Politics – December 2013
Support is sought to facilitate the work of the Middle East Study Group. Information at
http://www2.hull.ac.uk/fass/
Palestine
needs its Nelson Mandela; Israel needs it FW de Klerk. With such
courageous and prudent leadership on both sides there will be peace in
no time.
In Memory:
Youth And Age
MUCH did I rage when young,
Being by the world oppressed,
But now with flattering tongue
It speeds the parting guest.
William Butler Yeats
MUCH did I rage when young,
Being by the world oppressed,
But now with flattering tongue
It speeds the parting guest.
William Butler Yeats
Nelson Mandela's struggle against South African apartheid inspired millions. Mandela became a role model for many who fight oppression in different corners of the world. Mandela led a life of perseverance, of suffering, of struggle; a life of humility and humanity; a life of peace, of forgiveness, of reconciliation; a life of a wise man, a leader who showed his people that hope and vision can create new opportunities, that fighting for liberty does not have to be violent, that South Africa had better embrace and unite than self-destruct. Nelson Mandela became a legend in his lifetime because he personified a nation that went out of darkness to create new horizons of freedom and multiculturalism, of tolerance and unity.
Nelson Mandela's great vision for justice and equality and against bigotry and violence continues to resonate around the world, as new generations of young people pursue the ideals he embraced.
President Obama is a great orator. On December 10, 2013, in Johannesburg, he paid tribute to a person who he clearly admired, in his usual eloquence, clarity and power. These are the words of the world leader in memory of his role model:
On Wednesday, December 18, 2013, I will be hosting former Deputy Prime Minister
Dan Meridor. Please cross fingers for a successful event. More about this in my next Newsletter.
I hope to see the day when an Israeli giant Hi-Tech will buy small American start-ups.
~Raphael Cohen-Almagor
Hull to be UK City of Culture 2017
MA scholarships in the School of Politics, Philosophy & International Studies
International Peace Conference – May 2015
Iran
Philipp Mißfelder: Iran must not gain the skills for producing nuclear weapons
His Excellency Ambassador Manuel Hassassian
Labour Has a New Leader
Peace Conference in Angers, France
Visitor to the University of Hull – Professor Eric Barendt
The International Hrant Dink Award is waiting for your nominees
Exchange with Abe Silverman
EU Parliament votes for 40% of Seats on Company Boards for Women
My New Article – Two-State Solution
My Republished Article - Combating Terrorism on the Free Highway
New Books
French v. British
Monthly Poems
NASA releases new mosaic of Earthlings waving at Saturn
Light Side
Hull to be UK City of Culture 2017
For
the past year, hundreds of people (including your humble servant on
social media) have been campaigning for electing Hull to be the UK's
next city of culture. I said that Hull
needs this boost more than any other city I know, excluding Baltimore.
And on November 20, 2013, Hull has been named the UK's next City of
Culture, beating Leicester, Dundee and Swansea Bay for the right to hold
the title in 2017.
Hull,
known for being the home of poet Philip Larkin, the Ferens gallery and
the Truck theatre, will follow the 2013 City of Culture,
Derry-Londonderry.
The UK government chooses a new destination every four years, with the aim of helping tourism and the economy.
Hull council leader Stephen Brady said winning was "a real game-changer".
He
added: "It will give Hull a platform to tell the world what this great
city has to offer, transform perceptions and accelerate our journey to
make Hull a prime visitor destination."
Being
City of Culture has brought Derry events like the Turner Prize, BBC
Radio 1's Big Weekend and an outdoor theatrical extravaganza written by
Frank Cottrell-Boyce - who worked
on the London 2012 Olympics Opening Ceremony.
The Hull Truck
Theatre
Ministers
created the UK City of Culture title in an attempt to replicate the
success of Liverpool's year as the European Capital of Culture in 2008.
However, the winner does not receive direct funding from the UK government.
Culture
secretary Maria Miller said Derry's tenure was "encouraging economic
growth, inspiring social change and bringing communities together".
Hull's cultural programme
will be inspired by the poems of Philip Larkin.
"It
can produce a wonderful mix of inward investment and civic pride, and I
hope Hull's plans will make the most of all that being UK City of
Culture can bring," she added.
Hull's
most famous cultural figure is Larkin who, while not born there, lived
in the city for 30 years and found fame while working as a university
librarian. He produced most of
his published poetry while living in the city and Hull's bid is partly
inspired by his work.
A
statement from Hull City Council said: "Inspired by Larkin's poem Days,
the ambition is for each day of Hull 2017 to make a difference to a
life in the city, the UK and the world."
The
council said it expected the events to bring a £60m boost to the local
economy in 2017 alone, as well as a longer-term legacy for the city.
Hull
is also home to the Ferens Art Gallery, which broke visitor records
with a Da Vinci exhibition last year, and the Hull Truck theatre
company, which became a national force in
the 1970s and '80s and moved into a new £14.5m home in 2009.
The
city's plans for 2017 include an opening ceremony involving theatrical
elephants, dancing white phone boxes and four "rivers" of light, people
and sound flowing into the city.
The
city's annual Freedom Festival will incorporate a special aerial show
taking its theme from the last line of Larkin's poem An Arundel Tomb:
"What will survive of us is love."
There
will also be a stadium sound and light concert that will see lighting
designer Durham Marenghi work with 500 dancers on the theme of illusion
and fairs.
MA scholarships in the School of Politics, Philosophy & International Studies
To
celebrate the University's research successes, the University of Hull
is offering 3 MA scholarships of £10,000 each in the School of Politics,
Philosophy & International Studies.The
scholarships are for students applying for an MA in International
Politics, with an emphasis on
Middle Eastern Studies.
Closing date for applications: 11 January 2014. Interviews will be held in February 2014. Successful applicants will be informed of the award by 29th March 2013. Scholarships will start in September 2014.
Closing date for applications: 11 January 2014. Interviews will be held in February 2014. Successful applicants will be informed of the award by 29th March 2013. Scholarships will start in September 2014.
