole institution comes together to save them. CBCID dragged the probe for six years. Such wilful delay is meant to dilute the case," adds Grover.

The case stands on circumstantial evidence. The 41st Battalion of pac was on duty that day. The log book shows which truck went where, how much diesel it had, how many kilometres it logged, who was given which firearm. After the first three were shot, the remaining started fighting back barehanded. The pac men started firing indiscriminately on the truck. One of the pac men was hit by a bullet in friendly fire. Next day, he was taken to the hospital. His medical report is there on record.

By the time the truck started moving it was night, remembers Nasir. "We reached the canal around 9 p.m., after which the truck stopped. Three of us were ordered to get down. First, two PAC men held Mohammad Yasin from two sides and another shot him point-blank and threw him into the canal. Similarly, Mohammad Ashraf was disposed of. We resisted. Then they started firing on the truck indiscriminately," he says.

Mohammad Usman, now 55 and permanently disabled, lives in the Kancha ka Pul locality and sells fruits. He recounts: "It was Ramadan, but I was not fasting that day. We were living under curfew for the last six days and had no flour, milk or anything. How could we go out in the curfew?" he says, eyes moistening. Bullets shattered his hips and waist. Somehow, he pulled himself out of the canal. Around 3 a.m., a policeman came in a jeep and said, "Beta, I am taking you to the hospital, but don't mention PAC. If you do, we will inject you with poison and you will die within five minutes." Usman did as he was told, but later told his family what had happened.


Mohammad Naim
Mohammad Naim 43


He was not hit by bullets but he had already been beaten so much that he lay unconscious in the truck.Presumed dead, Naim was thrown into the canal along with the other bodies.
"We just get dates in courts. I am tired now. I have neither the money nor energy. Still I hope we will get justice."

Most of those handed over by the Army to PAC were sent to jail. Before that, they were beaten up in the Civil Lines area in which three of them died. Five were beaten to death in Fatehgarh jail. One of them was Mohd. Usman, whose 66-year-old widow Hanifa says, "We get date after date at the court, but no justice." Moinuddin, 50, one of the arrested, says, "Sarkar (government) does not recognise us as Indians. Else, the case would've been decided long ago." Grover says a, "protracted case always benefits the accused as many witnesses die and many begin to forget the details". Some of the witnesses of the Army still draw their pension but do not turn up even after summons. Grover fears that after such a long series of sustained institutional acts of sabotage, the victims may finally lose the case.

Janata Party President Subramanian Swamy, who had walked from Makanpur to the national capital in June 1987 and sat on a fast for a week demanding justice, has not lost hope: "Justice for Hashimpura victims is crucial to the existence of India as we know it."

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/meerut-hashimpura-massacre-victims-await-justice/1/187360.html

36 % of Maharashtra’s prisoners are Muslims - By Mohammed Wajihuddin - The Times of India, Mumbai

THE TIMES OF INDIA, MUMBAI DESERVES CREDIT FOR GIVING WELL-DESERVED IMPORTANCE TO TISS REPORT REPORTEDLY ON THE BEHEST OF STATE MINORITIES COMMISSION ON THE HIGH DETENTION RATE OF MUSLIMS (36% OF THE JAIL POPULATION TO ONLY 13% OF MUSLIM POPULATION IN THE STATE). HOWEVER, BOTH TIMES OF INDIA AND TISS ARE GUILTY OF IGNORING THE 800 POUND GORILLA IN THE ROOM. IT IS THE HEAVILY COMMUNALIZED STATE POLICE THAT IS HEAVILY POPULATED BY EXTREMIST HINDUTVA ELEMENTS. UNLESS THE COMMUNALIZED ELEMENTS WHICH ARE IN OVERWHELMING MAJORITY IN THE POLICE, ARE NOT ACKNOWLEDGED AS SUCH, EXPOSED AND CONTROLLED, THE STATE CANNOT ESCAPE BEING BRANDED AS A POLICE STATE. TISS HAS BLAMED THE SUPPOSED CRIMINALITY OF THE MUSLIMS ON LACK OF EDUCATION AND EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES. THAT FORMS THE BASIC REASONS OF MUSLIM BACKWARDNESS. BUT THAT DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY TRANSLATES INTO INCREASED 'CRIMINALITY' OF THE MAHARASHTRA MUSLIMS. BY IGNORING THE HATE AND DISCRIMINATION BASE LINE OF ALL GOVERNMENT AND POLITICAL POLICIES AGAINST MUSLIMS, ANY ATTEMPT TO ERADICATE THE CANCER OF COMMUNALIZED DEMONIZATION  OF MUSLIMS WILL RESULT IN FAILURE. BOTH SONIA CONGRESS AND SHARAD PAWAR'S NATIONAL CONGRESS PARTY FEEL NO NEED TO CLEANSE THE POLICE MENTALITY AND REFUSE TO RECRUIT MUSLIMS IN THE POLICE FORCE WITH A VIEW TO PROMOTE SECULAR ETHOS IN SECURITY AGENCIES. IN FACT THEY STUBBORNLY CLING TO THEIR ANTI-MUSLIM AGENDA IN THE STATE OPENLY FLOUTING CONSTITUTIONAL NORMS TO TREAT ALL PEOPLE IN THIS MULTI-ETHNIC, MULTI-CULTURAL AND MULTI-RELIGIOUS STATE/NATION ON EQUAL FOOTING. THE HATE CAMPAIGNS ESPECIALLY IN POLICE FORCE SHOULD BE LEGALLY BANNED AND HEAVY PENALTIES SHOULD BE IMPOSED ON COMMUNAL ELEMENTS WHO COMMIT CRIMES IN THE NAME OF FIGHTING CRIMES.

Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai
<ghulammuhammed3@gmail.com>

-----------------------


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/36-of-Maharashtras-prisoners-are-Muslims/articleshow/13750117.cms

36 % of Maharashtra’s prisoners are Muslims

, TNN | Jun 3, 2012, 01.18AM IST
MLC Pasha Patel often jokes that if the number of Muslim prison inmates in Maharashtra keep increasing at the current pace, every jail will soon have an Eidgah. Patel's black humour may be a bit exaggerated, but it cannot be denied that the number of Muslims in jail is highly disproportionate to their population. And this disturbing fact has been reconfirmed by a recent report of two scholars, Dr Vijay Raghvan and Roshni Nair of the Centre for Criminology and Justice at the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS).

