{news} Fw: PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on Gaza; DISCUSSION period begins

[Ken Humphrey]

        I strongly support the proposal. The Gaza and occupational policies of disastrous proportions demand a long over-due taking a stand. Both corporate American parties acquiesce completely to fascist-type brutalities and wanton destruction and killings of innocent civilians, including young children, giving Israel their unquestioning endorsement.In the U.S. the Greens are the only alternative party that is extant to condemn Israel's policies. The Greens should not succumb to pressure to water down our humanitarian and moral reactions to the increasingly ruthless policies of the rightwing Israeli regime. We must speak up for the innocents that have been killed and their culture wantonly destroyed. Peace in the Middle East, and even the security of Israel itself calls for American pressure on Israel since we furnish the very weaponry Israel used against the Palestinians and in 2006 against the Lebanese. America shares the blame with Israel in the eyes of the world.

        Ken Humphrey

From: justinemccabe at earthlink.net
To: gpcwc at lists.riseup.net; ctgp-news at ml.greens.org
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 07:03:43 -0400
CC: 
Subject: {news} Fw: PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on Gaza;	DISCUSSION period begins










Dear CT Greens, 
 
This proposal is being discussed on the International Committee.
We'd appreciate any comments from you.
 
Justine McCabe
 
 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Justine McCabe 
To: USGP International Committee 
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 8:59 AM
Subject: PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on Gaza; DISCUSSION period 
begins





Dear IC, 


 
Last month, in response 
to the Gaza massacre, the IC considered a draft statement on the 
Palestinian-Israeli conflict
The wording of that 
statement culminated in a call to our sister Green Parties 
to join GPUS in endorsing the Palestinian civil society call for 
Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel.  We took a straw 
poll that resulted in majority support: 21 yes votes, 8 
no, 1 abstention, with 70% of IC members 
participating. 
 
Since then, former IC 
co-chair Julia Willebrand and I were away, and we had an election for co-chairs 
that consumed much time and effort.
So, it's time to return to 
that statement.     
 
As the straw poll 
ended, there was a difference of opinion as to whether a 
formal proposal seeking consensus--and vote if necessary--were in 
order.  Given that this statement would be used to lobby international 
Greens to support BDS in compliance with the directive to the IC contained 
in GPUS Prop 190 of 2005, newly-elected co-chair Steve Herrick and I 
thought that formally proposing this would be best.
And, assuming that consensus 
is reached on such a proposal, we would then notify the SC of this IC 
action, and begin to use it to lobby Green parties 
worldwide.
 
The proposal is below. According 
to our bylaws, we have a discussion period first in order to refine 
the language, etc.  
Since we have already discussed 
this at length, we propose that one-week should be sufficient..  At 
the end of that time, we'll test for consensus. 
   
 
PLEASE 
NOTE: 
 
1) We will be 
considering the statement WITHOUT the Background information, though 
it still appears below the statement itself as the "references" part of the 
proposal format. Unless there is strong support to the contrary, it seems 
that this Background section is too long to include for a statement 
that will be circulated.  Instead, Justine plans to rewrite this as 
a "White Paper" to submit to the IC later as we did with the Right of 
Return paper on our 
website.        
 
2) There are 2 differences in 
this draft from the one voted on last month: 
 
a) "A Call for Boycott, 
Divestment, Sanctions Against Israel" appears in the title of the statement 
unlike in the original
 
b) Given 
that ecological wisdom/sustainability is a central Green Party 
pillar, there was an omission in the original statement about the 
impact of the conflict on the environment.  In the revised statement, 
the following is included:
 
"Recognizing that 
this conflict continues to have a devastating ecological 
impact on Israel/Palestine, especially water sources, thereby decreasing 
security for the whole 
region;"      
 
 
We look forward to comments from 
everyone.
 
Peace, 
 
Justine McCabe and Steve 
Herrick
Co-chairs, International 
Committee, GPUS
 
 
-----------------------------------------------------

PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on 
Israeli-Palestinian Conflict for endorsement by International Green 
Parties
PRESENTER: International Committee, 
GPUS
CONTACT: Justine McCabe justinemccabe at earthink.net
SUBJECT:  DRAFT Green Party 
Statement on Gaza Crisis and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Call for 
Boycott, Divestment Sanctions Against Israel
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Implementation of 
the GPUS International Committee’s mission as directed by GPUS Prop 190 of 
November 21, 2005, “The GPUS National Committee directs the International 
Committee to work with our sister Green parties around the world in implementing 
an international boycott.” http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2005_11_28.shtml 

In keeping with Prop 190, and in response 
to the three-week Israeli assault on Gaza beginning in December 2008, the 
International Committee considered a draft statement to be circulated among 
international Green Parties urging them to join our party in endorsing the 
Boycott, Divestment Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel.  That statement was discussed at length 
among IC members and a straw poll revealed majority support for it.  This proposal is an opportunity for the 
IC to formally endorse the statement with the intention of then circulating it 
among international Green Parties for endorsement of the BDS campaign as 
directed by GPUS Prop 190.      
FULL PROPOSAL: Draft statement is below 