For inquiries contact: Professor Raphael Cohen-Almagor
Chair in Politics
School of Politics, Philosophy and International Studies
The University of Hull
Cottingham Road
Hull, HU6 7RX
United Kingdom
F: +0044 (0)1482 466208
International Peace Conference – May 2015
I
have begun to organize an international peace conference, scheduled to
take part in Hull in May 2015. Until now I have been able to raise
£20,000 for the event. I require £30,000
more to do what I want to do: inviting 8 Israeli senior peace
negotiators, 8 Palestinian senior peace negotiators and 8 international
figures to discuss peace. I invited President Bill Clinton to confer his
leadership on the conference. My friend, Professor
Art Hobson, who resides in Arkansas, supported my plea with a letter to
Clinton.
Please
do get in touch if you are able to help with your connections to people
or with the financial aspects of the summit. We need to push the peace
wagon forward. It is better to
talk than to fight. If we won’t talk, we will fight. Human lives are at
stake.
Iran
On November 23, 2013 the United States and five other world powers announced a landmark accord that would temporarily freeze the Iranian nuclear program and lay the foundation for a more sweeping agreement. It was the first time in nearly a decade that an international agreement had been reached to halt much of Iran’s nuclear program and roll back some of its elements.
Iran, which has long resisted international monitoring efforts and built clandestine nuclear facilities, agreed to stop enriching uranium beyond 5 percent, a level that would be sufficient for energy production but that would require further enrichment for bomb-making. To make good on that pledge, Iran will dismantle links between networks of centrifuges.
Regarding enrichment, its stockpile of uranium enriched to 20 percent, a short hop from weapons-grade fuel, would be diluted or converted into oxide so that it could not be readily used for military purposes. Iran agreed that it would not install any new centrifuges, start up any that are not already operating or build new enrichment facilities.
Iran’s stockpile of such low-enriched uranium would be allowed to temporarily increase to about eight tons from about seven tons currently. But Tehran would be required to shrink this stockpile by the end of the six-month agreement back to seven tons.
The agreement, however, does not require Iran to stop enriching uranium to a low level of 3.5 percent, or to dismantle any of its existing centrifuges.
On the contentious issue of the heavy water reactor Iran is building near Arak, which could produce plutonium and therefore another path to a bomb, Iran agreed not to produce fuel for the plant, install additional reactor components there or put the plant into operation.
Iran is not required to dismantle the facility, however, or convert the plant into a light water reactor that would be less useful for military purposes.
To guard against cheating, international monitors would be allowed to visit the Natanz enrichment facility and the underground nuclear enrichment plant at Fordo on a daily basis to check the film from cameras installed there.
But Iran did not agree to all of the intrusive inspection regime that the International Atomic Energy Agency had said was needed to ensure that the Iranian program is peaceful.
In return for the initial agreement, the United States agreed to provide $6 billion to $7 billion in sanctions relief. Of this, roughly $4.2 billion would be oil revenue that has been frozen in foreign banks. [Prof. Sam Lehman-Wilzig commented: A more recent report in many international papers has the U.S. admitting that the sanction relief actually is $20 billion.]
The accord will last six months during which international negotiators will pursue a more comprehensive pact that would ratchet back much of Iran’s nuclear program and ensure that it could be used only for peaceful purposes.
In Geneva, the Iranian foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, said he hoped the agreement would lead to a “restoration” of trust between Iran and the United States. He reiterated Iran’s longstanding assertion that its nuclear program was peaceful, adding that the Iranian people deserved respect from the West.
Secretary of State John Kerry said it would “require Iran to prove the peaceful nature of its nuclear program.” Kerry maintained that the agreement “will make our partners in the region safer. It will make our ally Israel safer.”
The accord was a disappointment for Israel, which had urged the United States to pursue a stronger agreement that would lead to a complete end to Iran’s enrichment program. But Iran made it clear that continuing enrichment was a prerequisite for any agreement.
The fact that the accord would only pause the Iranian program was seized on by critics who said it would reward Iran for institutionalizing the status quo.
President Obama noted the qualms of Israel, Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf allies of the United States, saying they “had good reason to be skeptical of Iran’s intentions.” But he said he had a “profound responsibility” to test the possibilities of a diplomatic solution.
Source: Michael R. Gordon, “Accord Reached With Iran to Halt Nuclear Program”,
NY Times (November 23, 2013),
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/
My good friend, Professor Art Hobson, commented recently on the Iran deal. His astute analysis brings together his deep understanding of physics, and honest political analysis. His pieces were originally published in the Northwest Arkansas Times of Fayetteville, and with his permission I publish some segments:
Iran
has a large stock of nuclear reactor fuel that is "enriched" to 3.5
percent fissionable uranium as a fraction of total uranium content.
"Fissionable" means the individual atomic nuclei can be split,
yielding useable energy. Iran also has a smaller stock of 20 percent
enriched uranium, which it claims to need for medicine and research.
Enrichment separates the lighter-weight fissionable uranium from the
heavier-weight non-fissionable uranium by spinning it rapidly in uranium
centrifuges. Just as dairy
centrifuges spin milk in order to force the milk to the outside while
pulling the lighter-weight cream to the inside where it can be removed,
uranium-separation centrifuges pull the lighter uranium to the inside. Iran
has installed 12,000 centrifuges in its large Natanz enrichment plant and its smaller underground and heavily fortified Fordow plant.
The problem is, Iran's enrichment capability is much greater than required for their announced peaceful purposes. Iran
has
little apparent present need for low-enriched reactor fuel, because its
only power reactor uses low-enriched fuel provided by Russia. Furthermore,
Iran's 20 percent enriched stockpile is especially dangerous
because, in the "exponential" process of enrichment, it's a whole lot
easier to go from 20 percent to the 90 percent level needed for nuclear
weapons than it is to go from 3.5 percent to 90 percent.