Commissioned by the State Minorities Commission as a follow-up to the Sachar Committee report which lamented that "in Maharashtra Muslims account for 10.6% (2001 survey) of the general population, yet they comprise 32.4 % of the prison population" (the current prison population is 36%), the report is being hotly debated among government officials. Last week, at a meeting called by minorities affairs minister Naseem Khan, officials discussed a number of measures to not just prevent Muslim youth from committing crimes but also to provide legal aid to the imprisoned and rehabilitate them post-release. Among the plans in the pipeline are free legal aid to inmates, vocational training, sensitising the police and counselling and career guidance for Muslim youth in general.

Based on interviews with 339 Muslim inmates in 15 prisons, the TISS report unfortunately does not address the oft-raised question of alleged discrimination against Muslim offenders at the time of registering the case. "Our team's questions were first approved by the jail authorities," says Raghvan. A source reveals that at first some officials at Mantralaya were not in favour of allowing a headcount of, and interviews with, Muslim inmates. However, when the Minorities Commission and TISS team persisted, the officials relented on condition that they would vet the questionnaire. "They deleted the questions related to alleged torture and discrimination by the police," says the source.

Raghavan and senior criminal lawyer Majeed Memon point out that if offenders were aware of the Prohibition of Offenders Act, 1958, which can be invoked to avoid imprisonment if the offence is minor, many of them would not have been jailed. Memon cites the rash driving case of actor John Abraham who was let off under this Act. "An accused can give a bond of 12 or 24 months to the court, which then appoints a probation officer who monitors his behavior," explains Memon. "Only if he is found guilty of repeating an offence is he punished with imprisonment."

The report would appear to bear out the fact that some of the offences could well be minor. Raghvan says that 75.5% of the respondents were arrested for the first time and 24.5% were repeat arrestees. "This shows that majority of the respondents were not career criminals," says the report. Adds Raghavan, "We found that over 30% of the prisoners were not allowed to talk to their relatives at the time of arrest. This violates the rights of an accused."

The pertinent question remains: Why do so many Muslims join crime? The report discusses several reasons such as lack of resources and income opportunities, peer pressure and conflict with the police. An important one is the area of residence—many respondents who were involved in repeat offences came from neighbourhoods where, they said, they were witness to the flourishing of illegal activities since childhood. A considerable number were arrested for alleged forgery of documents, making fake currency notes, cheating and fraud. Since many Muslim ghettoes are blacklisted by the banks, even better educated people forge documents to get loans. "Some of them paid agents to make fake documents in order to get the loan," explains the report.

Although Dr Raghvan declines to discuss in detail the alleged police discrimination against Muslims, a few confessions do pertain to it. Sajid, a prison inmate with a criminal record, told the researchers: "I am trying to make a new beginning. Every time I start some work, the police arrest me on some charge or the other. They also demand money from me. Those who can pay are set free. The police are very powerful and can do anything."

Human rights activist Shabnam Hashmi cites the recent example of Kalyan resident Bilal Shaikh whom the police slapped with the non-bailable, cognisable Section 333 after he had a spat with traffic constables for jumping a signal. Assaulted brutally for "arguing" with the cops, Shaikh suffered a fracture to his right arm, was arrested and cooled his heels in prison for eight days while the four cops got bail on the same day since their offence, according to the FIR, was non-cognisable. "This shows the clear bias of the police against Muslim offenders," alleges Hashmi. The TISS report says that most Muslims echo these sentiments: "They view the police as an unjust system using unfair methods in the performance of their duties."


MAILER-DAEMON@mail.networksolutionsemail.com
Your message did not reach some or all

Sunday, May 27, 2012

Egyptian Is Counting on Worries of Elites - By David D. Kirkpatrick - The New York Times

Western Governments and media are hugely apprehensive about Muslim Brotherhood coming to power in Egypt, even if democratically. They had underestimated the will of the Egyptian people and had banked on military and liberals to carry the day for them into the future of continued servitude of the Egyptian people in the service of the WEST. However, unlike in Gaza, they cannot repudiate the open will of the people. They feel Egyptian elites will prefer to sell their nation to the WEST; but people's power is now unleashed and it is better that West should make peace with Islamists, who are willing to compromise and willing and able to finalize working relationship with the WEST. They will not be willing or crazy to throw away a historical chance for them to show to the World that Islam and Islamists can be trusted to opt for peace and cooperation, rather than confrontation and strife. The world can do business with them.
Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai
<ghulammuhammed3@gmail.com>

--------------

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/28/world/middleeast/ahmed-shafik-counting-on-egyptian-elites-fears.html?_r=1&emc=tnt&tntemail1=y&pagewanted=all

The New York Times

May 28, 2012


Egyptian Is Counting on Worries of Elites

Khalil Hamra/Associated Press


Ahmed Shafik, an associate of Hosni Mubarak, is set to face the Muslim Brotherhood’s candidate in the runoff in June.
By
Published: May 27, 2012
CAIRO — Ahmed Shafik said he never regretted calling former President Hosni Mubarak “a role model.”
Suhaib Salem/Reuters
A protest in Cairo on Sunday against Mr. Shafik, who suggested he would use executions and brutal force to restore order within a month and accused Islamists of harboring secret militias.

At the lunch of elite businessmen held this month by the American Chamber of Commerce in Egypt, an umbrella group for multinationals and those who work with them, the crowd erupted in applause.

It was a vivid demonstration of the unexpected surge of support that Mr. Shafik, a former air force general and Mr. Mubarak’s last prime minister, hopes will help him win a mid-June presidential runoff against Mohamed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood. A victory would make him Egypt’s first freely elected president, setting the template for the country’s post-Mubarak future.

Mr. Shafik, 70, and Mr. Morsi, 60, offer a rematch of the struggle that has driven Egyptian politics for six decades, between secular authoritarians and Islamists who promise a novel experiment in religious democracy.

Mr. Shafik’s bid for the presidency turns on the fears of an Islamist takeover on one hand and of pervasive lawlessness on the other. These fears are the glue that hold together his secular-conservative coalition of elite businessmen, former military officers, members of Egypt’s Coptic Christian minority and cosmopolitans who worry that Islamist electoral victories will mean a more pious and intolerant culture.

These fears were much in evidence at the American Chamber event. The well-heeled audience cheered as Mr. Shafik suggested that he would use executions and brutal force to restore order within a month, repeatedly mocked the Islamist-led Parliament and accused, against all evidence, the Islamists of harboring hidden militias to use in a civil war.

“The problem with security is that we don’t want security because we want to be the only ones with militias,” Mr. Shafik said, referring clearly, if obliquely, to the Islamists. “Because we want to turn Egypt into a Lebanon.”

But there was hope, he added: “The Egyptian people, contrary to the accusations, are obedient.”

Mr. Shafik’s chances in the runoff are hard to assess because of the popularity of Islamist politics here and the Brotherhood’s unrivaled political machine. The Brotherhood and other Islamists won three-quarters of the parliamentary vote, but roughly split the first round of presidential voting with more secular candidates. Mr. Morsi and Mr. Shafik each received only about a quarter of the vote, with a narrow majority of voters backing candidates sharply critical of both the Brotherhood and former Mubarak officials.

It is too soon to guess how those voters will break. And by Sunday the three runners-up had all filed various legal challenges to the results with the unpredictable presidential election commission of top judges. Its ruling, which is final, is expected by Tuesday.

Fighting off other Islamists during the campaign, the Brotherhood reverted to an older style of religious politics, describing its program as a distillation of Islam and calling for Islamic law. But since the revolution, the Brotherhood has also sought to reassure Egyptians that it supports equal citizenship for all, including women and Christians, and does not plan to impose legal restrictions on personal behavior or expression. At Christmas, Brotherhood leaders visited churches while younger members stood guard outside.

In a television appearance on Saturday night, Mr. Morsi tried to woo Egypt’s Christian minority, which is about 10 percent of the population. “Egypt belongs to all,” he said, implicitly blaming Mr. Shafik and the Mubarak government for their grievances. “Who killed them in protests? Who prevented them from building churches? The old regime, not us.”

Mr. Morsi sent Khairat el-Shater, the Brotherhood’s dominant strategist and a business tycoon, to represent the Brotherhood at another American Chamber lunch. Mr. Shater gave a speech so committed to promoting free markets, foreign investment and other business interests that some in the Chamber said it was as if he was reading their own talking points.

But the audience was too afraid of the Islamists’ potential social agenda to give them any credit, two people who were present said.

In the runoff, Mr. Shafik has sought to seize the mantle of the “glorious revolution.” After the applause for his admiration of Mr. Mubarak at the American Chamber lunch, Mr. Shafik specified that what he admired was his friend’s ability to keep his personal feelings out of his official decisions.

But critics say they feel like the revolution never happened. For a decade before Mr. Mubarak’s ouster, Mr. Shafik had been acclaimed as a potential inside candidate to succeed him, with the blessing of the elite within Egypt’s military-backed autocracy.

Mr. Shafik’s swearing-in as prime minister in January last year was considered a sop to the military and the old guard, not the protesters, to shore up Mr. Mubarak’s support. Mr. Shafik was forced to resign a month later after a confrontation on a talk show, and since then such blowups have become a trademark.

“I am not going to talk about that,” he snapped recently at an Al Jazeera interviewer, when she pressed him to clarify his ambiguous views on the political power of the military. Only a military man like him could “prevent any early friction,” Mr. Shafik continued, raising his voice and leaning forward from the edge of his chair. “I am just guaranteeing the success of the experience!”

In Mr. Shafik’s short platform, he calls for the military to play a continuing political role as “the guardian of the constitutional legitimacy.” He calls the military’s economic activities — which include a far-flung commercial empire with little military application — “a strategic necessity.” And he seems to endorse continuing Egypt’s much hated, 30-year-old “emergency law” allowing extrajudicial detention. In cases of emergency, his platform suggests, the application of such measures should still be exempt from parliamentary review.

On the economy, Mr. Shafik has said he opposes progressive income taxes and has talked about big development projects. As a former aviation minister in charge of airports and the state airline, he was known for his “iron fist,” especially on labor demands.

But he has offered little indication of support for free enterprise or markets. As aviation minister, he said that improving aviation through private carriers at the expense of the state-run airline would be counterproductive.

He, like other Mubarak associates, also faces lingering allegations of corruption. On Sunday, a Cairo court sentenced Zakaria Azmi, one of Mr. Mubarak’s closest aides, to seven years in prison and a $6 million fine for corruption.

Mr. Shafik has sometimes pledged to name a Christian woman his vice president. But at the American Chamber lunch he appeared uncertain. “I wish I could find a Christian lady who’s highly qualified,” he said.

Instead, he declined to rule out naming Mr. Mubarak’s former vice president and feared spy chief, Omar Suleiman. “If it was possible for the expertise of Omar Suleiman to be used in any place, why not use it?” he said, to big applause.

He mocked the activists who have vowed to take to the streets for a “second revolution” if Mr. Shafik or Mr. Suleiman becomes president. “It is not like we have parents who say, ‘This is allowed or forbidden, if this person runs then the country will be on fire, or if this person works we will go to the streets in arms,’ ” he said.

He added: “The state has to be very strong. The strongest thing should be the state.”


Mayy El Sheikh contributed reporting.
A version of this article appeared in print on May 28, 2012, on page A4 of the New York edition with the headline: Egyptian Is Counting On Worries Of Elites.
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Email
  • Share

Friday, May 25, 2012

Lemonade girl (1-minute video)

Anti-Muslim bullying in schools has increased by 15% according to a CAIR study.

As-salaamu alaykum (peace be to you),

Recently, the parents of nine-year-old Muslim twins reported to CAIR that
their children had been facing chronic, anti-Muslim bullying for years. They told us their son was taunted because of his religion and ethnicity, and was told, “All Muslims are dirty and they kill people.” Their daughter was allegedly slapped, hit in the eye and told “go back to your country.”

Not on CAIR’s watch
. When we learned of the abuse, our staff attorneys contacted school officials right away and were speaking to the district superintendent within days. Beyond helping these children, CAIR is committed to assisting the school district develop a more inclusive and safe environment for minority students.

After CAIR’s work on her behalf, the daughter set up a lemonade stand and, with her brother’s help, raised $50 for CAIR
. Her parents matched her gift to honor her resourcefulness.