Making matters worse, Iran wants to start up its Arak reactor, fueled by non-enriched natural uranium. The
heat-transferring
"coolant" in such a reactor must be a form of water called "heavy
water," having hydrogen atoms (water is made of oxygen and hydrogen)
that are twice as heavy as normal hydrogen. This type of
reactor
produces, as a side effect of the heat that goes into generating
electricity, a form of plutonium that can be easily "reprocessed" into
nuclear weapons fuel. The Arak reactor will yield enough plutonium for one
or two nuclear bombs per year.
Under the six-month deal signed in Geneva, Iran agrees to many changes: halt
enrichment above 5 percent; dismantle
the centrifuge connections needed to enrich above 5 percent; neutralize
their entire stockpile of 20 percent uranium by diluting it to below 5
percent or converting it to a chemical form that cannot be used for
further enrichment; install no new centrifuges;
render some two-thirds of their centrifuges inoperable; construct no new
enrichment facilities; halt the growth of their 3.5 percent uranium;
halt progress on the Arak reactor by halting fuel production, not
fueling it, not installing additional reactor components,
not transferring fuel or heavy water to the site, and not constructing a
reprocessing facility. Iran also agrees to provide daily access to international inspectors at Natanz and Fordow,
at its centrifuge production plants, at its uranium mines, and at the Arak reactor. These steps won't dismantle Iran's bomb program, but they will stop its progress toward a bomb.
In return, Iran gets limited, temporary, and reversible relief from sanctions. The
vast bulk of the sanctions, including the oil, finance, and banking sanctions, will continue during the six months. For example, only $7 billion of the $100 billion in presently inaccessible foreign exchange holdings
will become accessible.
Why might Iran want nuclear weapons? It's an essential but seldom-asked question. The
reason cannot be "to attack Israel," because attacking would bring quick annihilation by Israel and the United States. Instead, it wants to balance Israel, which has a
formidable nuclear arsenal of some 200 weapons. Because of
the power and prestige that are unfortunately conferred on nuclear
weapons nations, it's plausible that Iran wants to balance Israel's
nuclear arsenal with
one of its own. If Israel wants to prevent neighboring
nations from attaining their own nuclear arsenals, it must give up its
own nuclear weapons.
Israel
developed its 100 to 200 nuclear weapons during the 1960s, and today
has a secure "triad" (land missiles, bombers, submarines) of delivery
systems. Israel's
plutonium-producing reactor at Dimona is similar to Iran's partially
built Arak reactor, except that Israel also has a reprocessing facility
to convert plutonium to bomb-usable form. Israel hid this development
from U.S. inspectors and, when it was finally
discovered, claimed it was purely for peaceful purposes. Like Iran,
Israel also has an uranium enrichment facility.
Although
the U.S. was unhappy with Israel's nuclear developments, President
Nixon and Kissinger decided in 1969 to accept Israel as the world's
sixth nuclear power, provided
they didn't openly test or brandish their weapons. This is the current
policy.
Today's
Mideast is not the Mideast of 1970. If the status quo ever worked, it
certainly isn't working today. Joe Cirincione, President of the
Ploughshares Fund, a nuclear
weapons policy organization, reports that "It is impossible to give a
nuclear policy talk in the Middle East without having the questions
focus almost entirely on Israel." Israel's neighbors will not accept
Israel as the region's only nuclear power, especially
in view of the continuing Israeli-Palestinian struggle. Iran's drive
for nuclear weapons is deplorable but not surprising in view of Israel's
arsenal.
A
Mideast nuclear-free zone, including Israel, is the sustainable way out
of this situation. It can happen. Dominant Mideast powers have
frequently expressed
interest. At an international conference of 120 nations in August,
2012, Iran's Ayatollah Khamenei called for a Mideast nuclear-free
zone. The United Nations Non-Proliferation Treaty's 189 nations,
including the U.S., voted unanimously in 2010 to convene
a conference on establishing such a zone. Saudi Arabia has generally
supported the idea. But Israel refuses to discuss disarmament, refuses
U.N. inspections, and is one of only four nations remaining outside the
NPT. Nevertheless, 64 percent of Israelis
favor a nuclear-free zone that would include Israel.
The
solution is a disarmament agreement with Iran and discussion of a
nuclear-free zone. But that discussion can't begin until Israel feels
more secure,
and that in turn can't happen until there is a peaceful resolution
between Israel and Palestine.
President
Obama and Secretary of State Kerry are exactly right in pushing both
for an Israeli-Palestinian settlement, and for the nuclear agreement
with Iran. As Kissinger
and Shultz point out, that deal will not entirely disarm Iran. That
fact makes it urgent that the Israeli-Palestinian mess be settled as
soon as possible, so that the region can proceed to a nuclear-free
zone.
Berlin, 28. November 2013Philipp Mißfelder: Iran must not gain the skills for producing nuclear weapons
On the occasion of the debate in the Bundestag on the preliminary nuclear deal with Iran, the foreign policy spokesman of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group, MP Philipp Mißfelder explains:
“The CDU/CSU parliamentary group takes the concerns of the Jewish State of Israel very seriously concerning the solution found with Islamic Republic of Iran on its nuclear program. Iran must now take the opportunity to dispel any doubts about the exclusively peaceful use of its uranium enrichment. After the agreement reached in Geneva, the Iran has not to dismantle its previously built nuclear reactors, but can continue to operate these facilities. As one of the countries with the most oil occurrence in the world, Iran emphasizes at every opportunity its need of those nuclear plants for producing energy. This argument is extremely contradictory. The agreement reached in Geneva is valid at first for half a year...
Iran was very adept at concealing his true intentions in the past. Therefore, the international community should not make the mistake and rely only on verbal assurances. In the coming weeks and months, it will therefore be important to require verifiable results of the commitments made in Geneva. Iran must not gain the skills for producing nuclear weapons. Therefore, the pressure must be maintained.”
His Excellency Ambassador Manuel Hassassian
On
November 20, 2013, His Excellency Ambassador Manuel Hassassian visited
the University of Hull and delivered a lectured to a packed auditorium.