Here's what she did: (1-minute video)



Will you embrace this girl’s supportive spirit?

Help us meet our quarterly goal of raising $180,000
. We’re making progress, but we’re not there yet.

Anti-Muslim bullying is a challenge more of our children are facing, so we at CAIR are committing more resources into combating this problem. We count on you to enable us to be there when parents seek help for their children.

Without the blessings of Allah (SWT) and financial support from people just like you, these children and their family would have been left to face the hate alone.

I promised the nine-year-old who raised $50 for CAIR that I would tell you about her hard work. I hope she inspires you to give a gift so I can go back and tell her how God magnified her generosity through people like you.
DONATE

Thank you for your support and may God bless you.


Nihad Awad
CAIR National Executive Director


Please send this story to your friends and family, and share on social media.

All contributions to CAIR are zakat-eligible, but not tax deductible; tax-deductible status is pending.

Wednesday, May 23, 2012

Families find few avenues for care and treatment of the mentally ill - By Malia Politzer & Vidya Krishnan - Livemint.com


Families find few avenues for care and treatment of the mentally ill

Malia Politzer & VidyaKrishnan

Santosh Kumar Bhowmik, a 67-year-old retired professor, sits erect on a marble bench at a cafeteria at Dilli Haat, an outdoor food plaza and handicrafts bazaar in Delhi, sipping Sprite from a plastic cup while keeping a watchful eye on his son.

At 33, the son conducts himself with the shy deference of an adolescent. At the moment, he is facing a metal pole, muttering quietly under his breath to people no one else can see or hear.

Bhowmik’s son Surjit suffers from schizophrenia, a mental illness that typically makes it difficult for an individual to think logically, have normal emotional responses, and distinguish between real and unreal experiences.

“I do not know what will happen to him after I am no more,” Bhowmik said. “I leave it up to God.”

He is not alone in his anxiety.

The ministry of health and and family welfare estimates that as many as one out of four Indian families will have at least one member diagnosed with some sort of mental illness. At least 7% of the population is estimated by the ministry to suffer from “severe” mental illness.

Yet, with only 37 government institutions to care for the mentally ill in a nation of more than one billion people, there are limited long-term resources for families struggling to look after a relative who needs psychiatric treatment. In northern India, there isn’t a single government-run rehabilitation centre where people with incurable mental ailments can be admitted.

“For 18 years, I have cared for my son at home because I do not have a choice,” said Bhowmik. “It is not enough to give medicine to patients suffering from schizophrenia. They require special care, which we cannot give at home, but I do not have the money to institutionalize him in a private facility. I don’t like to think about what will happen to him after I am gone.”

In the 1980s, the World Health Organization released the startling findings of a two-part study on mental illness: Patients suffering from schizophrenia in developing countries such as India, Nigeria and Colombia had better long-term outcomes than those in developed countries, which included Denmark, the US and Canada.

The culmination of decades of research, the study examined long-term treatment of more than 1,000 schizophrenic patients across 16 countries, concluding the greater levels of acceptance, stronger social ties, and greater family involvement more common in developing countries appeared to be “key positive factors” linked to patient recovery.

While the study’s findings have been criticized on the grounds that it may have ignored patients locked away by families concerned about the social stigma associated with mental illness, it contained important insights into its treatment.

“Social ties are one of the intervening factors that affect patient outcomes. There was another study in the UK which looked at different ethnic groups, and Asian families with stronger social ties showed better recovery and remission rates,” said Manasi Sharma, a research coordinator at Delhi-based Centre for Excellence in Mental Health. “But caution has to be exercised by looking at these studies—it can go both ways. Families have been known to shun patients, too.”

Should the study be conducted in India today, it would likely yield very different results. Economic liberalization and policies successful in lifting millions of people out of poverty have also reshuffled social structures. Large joint families that used to be the norm have given way to the smaller, nuclear families typical of most Western countries.

Nirmala Srinivasan, founder of the Association for Mentally Disabled, a support group for caregivers to the mentally ill in Bangalore, said there is no doubt that the burden of caring for the mentally ill is growing.

The daughter of a woman diagnosed with schizophrenia and the primary caregiver to another close family member struggling with mental illness, Srinivasan has unique insights into how deteriorating social support networks have burdened modern day caregivers.
“I grew up in a large south Indian orthodox Brahmin family, with a lot of widowed aunts. 
It was a very large joint family, so I never felt the burden of my mother’s care,” said Srinivasan, who fondly recalls a childhood filled with neighbours, festivals and a family that worked together to manage her mother’s illness, to make sure that her mother always felt included and was never alone.

“But now there’s an issue with inadequate family resources, particularly among middle-class families that have migrated to urban centres,” she said. “My father had a tremendous in-house support network. That is completely lacking for caregivers across the country today.”

The growing verticality of cities, which stacks families into isolated apartment units, also serves to isolate them, while exacerbating the stigma associated with mental illness, Srinivasan said.

“They won’t seek help if there’s a crisis unless the (patient) becomes violent. They don’t want to have to explain it to the neighbours the next day,” she explained. “Sometimes I think that the mentally ill in slums may fare better during emergencies than middle-class families, because in slums you can’t hide an emergency. Whether it’s a mental crisis or labour pains, the entire community will rally and bring them to a hospital. And if it’s a village, they’ll put them in a bullock cart.”

Paying for long-term care can also leave families in a financial hole, particularly those who lack insurance.

“I have no options, I cannot even get a loan,” said a woman who’s a full-time caregiver for two family members—a father who suffers from dementia and a brother diagnosed with schizophrenia. “For poor people, there are loan options, but for the middle class, there is nothing. And mental illness affects all income levels, so the issues cut across income levels too.”

Taking on the mantle of the caregiver eventually forced her to quit her full-time job, said the woman, who spoke on condition of anonymity. The scant wages she earns as a freelancer in the social development sector makes hiring any sort of full-time help out of the question.

Finding trained nursing attendants is difficult and costly—a full-time trained nursing attendant costs Rs.35,000-40,000 a month plus food, and adult diapers (now necessary for her father’s care) cost her approximately Rs.300 a day. Even keeping a full-time maid is hard as most don’t stay, unnerved by her brother’s erratic behaviour.