Below is a summary of his
communication.
On the present condition:
We are stuck between the historical inevitability and the political constraints.
There is no military solution to this protracted conflict.
Israel has won all wars, but it is not able to secure its citizens.
Violence only breeds violence.
The occupation needs to end because it is violent.
On Palestine:
We the Palestinians failed when we used violence and also when we resorted to negotiations.
Palestinian
democracy is not European. It will include also Sharia law and
Palestinian cultural views. Israel and other countries should accept and
respect this. They cannot expect
Palestine to adopt their liberal democracy. It is not going to work.
Hamas:
Hamas
is concerned with violence. It must change its policies because they
are losing options and supporters. Within a year, Hassassian predicts,
Hamas will adopt a pragmatic stand.
Qatar has stopped its financial support of Hamas.
On Israel:
Israel
continues the occupation for a very long time. There are 600
checkpoints. It is ugly. Peace is the only way to resolve the conflict.
The
settlements’ profit is $700 million a year. They are illegal according
to international law yet are able to sell their products.
Only 10% of settlers are ideologically motivated. The rest are there for economic reasons.
Israel is above international law. It can exert power over Europe and the USA.
On the USA:
The USA until now has only managed the conflict. Despite its best efforts, it was unable to solve it.
Obama does not care about peace. John Kerry does care.
USA
will never shift its alliance from Israel to Palestine. There are more
Arabs than Jews in the USA but the Arabs have different agendas. They
are divided whereas the Jews are united
around Israel.
USA
and Israel have a Catholic marriage. USA is committed to Israel because
of the American Jewry and the support of many millions of Christians
whose religion commits them to protect
Israel.
Nothing today is moving towards peace. USA cannot be the only police power in the world.
Jerusalem:
Jerusalem should be solved bottom up. Procedures for running the city should be installed. Later decide on sovereignty.
Iran:
Iran
threat is also a threat to Palestine. We also don’t wish Iran to have
nuclear capacity. Such capacity would constitute a threat to many Arab
countries. But Iran should be free
to develop nuclear power for peaceful ends.
Arafat:
Arafat had duality of peace and violence. On the other hand, Abbas is a man of peace.
Arafat could not have decided on refugees and Jerusalem in Camp David.
Abu Mazen:
Abu
Mazen is a man of peace. He does not have the duality of peace and
violence that Arafat had. He consistently spoke for peace and against
violence.
Abu Mazen has been attacked as Quisling of Israel because he pursues peace. He is a pragmatic politician.
Abu Mazen is committed to peace. He is not corrupt. He is a rich man. He does not need to be corrupt.
Arafat was not corrupt either, but he corrupted others. Abu Mazen tries to fight corruption.
Rabin:
Rabin
was a courageous leader. Arafat always spoke about him with
appreciation. If Rabin were alive, there could have been peace already
in 1999.
Barak:
Barak was a huge disappointment. He is a failed disciple of Rabin.
Prospects for peace:
Oslo has failed because it left the substantive issues to a later stage.
In any negotiations, parties should be on a par. Top dog/underdog negotiations are doomed to fail.
The negotiations were never just because Israel was always more powerful.
Europeans are payers but not players. They pay the check but are not part of the negotiations.
Refugees, Temple Mount, exchange of territories, major blocs, Jerusalem, the Old City, security, borders, all can be resolved.
Peace
is not simply the signing of agreement between governments. We need
peace building and education to build bridges between people. Otherwise
we will have cold peace, like the
peace between Israel and Egypt and Jordan. Peace should be built from
grassroots.
Israel
has missed many opportunities for peace. Israel should make the
necessary just concessions. The Palestinians have already conceded to
have mere 22% of the historical Palestine.
Once Israel will agree to make the necessary concessions, then it will
be possible to make the region thrive like Benelux.
Hassassian
sounded like Shimon Peres when he articulated a vision of economic
development shared by Israel, Palestine, Egypt and Jordan. He said: “We
can create a French Riviera in
the Middle East”.
Hassassian
said that Palestine needs no weapons. It can be demilitarized. “We wish
to have economic heaven, not to waste resources on weapons”. He went on
to say: “Our first military
pact should be with Israel”.
Hassassian maintained that he is in favour of a two-state solution.
Hassassian
does not think he will see peace in his lifetime, yet at the same time
he remains optimistic. He told me: “Try harder, do not lose hope”.
Plans for the future:
If
Israel does not commit to peace and will continue with the building of
settlements, Hassassian detailed the Palestinian action plan against
Israel. He said that the campaign will
be strong and relentless. It will enjoy the support of all Muslim and
Arab countries. Hassassian predicts that the campaign will also enjoy
the growing support of European, Asian, African and South American
countries. Israel will become isolated. Hassassian
candidly said that the campaign will include concrete steps:
Marches of thousands of people from
Bil'in and other Palestinian towns
to the checkpoints.
Push for UN recognition of Palestine as fully fledged member.
Peaceful resistance and diplomatic struggle in international organizations.
Take Israel to the Hague International Criminal Court.
Campaign to stop the occupation.
Push for boycotting Israel if it continues the occupation.
Affecting and hurting the economy of Israel.
You can listen to Ambassador Hassassian’s lecture on
http://www2.hull.ac.uk/fass/
Labour Has a New Leader
On
November 21, 2013, the Israeli Labour Party elected a new chairperson.
MK Isaac Herzog beat the incumbent Shelly Yachimovich with 58 percent of
the vote while Yachimovich gained mere 42 percent.
Herzog, 53, a lawyer before entering politics, is the son of former
Israeli President Chaim Herzog and has held several ministerial
positions in previous governments.
I
hope Herzog will become the peace camp leader and will dedicate much of
his time to promote two-state solution. Herzog has spoken in the past
in favour of Palestinian independence.
Peace Conference in Angers, France
I was invited to Angers to take part in
Israel – Palestine 2020 – La guerre de l’eau aura-t-elle lieu?