Even while families are increasingly feeling the pinch, state governments are yet to step up to provide viable alternatives. This void is most keenly felt by families living in northern India. As of now, there is not a single government-run rehabilitation centre in the region where patients with incurable mental ailments can be admitted for long-term care.

But the ripple effects of government apathy in the North are also felt in the South, where the few private rehabilitation centres that exist have learned to be wary when approached by northern families.

“After very bitter experiences in the past, we are hesitant to admit patients based in northern India. The likelihood of abandonment is very high and the distances make following up with the families very difficult for us,” said M. Ranganathan, a caregiver at Family Fellowship Society (FFS) in Bangalore.

Ranganathan retired from the National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences in Bangalore after four decades of work in the area of psychiatric social work. He cited three recent instances when families based in Delhi abandoned the patients at FFS.

“They did not pay the monthly charges and stopped answering our phone calls. Eventually, we had to seek police assistance to get the patients back to their homes, as we cannot take care of patients without financial assistance,” he added.

Bhowmik’s is one of 25-odd families that came together to fill the void for rehabilitation centres in Delhi three years back by forming a social support group of caregivers and mentally ill patients.

Rajeshwari Iyer, one of the founders of the group Roshni, shows through personal example how strong family support can make or break recovery for a person struggling with mental illness. Her daughter Madhu was diagnosed with schizophrenia when she was 16 years old. Now 34, she is working as a receptionist at a doctor’s office and hopes to lead a normal life—perhaps even get married.

Her own recovery has inspired her to help others struggling with mental illness. “In the absence of my mother, I try to help patients and even counsel families based on my experience as a patient,” said Madhu.

Her mother knows all too well what can happen when the primary caregiver passes away, and no long-term care facilities exist. Three months ago, she received a call from the Delhi Police asking that she help with someone they suspected was mentally ill.

Iyer arrived at a dilapidated home that looked abandoned. Living inside, in the dark, was an unshaven man with dreadlocks and an insect-infested beard.

“His legs were gangrenous,” she recalls, shuddering. She learned from neighbours that the man suffered from psychosis and had been cared for by his parents, who passed away several months back. His brothers and sisters all lived in Delhi, but refused to come forward to claim him, saying there was no way they could care for both him and their own families.

Iyer was able to intervene and get the man accepted at a government hospital. But there are many others who are not so fortunate.

“I remember one mentally ill man whose primary caregiver died,” she said. “His brothers would not take him in and put him on the streets. Three days later, he was dead.”

Barring government intervention, the group members have no choice but to take matters into their own hands. “In Delhi, it frustrates me that being the national capital and despite having resources at command, not a single home for mentally ill patients exists,” said Bhowmik. “My request to families in Delhi will be to start a self-help movement, mobilize resources instead of waiting for the government to pitch in.”

malia.p@livemint.com

This is the first part of a two-part series on mental illness. Next: Homes for mentally ill homeless in south India leave much to be desired.

Israel in Peril By David Shulman - Book Review: The Crisis of Zionism - By Peter Beinart - Times Books

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/jun/07/israel-in-peril/?pagination=false

Israel in Peril

June 7, 2012

David Shulman

The Crisis of Zionism

by Peter Beinart
Times Books, 289 pp., $26.00                                                  
Benjamin Netanyahu; drawing by Pancho

On April 15 of this year I was returning to Israel on an Alitalia flight from Rome. About forty minutes before landing in Tel Aviv, the captain informed us that Israel had announced extraordinary security measures, constricting its air space in response to an unusual threat, and that from that moment on—we were still high above the Mediterranean—until we would be allowed to leave the terminal, all photography was strictly forbidden; beyond that, we were to follow the instructions of Israeli security personnel on the ground.

My first thought was that Benjamin Netanyahu had decided to attack Iran, despite, or maybe actually because of, the seeming movement in the preceding days toward an effective and acceptable peaceful solution to the problem of the Iranian nuclear project. On second thought I decided that such an attack was still somewhat unlikely. So what was going on?

Upon landing we were diverted to the old, by now outmoded Terminal 1, then, after passport control, taken by buses to the new Terminal 3. There were police and border police everywhere, in large numbers, and we soon saw them arresting a demonstrator and forcing him into a police van. At this point it dawned on me that the extraordinary menace from the skies had to do with the arrival in Israel of a few dozen peace activists from Europe. They were, we later learned, trying to reach Bethlehem in the Palestinian territories in order to protest against human rights abuses by Israel.

These protesters clearly provided reason enough to call out the armed forces, as if a violent invasion were taking place. Some fifty or so were arrested; two managed to slip through the cordon and reach Bethlehem. Government spokesmen that evening proudly spoke of having warded off a threat of almost existential proportions. Their satisfaction was marred only by the fact that the TV news that day was full of one of those incidents that reveal in a flash the violent reality of the occupation.
 
Shalom Eisner, deputy commander of the army brigade stationed in the Jordan Valley and a settler himself, was filmed while brutally, and without provocation, smashing a Danish peace activist in the face with his rifle. The ugly, indeed horrifying, scene was broadcast dozens of times. I’m sorry to say that I’ve seen the likes of it rather often in demonstrations in East Jerusalem (Sheikh Jarrah, Ras al-Amud, Silwan) and in peace actions in the territories. Eisner has since been temporarily relieved of his command; if earlier cases are any indication, he will probably be reinstated after some two years in another post. Interviewed after the incident, he gave an honest statement of his moral stature: “Maybe it was a professional mistake to use the gun when there were cameras around.”1
Why should a handful of harmless demonstrators elicit so severe a reaction? Netanyahu, in his official announcement, said that if these people were so concerned with human rights, they should check out the situation in Syria, Gaza, or Iran—as if such sites of egregious abuse relieved Israel of any responsibility for what is going on day by day in the occupied territories. The same logic—that of the endless war between the Sons of Light and the Sons of Darkness—underlies Netanyahu’s constant dwelling on the Holocaust in relation to Iran. Like many Israelis, he inhabits a world where evil forces are always just about to annihilate the Jews, who must strike back in daring and heroic ways in order to snatch life from the jaws of death. I think that, like many other Israelis, he is in love with such a world and would reinvent it even if there were no serious threat from outside.
Buried somewhere inside all this is a bad Israeli conscience about the treatment of Palestinians since 1948—a conscience repressed but still somehow alive (not, perhaps, in Netanyahu). The rationalizing vision pasted over that bad conscience, a vision simple-minded, self-righteous, dangerous, and immoral, underlies the dilemma that Peter Beinart has eloquently and bravely stated in The Crisis of Zionism. He articulates it as a conflict, very familiar by now, between liberal, democratic values and a proto-racist, atavistic nationalism. This conflict has created two Jewish states in the Middle East. As Beinart says, “To the west [of the Green Line, the pre-1967 border], Israel is a flawed but genuine democracy. To the east, it is an ethnocracy.”

By “ethnocracy” he means “a place where Jews enjoy citizenship and Palestinians do not”; it is a mini-state run by settlers, some of them violent and fanatical, that disenfranchises a huge Palestinian population and continually appropriates Palestinian land in the interests of expanding and further entrenching the colonial project of the settlements. Inevitably, the ethos of the occupation, now in its forty-fifth year, spills westward over the Green Line: “Illiberal Zionism beyond the green line destroys the possibility of liberal Zionism inside it.”

The evidence for this observation is overwhelming; Beinart discusses recent research that shows a dangerous erosion in the commitment by ordinary Israelis to basic democratic values and the concomitant rise of hypernationalist, racist, and totalitarian tendencies, some of them well represented in the ultra-right parties in the Knesset and in the current Israeli cabinet. In the last year or so, we’ve seen a spate of antidemocratic, “ethnocratic” legislation all too reminiscent of dark precedents in the history of the last century.

We could also describe what is happening, more simply, as a takeover by the settler mini-state of the central institutions of the Israeli state system as a whole. By now, Israeli policy is almost entirely mortgaged to the settler enterprise; almost every day brings some new, inventive scheme to legalize existing “illegal outposts” in the territories and to facilitate the appropriation of more and more Palestinian land.2 The inevitable result of such policies is the imminent demise of the so-called “two-state solution,” which would put a Palestinian state by the side of pre-1967 Israel (with whatever minor revisions of the old boundary the two sides would agree upon in negotiations). By now, a huge portion of the West Bank has, in effect, been annexed, perhaps irreversibly, to Israel. No state can be constituted on the little that remains. I will return to this question.

Even apart from the disastrous political consequences of current Israeli policy, it is critical to recognize that what goes on in the territories is not a matter of episodic abuse of basic human rights, something that could be corrected by relatively minor, ad hoc actions of protest and redress. Nothing could be further from the truth. The occupation is systemic in every sense of the word. The various agencies involved—government bureaucrats and their ministries and budgets, the army, the blue-uniformed civilian police, the border police, the civil administration (that is, the official Occupation Authority), the courts (in particular, the military courts in the territories, but also Israeli civil courts inside the Green Line), the host of media commentators who toe the government line and perpetuate its regnant mythologies, and so on—are all inextricably woven into a system whose logic is apparent to anyone with firsthand experience of it. That logic is one of protecting the settlement project and taking the land. The security aspect of the occupation is, in my view, close to trivial; were it a primary goal, the situation on the ground would look very different.

Take a few routine, typical examples, drawn at random from an endless series. In mid-January the civil administration sent its bulldozers, accompanied, of course, by soldiers, to demolish the ramshackle hut of Halima Ahmad al-Hadhalin, a Palestinian widow with nine orphaned children living in the deeply impoverished site of Umm al-Kheir, adjacent to the large and constantly expanding settlement of Carmel in the south Hebron hills. The bureaucrats claimed that the shack was built without a permit, which is no doubt true; Palestinians living in the West Bank “Area C,” i.e., under full Israeli control, only very rarely receive a permit to build from the committee, largely composed of settlers, that oversees such requests.

I saw Halima on January 28, a freezing, rainy day; she was standing barefoot, still shocked and traumatized, in a neighbor’s tent. Such demolitions happen regularly at Umm al-Kheir and have nothing whatever to do with the rule of law; they are part of a malevolent campaign to make life as miserable as possible for the Palestinians there (who, incidentally, claim credibly to own the land on which Carmel sits today) in the hope that they will go away.

Precisely the same line of reasoning applies to a wave of demolition orders issued in February of this year against the project of electrification and the building of energy infrastructures in a set of some sixteen tiny Palestinian khirbehs spread over the south Hebron hills. The shepherds and small-scale farmers in this region live in caves, tents, or shacks, in abject poverty. Volunteers and peace activists with technical know-how such as Noam Dotan and El’ad Orian, from the organization known as Comet-Me, have painstakingly built wind turbines and basic electric grids in many of these villages to serve a population of some 1,500 people.

The immediate change in the quality of life in this harsh region was dramatic; my friend Ali Awwad from Tuba, proudly turning on a light bulb in the cave he inhabits, said to me, “For the first time in my life, I feel like a complete human being.”3 Can these minimal infrastructures, entirely benevolent in intention and effect, funded mainly by European donors at the level of hundreds of thousands of euros,4 constitute a threat of any sort to Israel?
 
Apparently, they can. The civil administration is keen on destroying them, once again on the flimsy excuse that they were put in place without permits—as if a request for a permit would have been forthcoming.5 Several electric pylons have already been destroyed and electric wires, undoubtedly worthy targets for the Israeli army, have been cut in some six villages. Pressure from European governments, especially Germany, has stayed the new demolition orders for the moment, but the danger that the bulldozers will turn up when opportunity arises remains very real.

Could the courts stand as a bulwark against such arbitrary acts by the authorities or the more severe instances of outright theft or violent attack by settlers? Occasionally, they do. In general, however, no Palestinian has the slightest chance of finding justice in an Israeli military court, and very few indeed have been justly treated in the civil courts over the last forty years. Any case having to do with an attempt to establish or maintain Palestinian ownership over lands taken for settlement is, ipso facto, unlikely to end in a decision that goes against the settlers or the government, although there have been some exceptions to this gloomy conclusion. Palestinians who protest against the occupation and the loss of village lands are treated harshly, sometimes imprisoned for long periods, sometimes killed in the course of the demonstrations.6
 
It is such matters that make Beinart’s deliberately understated description of the occupation seem, from a local perspective in Israel-Palestine, far too mild. His book is clearly addressed in the first instance to an American audience, one perhaps not fully aware of the real situation inside the Palestinian territories. The tone is polemical, as one might expect; inevitably, Beinart has been bitterly attacked as naive—the worst, also the cheapest insult in the lexicon of those who defend Israeli policies—and as oblivious to the complexities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.7 He is, in fact, all too aware of those complexities, far more so than many who claim to speak to or for American Jews (most of whom, as Beinart points out, have probably never met a living Palestinian). He mainly focuses on the situation as it is today, under this particular American president and this particular Israeli government. Possibly the most revealing part of the book is the detailed and persuasive description of the political maneuvers that allowed Netanyahu to humiliate Obama repeatedly, first over the issue of a freeze on settlements, and later in Congress, in 2010–2011.