The
conference aimed to bring together Israelis, Palestinians and others
(mostly French) who are committed to peace, and to
discuss possible solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The main
issue was the water problem although other sticking points were
discussed as well.
Every meeting that brings together Palestinians and Israelis is important. We need to meet one another as human beings, as
people who enjoy similar things, and who share similar fears. Every such meeting is valuable in itself.
I talked about “Why Two-State Solution?” and participated in the closing round-table. We emphasized the importance of grassroots,
of
working together, promoting the work of civic organizations that are
committed to peace and that could contribute to the understanding
between the two societies. We accentuated the need to involve the
communities on both sides of the divide, and insisted
that the media should play a positive role in the construction of peace.
It
is unfortunate that some universities in the West Bank cooperate with
Israeli universities and other Israeli institutions while others
prohibit such cooperation. They perceive
any such cooperation as “betrayal”.
Speakers
raised the concern of water shortage in the region. Israel and
Palestine need to share water as there is limited rainfall, and only one
major waterway, the Jordan River that
is exploited more than it should be.
Israel
is very efficient in utilizing water. It uses gas to desalinate water
but it does not provide the Palestinians their water needs.
Mohammad
Said al Hamidi, who took part in the Oslo negotiations, put the problem
in one succinct sentence: The Palestinians are thirsty. In many
villages, people open the tab and
no water are coming. In many places, there is shortage of water. In many
places, Palestinians enjoy limited amount of water only five days of
the week.
In
Oslo, Israel and the PA agreed on quota allowances. These allowances
did not change since then despite the natural growth of the Palestinian
people.
Sharing
water can be a catalyst for peace. We need to build trust and create
bridges between the two people. We need to treat one another as equals
and collaborate to better the destiny
of our region.
I thank Professor Christian Pihet and Mr Marc Zerbib for their kind invitation to take part in this important gathering.
Visitor to the University of Hull – Professor Eric Barendt
I
was delighted to host my law tutor at St. Catherine’s College, Oxford,
Professor Eric Barendt. Eric delivered a talk to a full house on
“Is it legitimate to ban hate speech?”.
The
legitimacy of hate speech bans is one of the hardest questions for
liberal democracies to resolve. Can extreme hate speech be restricted
without interfering with free political
discourse?
Eric Barendt, Emeritus Professor of Law, UCL, is an internationally renowned expert on media law. He was Goodman Professor of Media Law at UCL from 1990 until 2010. Before coming to UCL, he lectured law at St. Catherine’s College, Oxford. Professor Barendt is the author of many important books and articles on media law, the laws of libel and privacy, and freedom of expression, most notably Freedom of Speech (2ndedition: Oxford University Press, 2005). His most recent book is Academic Freedom and the Law (Hart, 2010). Professor Barendt is also the editor of the Journal of Media Law.
The International Hrant Dink Award is waiting for your nominees
The International Hrant Dink Award winners will be announced on September 15th, 2014.
Every
year, the Award will be presented to individuals, organizations or
groups that work for a free and just world free from discrimination,
racism and violence, who take personal
risks for achieving those ideals, who break the stereotypes and use the
language of peace and by doing so give inspiration and hope to others.
By means of this Award, the Hrant Dink Foundation aims to remind to all
those who struggle for these ideals that
their voices are heard, their works are visible, they are not alone, and
also to encourage everyone to fight for their ideals.
This year proposals for nominations will be accepted until April 15th 2014.
This year proposals for nominations will be accepted until April 15th 2014.
How can I submit nomination?
You can submit your nominations until April 15th 2014, either by filling in the nomination form on the websitewww.hrantdinkaward.org
You can submit your nominations until April 15th 2014, either by filling in the nomination form on the websitewww.hrantdinkaward.org
Providing detailed information about your nominee will help the International Jury in the selection process.
Exchange with Abe Silverman
Nov 19/2013
Dear Rafi
Hello
from very cold and snowy Western Canada. I am still trying to get
together with Suresh. I hope that we will spend some time together
during the Holidays.
I
would like to respond to some of the issues you raised. Yes, I am still
in favour of a 2 State solution but am more sceptical then ever that it
will happen any time soon.
It
is my strong opinion that if Israel's starting position in the
negotiations are that the border will follow the security barrier and
the IDF will have a presence in the Jordan
Valley and this position is because the Israeli leadership need to
ensure security for it's citizens so be it. You have to start somewhere.
What can the Palestinians offer that will satisfy Israel's security
needs? And if the issue of settlements is one of
ownership of the land let the courts decide. Was the land bought and
paid for, and it should not make a difference by whom. If the dispute is
over where the settlements are located, in Israel or Palestine, that
has to be negotiated. Arabs live in Israel and
Jews should be able to live in Palestine. Anything else is just ethnic
cleansing. ie Gaza and Sinai.
Can
I recommend that you read The Prime Ministers by Yehuda Avner. I think
that he knew better than anyone what events occurred leading up to the
Yom Kippur war.
And
I am no lawyer but I would think that hate speech should be a
chargeable offense if it can be proven to be Libelous and Defamatory.
Chag Chanukah Samaich
Abe
Dear Abe
Thank you.
I will order Yehuda Avner, The Prime Ministers for
my library. Hope they will be willing to process my request.
Israel
does not buy land from the Palestinians in the West Bank. It simply
takes it from them. The practice has been going on for many years, under
the directives of Pleah Albek.
I recommend Azoulay, Ariella and Adi Ophir, The One-State Condition (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2012).Best wishes
Raphael
Nov 21/13
I
think that you are somewhat misinformed. In 1979 Israel's Supreme Court
ruled that no privately owned land could be confiscated and this
decision was written into law by the Government
of the day. The only exception is in cases of National security. In 1982
an Israeli attorney Pleah Albek argued successfully that lands
confiscated by Israel in Palestinian Susya was illegal. There are many
case dealt with by Israel's Supreme court which upheld
the claims of land ownership by Palestinian Arabs. Are there abuses?
Yes. Have all land claims been settled in Canada with the First Nations
Community after some 200 years? No. Has Australia dealt with all land
claims of their Aboriginal Community? No. Am
I trying to suggest that 2 wrongs make a right? No. What I am suggesting
is that these are very complicated issues that need to be resolved and
It is my strong opinion that Israel going back to the Partition Plan of
1947, Ehud Barak's offer to Arafat and Olmert's
offer to Abbas etc. has shown Israel's commitment to a 2 State Solution
and the Arabs have yet to accept Israel as the Historical Homeland of
the Jewish people. I think that without that acceptance peace is not
possible.
Warm regards
Abe
Dec13/13
Shabat Shalom
"The
Jews inserted special prayers last month for God to bring them rain but
used the Kabbalistic ideas in a code that encrypted requests that a
winter storm would coincide with Kerry's
visit and disrupt his schedule", Abbas told the official PA news agency.
There
are to many coincidences Abbas told reporters in Kerry's entourage
after the Secretary of State landed at Ben Gurion Airport. This is only a
hint of what would happen if we were
to recognize Israel a Jewish State. The Jews can not be trusted. They
will use their influence on God to get what they want. There might even
be peace Allah forbid, one day.
The
Jews will stop at nothing to ditch the negotiations that are aimed at
two states, a Palestinian State based on our needs for secure borders
and an Israeli State with clear and
secure boundaries of Dizengoff Square, the Mediterranean Sea and the
Azreilla Mall.
Abbas
also threatened that if the Jews did not rip out from their Sabbath
prayer books the prayer for the Government of Israel and the IDF, he
will go to the United Nations to declare
a boycott on all Synagogues throughout the world. I will also appeal to
the International Court after we gain membership there, to rule Jewish
prayers a war crime because they ask Him to take vengeance on Israel's
enemies.
Does this sound like a leader that is rational and can be trusted to uphold any peace deal?
Call me naïve. It sure is not the basket were I would place all of my eggs.
Warm regards
Abe
December 14, 2013
Dear Abe
Peace is done between enemies, not friends. The Palestinians are bitter enemies. There is a lot of bad blood between the two sides, animosity, distrust, hatred, ignorance, demonization, and lack of understanding and appreciation of each other’s culture.
What we say about the Palestinians, they say about us. “They are the enemy”. “They understand only force”. “They do not want peace”. “They want our land”. “They want to destroy us”. “They do not understand us”. “They do not appreciate our culture”. “They are evil”. “They are not to be trusted”, etc.
This conflict will not be resolved without a price, and if it won’t be resolved the cycle of violence will continue. If we won’t speak, we are doomed to fight. For me, blood is the highest price to be paid, and I am willing to pay smaller prices to avoid paying with blood. We must strive to install peace and see all that we can that future generations, our children and grandchildren, could live in Israel and in Palestine like normal people, free of violence, terror and brutality.
Israel is by far the stronger side. Israel occupies Palestine. Thus Israel needs to be generous yet careful, kind and considerate, just and benevolent. Israel should insist on security matters and be forthcoming in enabling the Palestinians establish their sovereign, independent state. Sovereign Palestine is an Israeli interest as well. Their viability will contribute to our security, our flourishing, and to the stability in the region. Their vitality will contribute to our economy. Their borders will help Israel define its own borders. Sixty five years after our independence, Israel still does not have clear and defined borders. This is abnormal. This should be settled in a just and fair way.
EU Parliament votes for 40% of Seats on Company Boards for Women
Companies listed on stock exchanges in the EU would have to bring in transparent recruitment procedures so that by 2020, at least 40% of their non-executive directors are women, under a draft EU directive voted for by the EUParliament on 20 November. The draft directive has been approved following an analysis which shows that only 17.6% of non-executive board members of the EU's largest companies were women. The rules would not apply to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), i.e. those that employ fewer than 250 persons. Where candidates are equally well qualified, priority should go to the candidate of the under-represented sex. Companies that fail to abide by the rules will be required to explain why and notify national authorities on the measures taken and plans to achieve the target in future. Penalties such as fines should be imposed for failing to follow transparent appointment procedures, rather than for failing to achieve the target. To take effect, the directive needs to be endorsed by the Council of Ministers.
My New Article – Two-State Solution
December 14, 2013
Dear Abe
Peace is done between enemies, not friends. The Palestinians are bitter enemies. There is a lot of bad blood between the two sides, animosity, distrust, hatred, ignorance, demonization, and lack of understanding and appreciation of each other’s culture.
What we say about the Palestinians, they say about us. “They are the enemy”. “They understand only force”. “They do not want peace”. “They want our land”. “They want to destroy us”. “They do not understand us”. “They do not appreciate our culture”. “They are evil”. “They are not to be trusted”, etc.
This conflict will not be resolved without a price, and if it won’t be resolved the cycle of violence will continue. If we won’t speak, we are doomed to fight. For me, blood is the highest price to be paid, and I am willing to pay smaller prices to avoid paying with blood. We must strive to install peace and see all that we can that future generations, our children and grandchildren, could live in Israel and in Palestine like normal people, free of violence, terror and brutality.
Israel is by far the stronger side. Israel occupies Palestine. Thus Israel needs to be generous yet careful, kind and considerate, just and benevolent. Israel should insist on security matters and be forthcoming in enabling the Palestinians establish their sovereign, independent state. Sovereign Palestine is an Israeli interest as well. Their viability will contribute to our security, our flourishing, and to the stability in the region. Their vitality will contribute to our economy. Their borders will help Israel define its own borders. Sixty five years after our independence, Israel still does not have clear and defined borders. This is abnormal. This should be settled in a just and fair way.