The settlement freeze, in which the Obama administration had invested considerable effort, pressure, and prestige, was never more than a sham; according to the reliable count by Peace Now, construction of new housing units in the territories in 2010, the year of the “freeze,” was only slightly lower than in 2009 (1,712 units as opposed to 1,920). In March 2010, on the day that Vice President Biden arrived in Jerusalem, the Israeli government announced that it was nearly doubling construction in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Ramat Shlomo—an obvious and probably calculated insult to the administration.

Even more outrageous was Netanyahu’s arrogant response to a key speech of Obama’s on May 19, 2011, in which the president stated clearly that “the dream of a Jewish and democratic state cannot be fulfilled with permanent occupation.” Netanyahu announced that he “expects to hear a reaffirmation from President Obama of US commitments made to Israel in 2004”—including acceptance by America of the annexation by Israel of huge chunks of Palestinian land in the so-called “settlement blocs.” Note the word “expects,” as if Netanyahu were dictating to a submissive president what the latter should or should not say. Netanyahu’s speech to Congress on May 24, 2011, a pastiche of myth and demagogic rhetoric of the extreme right, remained faithful to this tone, which Congress shamefully applauded.

Sadly, Beinart shows how Obama has consistently given in to pressure from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) lobby and other American Jewish establishment voices. He gives a withering critique of the leadership of central American Jewish institutions, by now blindly and rather crudely identified with the Israeli right and the Netanyahu line; he quotes Keith Weissman, formerly on the AIPAC staff, as saying that already in the mid-1990s dominant figures there “were sucking at the teat of Likud.” 

Beinart shows that this orientation, with its visceral aversion to the very idea of a free Palestinian state and its enthusiasm for the occupation, now largely dominates the Anti-Defamation League, the Zionist Organization of America, the Presidents’ Conference, and a large part of the Orthodox rabbinical establishment as well.

Orthodox hypernationalism and its sometimes violently antidemocratic, even racist voices partly account for Beinart’s pessimistic prognosis for mainstream American Judaism and its relation to Israel.8 “American Zionism,” he fears, “will become the province of people indifferent to liberal democratic ideals, and the American Jews most committed to those ideals will become indifferent, at best, to the Jewish state.”9 He cites studies showing that younger non-Orthodox American Jews, conspicuously liberal in their values and politics, are less and less attached to Israel. Here is the American Jewish version of the conflict I have described in Israel between democratic ideals and tribal nationalism. Both my grandfathers, like most American Jews of their generation, at once Rooseveltian Democrats committed to strong notions of social justice and ardent Zionists, would have been horrified by what has happened in Israel and by the consequent need for American Jews to make such a choice.

shulman_2-060712.jpg Jack Guez/AFP/Getty Images

Palestinian children walking past Israeli border policemen standing guard near a Palestinian house taken over by Jewish settlers in the center of Hebron, April 3, 2012

The book has a welcome pragmatic thrust to it, reflecting the urgency—and the immense difficulty—of generating change, but here again Beinart’s recommendations seem to me rather limited.10 He wants to strengthen liberal Jewish education in the US and to expand its funding basis; no one could take exception to this plea, though its potential effects on Israeli policy may be decades away. More immediately, he recommends a boycott by American Jews of products coming from Israeli settlements in the territories. This may seem a bold step in New York or Philadelphia, given the current climate in American synagogues and other Jewish institutions, though many of us have been doing it for years, publicly or silently, to no great effect. I once threw a fit in a well-known Jerusalem restaurant when it turned out that they had in stock only wine produced by settlers or in wineries located in the territories. The owner eventually appeared and apologized profusely, promising that in future he’d have a wider selection. That’s about as far as we’ve got, although there is at least one case—that of the Barkan wineries—where pressure from outside, probably mostly from Europe, apparently led to the closure of the main production unit on the West Bank, near Banu Hassan. Lest this example inspire inflated hopes, I should add that, according to recent studies, many if not most Israeli wineries process grapes grown in settlements.

By now, targeting settlers’ produce has a slightly anachronistic feel to it. Does it make sense to focus on wine from Hebron or milk products from the Susya dairy when the entire Israeli political system sustains the colonial project in the territories? I should make it clear that I oppose the call for an across-the-board boycott of Israel, and in particular for an academic-cultural boycott, which, in my view, can only be counterproductive, strengthening the prevalent paranoid mythology and its strident spokesmen on the right. Although I spend a portion of my time in often quixotic gestures in the south Hebron hills, in general I’m not fond of the ineffectual.

What is needed is something far more effective—perhaps something that a second-term Democratic president could achieve if he had the courage to confront the stranglehold of AIPAC on American politics, partly described by Beinart. In the meantime, we could use the kind of idealistic and hardheaded volunteers whom Arnold Wolf, the charismatic liberal rabbi who was one of Obama’s mentors in Chicago, took to Selma, Alabama, during the civil rights struggle. We need volunteers on the West Bank, to protect innocent Palestinian civilians from marauding settlers and the soldiers who invariably back the settlers up. Even a few hundred people would make a real difference.

But it may already be too late. Analysts like Meron Benvenisti, the former deputy mayor of Jerusalem, have been saying for years that the idea of the two-state solution is no more than a fig leaf, to which both the Israeli and Palestinian leaderships pay lip service, hiding the recalcitrant reality of what is already a single state between the Jordan River and the sea. At the moment, this single state, seen as a whole, fits Beinart’s term—a coercive “ethnocracy.” Those who recoil at the term “apartheid” are invited to offer a better one; but note that one of the main architects of this system, Ariel Sharon, himself reportedly adopted South African terminology, referring to the noncontiguous Palestinian enclaves he envisaged for the West Bank as “Bantustans.”