EU Parliament votes for 40% of Seats on Company Boards for Women
Companies listed on stock exchanges in the EU would have to bring in transparent recruitment procedures so that by 2020, at least 40% of their non-executive directors are women, under a draft EU directive voted for by the EUParliament on 20 November. The draft directive has been approved following an analysis which shows that only 17.6% of non-executive board members of the EU's largest companies were women. The rules would not apply to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), i.e. those that employ fewer than 250 persons. Where candidates are equally well qualified, priority should go to the candidate of the under-represented sex. Companies that fail to abide by the rules will be required to explain why and notify national authorities on the measures taken and plans to achieve the target in future. Penalties such as fines should be imposed for failing to follow transparent appointment procedures, rather than for failing to achieve the target. To take effect, the directive needs to be endorsed by the Council of Ministers.
My New Article – Two-State Solution
Raphael Cohen-Almagor, “Two-State Solution: The Way Forward”, in
Sharnoff’s Global Views (November 22, 2013),
http://www.
My Republished Article -
Combating Terrorism on the Free Highway
New Books
Warm congratulations to my friend and colleague
Alan Craig on the publication of his book International Legitimacy and the Politics of Security (Lanham, Maryland: Lexington Books, 2013).
I have browsed the book which looks both comprehensive and interesting.
Mazal Tov! Alan. Go from strength to strength.
Book description: Delegitimation has become the new battleground for Israel and the critics of Israeli military operations. But the Israeli experience reveals a more general engagement where all states act strategically to build legitimacy for their policies and all resist attempts at delegitimation. To understand these processes it is necessary to see how politicized moral and legal judgments shape both the use of force by states and our judgments about the means and the outcomes. This is a book about legitimacy, military lawyers and security. More particularly, it is about how the legitimacy of Israel’s asymmetric military operations cannot be detached from the politics of law and ethics. Sometimes it is enough that states respect the laws of armed conflict, but at other times they may be held to a higher standard. This does not happen in a vacuum. Rather it is the product of political engagement in the murky politics of international legitimacy where standards are negotiable and some states get a harder time than others. There is a strong theoretical analysis underpinning a discussion that constantly returns to the practical problems of modern armed conflict where combatants hide among civilians and states complain about the unrealistic expectations of human rights NGOs. Here, the law is unclear and there are choices to be made. The book presents new research into the involvement of Israeli military lawyers in operational targeting decision making that has life and death consequences. The case studies concern targeted killing during the Second Intifada, Israel’s 2006 Lebanon War, the 2009 Operation Cast Lead in Gaza and, finally, the 2010 Israeli maritime interception of the ‘Turkish Flotilla’ to Gaza. The investigation identifies a struggle between the proponents of human rights in war and those who promote the rights of states to deploy military force for the security of their citizens. But not all parties to a military conflict are held to the same standards. In fact, the analysis maps a complex political deployment of law and ethics in the strategic calculation of legitimacy costs and the diplomatic processes whereby they are contested, with policy implications for those in charge of the design and execution of military operations.
Stephen J.A. Ward (ed.),
Global Media Ethics (Chichester: Wiley, 2013)
This is an interesting book as it gives voice to scholars from all around the globe. The book explores
how current
global changes in the media promote and inhibit responsible journalism.
Incorporating standard ways of analysis with non-western case studies,
the book covers a lot of ground that enriches the present conversations
and debates in media ethics, providing relevant
and timely ethical dilemmas to probe both by professionals and students
in the class room.
Among the book chapters:
ü
The Role of the Journalist in Reporting International Conflicts
ü
Contextual Ethics and Arab Mass Media
ü
From Journalism Ethics to an Ethics of Citizenship: Evidence from Colombia
ü
Media Ethics in a New Democracy: South African Perspectives on Freedom, Dignity, and Citizenship
ü
Democratization by Boilerplate: National Media, International Norms, and Sovereign Nation Building in Postwar Liberia
ü
The Role of Global Media in Telling the Climate Change Story
ü
Ethics of Global Disaster Reporting: Journalistic Witnessing and Objectivity
ü
Affective Expertise: The Journalism Ethics of Celebrity Sourcing
ü
Global Media Ethics, Justice, and Indian Journalism
This
is certainly not the standard text book in media ethics. I especially
recommend it to American scholars as the cases presented can be compared
and contrasted with the prevailing
norms and conduct in the Northern American media.
I thank Wiley for a copy of this stimulating book.
French v. British
In France, the taboo issues are money, politics and religion.
In England, the taboo issues are money and sex.
The French appreciate good wine.
The British love good beer.
If you wish to be truly unpopular in England, say something against alcohol consumption.
The United States tried to fight alcohol in the 1920s and failed miserably. The British will never attempt to try.
Monthly Poems
Quiet Muse
The trees are empty
Supermarkets completely nude
Brown dogs are barking like mad
In the air smell of dead.
Nights are black and long
Days red and double
This land is a crazy place
Blanket of hate covers common sense.
Sun beyond the horizon
Where is the promised promised land
Border stretches beyond imagination
Leaving is never easy
More so when rockets pounding.
Only your tired smile
The honey voice calms me down
Oxygen for dreary times
Gently put head to shoulder
Two, will make this too.
Raphael Cohen-Almagor
Friendship Is and Can Be
My friend is all of these!
Friendship is to trust
Friendship is having the kindness to help
Friendship is giving to others without thinking
Friendship is being there when someone need you
Friendship can be just a smile that brightens your day
Friendship is giving more than you expect to receive
Friendship is listening
Friendship is offering your opinion when you think you need to
Friendship can be many things
Friendship is different for everyone
Friendship could be holding a hand for support
Friendship is lending your shoulder to cry on
Friendship is mellow
Friendship is giving back
Friendship is only taking that what you need
Friendship can be that voice of reason you give
Friendship could also be a boost of encouragement when it's needed
Friendship stands the test of time
My friend is all of these!