These Palestinian Bantustans now exist, and no one should pretend that they’re anything remotely like a “solution” to Israel’s Palestinian problem. Someday, as happened in South Africa, this system will inevitably break down. In an optimistic version of the future, we may be left with some sort of confederated model that is more than one state but somehow less than two—and in which the Jews will soon become a minority. I do not see how that can happen without a struggle, hopefully nonviolent at least to some degree, in which Palestinians claim for themselves the rights that other peoples have achieved.
How did we reach this point? Why do Israelis cling to a policy so evidently irrational, indeed suicidal? The simple—too simple—answer is: we’re afraid. We’ve been so traumatized, first by our whole history and then by the history of this conflict, that we want at least an illusion of security, like the kind that comes from holding on to a few more rocky hills. Never mind that every inch of Israel is within range of tens of thousands of missiles currently stationed in Lebanon, Syria, and Gaza, not to mention Iran, and that a few more square kilometers make no difference to that threat. We’ll still take over those West Bank hills, and we’ll even put a few rickety caravans on them for anyone crazy enough to want to live there, and we’ll station a few dozen bored soldiers on top of each of them and all around them, and we’ll connect them to the Israeli electricity grid and the water system, and we’ll build a big perimeter fence to enclose the new settlement and to provide land for it to grow on (usually many times the size of the settlement itself). The land happens to belong to Palestinians, but that, clearly, is a consideration of no relevance here.

The fears of Israelis are no doubt real enough, and a generous interpretation of Israeli policy over the last four decades would give them due emphasis. As Ali Abu Awwad, one of the leaders of the new generation of Palestinian nonviolent resisters, often says: “The Jews are not my enemy; their fear is my enemy. We must help them to stop being so afraid—their whole history has terrified them—but I refuse to be a victim of Jewish fear anymore.” He’s right to refuse. But I think the reality we inhabit and have largely created by our own actions has more to do with the story we Israelis tell ourselves about who we are—a powerfully dramatic story that, like many such mythic stories, has a way of perpetuating itself, at continually escalating cost to those who tell it. This story more and more coincides with the primitive Netanyahu narrative I mentioned earlier.

To get away from it, we need to recognize certain primary facts, however uncomfortable they may be for some of us. As has been the case in the past, there are always easily available diversions and distractions that mask the true basis of the ongoing struggle; in Israel today, the main such diversion is called “Iran.” Along with such distractions we have the Israeli refusal to see the present Palestinian leadership in Ramallah for what it is, a more than adequate partner for Israel. Those who don’t agree should be thinking about men such as Marwan Barghouti, still biding his time in an Israeli jail. He’s no saint, to be sure, but he enjoys enormous authority among Palestinians, and he knows very well what is required to strike a deal. There is good reason to believe that he wants such a deal, along the lines that are by now recognized as reasonable by a majority on both sides of the conflict and, indeed, by most other nations. He has recently published a strong statement calling for mass nonviolent resistance in the territories and an end to the farce of a negotiating “process” that has allowed Israel to stall endlessly—and to hide its deeply rooted hostility to the very idea of coming to some form of agreement with the Palestinian national movement.

This profound antipathy to making a meaningful peace will undoubtedly continue to dominate the present Israeli government, now expanded by the entry of the Kadima party into the coalition; Kadima presents itself as “centrist” but is, in fact, hardly distinguishable from the Likud, from which it seceded under Sharon’s leadership, when it comes to Palestinian matters. The new cabinet will continue to entrench the occupation and to legalize the massive theft of Palestinian lands while loudly complaining that the Palestinians are responsible for the collapse of negotiations.

So again, it is worth stating the self-evident truths: at the core of this conflict there are two peoples with symmetrical claims to the land. Neither of the two has any monopoly on being “right,” and each has committed atrocities against the other. One of these two sides is, however, much stronger than the other. Until the national aspirations of the weaker, Palestinian side are addressed and some sort of workable compromise between the two parties is achieved—until the occupation as we know it today comes to an end—there will be no peace. It is impossible to keep millions of human beings disenfranchised for long and to systematically rob them of their dignity and their land.

To prolong the occupation is to ensure the emergence of a single polity west of the Jordan; every passing day makes a South African trajectory more likely, including the eventual, necessary progression to a system of one person, one vote. Thus the likelihood must be faced that unless the Occupation ends, there will also, in the not so distant future, be no Jewish state.

—May 9, 2012
  1. 1 Gili Cohen, Haaretz , April 20, 2012. 
  2. 2 Most recently, Chaim Levinson, Haaretz , April 24, 2012, reports that the government is attempting to circumvent the standard procedures for authorizing building in the territories by ordering the army to enable supposedly temporary construction, without permits. Nothing in Israel is as permanent as a “temporary” outpost on the West Bank. 
  3. 3 One can see the installations in situ in Danny Bertha’s fine film on this project, The Human Turbine (2010). 
  4. 4 The German government reportedly provided approximately 400,000 euros. 
  5. 5 For further reports on the recent wave of demolition orders, see www.greenprophet.com and Akiva Eldar in Haaretz , February 2, 2012. 
  6. 6 For the case of Abdallah Abu Rahmah from Bil’in, see my essay, “Salt March to the Dead Sea,” Harper’s , June 2011; Abdallah’s relative Bassem Ibrahim Abu Rahmah was killed by the army in Bil’in on April 17, 2009. A particularly salient example is the year-long arrest of Bassem al-Tamimi, the leader of the popular protest at al-Nabi Saleh in the northern West Bank; al-Tamimi was released on April 25, 2012. To take the measure of the man, read his statement to the military court
  7. 7 For example, Jonathan Rosen, “A Missionary Impulse,” The New York Times Book Review , April 13, 2012. 
  8. 8 Beinart, The Crisis of Zionism , pp. 164–168. 
  9. 9 Beinart’s analysis was first set out in full in an important essay in The New York Review , “The Failure of the American Jewish Establishment,” June 10, 2010. 
  10. 10 For a more radical critique, see Joseph Dana, “The Crisis of Zionism: Undeterred by Unavoidable Realities,” The National , April 20, 2012.