Friendship is to trust
Friendship is having the kindness to help
Friendship is giving to others without thinking
Friendship is being there when someone need you
Friendship can be just a smile that brightens your day
Friendship is giving more than you expect to receive
Friendship is listening
Friendship is offering your opinion when you think you need to
Friendship can be many things
Friendship is different for everyone
Friendship could be holding a hand for support
Friendship is lending your shoulder to cry on
Friendship is mellow
Friendship is giving back
Friendship is only taking that what you need
Friendship can be that voice of reason you give
Friendship could also be a boost of encouragement when it's needed
Friendship stands the test of time
Friendship is show in many different ways
Friendship can be everlasting
Friendship is not always an easy thing
Friendship is hard to break apart
Friendship is strong
Friendship should never be taken for granted
Friendship is meant to be shared with all
Friendship is free and rewarding to share
Friendship can be unforgettable
Friendship is priceless to many
Friendship is a secret never to be told
Friendship is not having to say sorry but do
Friendship is not judging no matter what
Friendship is to share, the joy and the fear
Friendship is someone to run too when things are tough
Friendship is a hand to hold when things are so rough
Friendship is someone to laugh with not at you
Friendship is just knowing they are there
Friendship is very personal
Friendship is all of these things and many more
This is are how I see friendship
To have a true Friend is the best thing to achieve
We all have one but it may take a very long time to find them.
Djean Whitney
Friendship can be everlasting
Friendship is not always an easy thing
Friendship is hard to break apart
Friendship is strong
Friendship should never be taken for granted
Friendship is meant to be shared with all
Friendship is free and rewarding to share
Friendship can be unforgettable
Friendship is priceless to many
Friendship is a secret never to be told
Friendship is not having to say sorry but do
Friendship is not judging no matter what
Friendship is to share, the joy and the fear
Friendship is someone to run too when things are tough
Friendship is a hand to hold when things are so rough
Friendship is someone to laugh with not at you
Friendship is just knowing they are there
Friendship is very personal
Friendship is all of these things and many more
This is are how I see friendship
To have a true Friend is the best thing to achieve
We all have one but it may take a very long time to find them.
Djean Whitney
Gem of the Month
NASA releases new mosaic of Earthlings waving at Saturn
Enjoy this beauty!
Gotta Love the Irish – Part 4
Lost at Sea
Two Irishmen, Patrick & Michael, were adrift in a lifeboat following a
dramatic escape from a burning freighter.
Two Irishmen, Patrick & Michael, were adrift in a lifeboat following a
dramatic escape from a burning freighter.
While rummaging through the boat's provisions, Patrick stumbled across an old lamp.
Secretly hoping that a genie would appear, he rubbed the lamp vigorously.
To the amazement of Patrick, a genie came forth.
This particular genie, however, stated that he could only deliver one wish,
not the standard three.
Without giving much thought to the matter, Patrick blurted out,
"Make the entire ocean into Guinness Beer!"
The genie clapped his hands with a deafening crash, and immediately the entire sea turned into the finest brew ever sampled by mortals.
Simultaneously, the genie vanished.
Only the gentle lapping of Guinness on the hull broke the stillness as the two men considered their circumstances.
Michael looked disgustedly at Patrick whose wish had been granted.
After a long, tension-filled moment, he spoke:
"Nice going Patrick!
Now we're going to have to pee in the boat!
Secretly hoping that a genie would appear, he rubbed the lamp vigorously.
To the amazement of Patrick, a genie came forth.
This particular genie, however, stated that he could only deliver one wish,
not the standard three.
Without giving much thought to the matter, Patrick blurted out,
"Make the entire ocean into Guinness Beer!"
The genie clapped his hands with a deafening crash, and immediately the entire sea turned into the finest brew ever sampled by mortals.
Simultaneously, the genie vanished.
Only the gentle lapping of Guinness on the hull broke the stillness as the two men considered their circumstances.
Michael looked disgustedly at Patrick whose wish had been granted.
After a long, tension-filled moment, he spoke:
"Nice going Patrick!
Now we're going to have to pee in the boat!
You've Been Drinking Again
An Irishman had been drinking at a pub all night. The bartender finally said that the bar was closing.
So, the Irishman stood up to leave fell flat on his face.
He tried to stand one more time; same result.
He figured he'll crawl outside and get some fresh air and maybe that will sober him up.
Once outside, he stood up and fell on his face again.
So he decided to crawl the four blocks home.
Again, he fell flat on his face.
He crawled through the door and into his bedroom.
When he reached his bed he tried one more time to stand up.
This time he managed to pull himself upright, but he quickly fell right into the bed and is sound asleep as soon as his head hit the pillow.
He was awakened the next morning to his wife standing over him, shouting,
"SO YOU'VE BEEN DRINKING AGAIN!"
Putting on an innocent look, and intent on bluffing it out he said,
"What makes you say that?"
"The pub just called;
you left your wheelchair there again."
An Irishman had been drinking at a pub all night. The bartender finally said that the bar was closing.
So, the Irishman stood up to leave fell flat on his face.
He tried to stand one more time; same result.
He figured he'll crawl outside and get some fresh air and maybe that will sober him up.
Once outside, he stood up and fell on his face again.
So he decided to crawl the four blocks home.
Again, he fell flat on his face.
He crawled through the door and into his bedroom.
When he reached his bed he tried one more time to stand up.
This time he managed to pull himself upright, but he quickly fell right into the bed and is sound asleep as soon as his head hit the pillow.
He was awakened the next morning to his wife standing over him, shouting,
"SO YOU'VE BEEN DRINKING AGAIN!"
Putting on an innocent look, and intent on bluffing it out he said,
"What makes you say that?"
"The pub just called;
you left your wheelchair there again."
And finally, I love the Irish because of
Michael Flatley,
Peace and love. Merry Christmas and much light. Happy New Year!!
Yours as ever,
Rafi
My last communications are available on
http://almagor.blogspot.com/
Earlier posts at my home page: http://hcc.haifa.ac.il/~rca/
People wishing to subscribe to this Monthly Newsletter are welcome to e-mail me at r.cohen-almagor@hull.ac.uk
Earlier posts at my home page: http://hcc.haifa.ac.il/~rca/
People wishing to subscribe to this Monthly Newsletter are welcome to e-mail me at r.cohen-almagor@hull.ac.uk
Follow me on Twitter at @almagor35