TIME LINE: Five-day discussion period, 
beginning Friday, March 20, 2009 ending Friday, March 27 at 10 pm PDT   
RESOURCES: Lobbying efforts by members of 
GPUS International Committee 
REFERENCES: 
"Background" section that appears below the statement
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DRAFT Green Party Statement On Gaza Crisis and the 
Palestinian-Israeli Conflict:
 A Call for Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions Against 
Israel
 Although 
Green Parties represent different countries and regions of the world, we 
share common principles essential to understanding and resolving this 
conflict. Among these principles are non-violence, including consistent 
enforcement of international law; ecological wisdom and sustainability, 
including reducing the negative impact of humankind on the natural environment; 
and social justice, thereby rejecting discrimination based on gender, class or 
ethnicity.
These 
principles guide our response to the recent crisis in Gaza that began on 
December 27, 2008 in which we condemn the killing of civilians, 
condemn the excessive and disproportionate force used by Israel, the Occupying 
Power in Gaza, call for a full and continuing ceasefire between Israel and the 
Hamas government in Gaza, and a complete withdrawal of all Israeli 
forces with the opening of all border crossings in 
Gaza
As 
of January 18, the Gaza crisis resulted in displacement of 
thousands of Palestine, the injury of more than 5,300, and the 
killing of over 1,300, mostly civilians. It has also caused 
the destruction of Gaza’s infrastructure, including demolition of 
hundreds of homes and attacks on UN schools and on the UNRWA 
warehouse, which is the source of basic necessities, such as food, 
fuel and medicines. According to a 1/15/09 UN press release: “One in every 
250 people in Gaza is either now dead or significantly injured . . . This 
number is comparable to 33,000 people in New York City or 1.2 million 
people in the United States.” 
http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/47d4e277b48d9d3685256ddc00612265/b974aca8e8fe201d85257540004ffedc!OpenDocument
Contrast 
this with the Hamas rocket attacks, which during the same 
period killed 3 Israelis civilians and 10 Israeli 
soldiers. 
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1232171510978&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout
Furthermore, we 
are greatly distressed by the continuing decoupling of these recent hostilities 
from their historic context, which encourages, inter alia, the following 
obstacles to peace:
•      
Demonization of Palestinians as inherently anti-Semitic, hateful 
terrorists;
•      
Delegitimization of lawful resistance by Palestinians to Israeli violations of 
their human and legal rights;
• 
    Propounding the myth of balance 
between the two peoples despite the patently disproportionate military and 
political power between them: an occupying power, Israel — nuclear-armed with 
the fourth largest military in the world, backed by a superpower — and 
Palestinians, an effectively disarmed, impoverished and occupied people;
• 
  Jettisoning of international law in favor of bilateral negotiations 
between two actors of such grossly unequal power, a course begun with the Madrid 
/Oslo process;
• 
  Distortions of human security needs of Israelis in favor of Israeli state 
security and regional domination;
• 
  Conflation of criticism of Israeli policies with anti-Semitism, which 
promotes regressive elements on both sides for political gain, trivializes the 
historic prejudice against Jews, and inhibits the expression of sympathy 
Palestinians do have for Jewish suffering, especially the Nazi 
holocaust.
 As 
a consequence we call for a redirection of international attention to the root 
causes of past and ongoing hostilities between Israelis and 
Palestinians, i.e., Palestinian dispossession and ethnic cleansing by 
Israel since 1948, and the establishment of an apartheid-like system 
in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) that discriminates 
against non-Jews.*
THEREFORE:
Recalling the 
historic examples of apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany that a just, 
enduring peace, and reconciliation between Palestinians and Israelis depend on 
acknowledgement of wrongdoing and restitution and;
Recalling that 
Europeans, not Palestinians, were responsible for the Nazi holocaust; we 
believe that individual European Green Parties, especially 
those with elected representatives in their 
governments, and in the EU parliament in their capacity to influence 
the European Union’s relation to Israel, have a special duty to ensure that 
Palestinians no longer bear the blame for historic European transgressions 
against Jews; and
Recalling that 
the Green Party of the United States has a particular obligation in relation to 
this conflict as the US government is Israel’s closest ally:
• 
   That Israel receives more than $5 billion annually in military and 
financial aid; that as current hostilities in Gaza illustrate, Israel’s use of 
this military aid often violates American laws in that the Arms Export 
Control Act stipulates that US-supplied weapons be used only for “legitimate 
self-defense” and that the US Foreign Assistance Act prohibits 
military assistance to any country “which engages in a consistent pattern of 
gross violations of internationally recognized human rights” and that 
the Proxmire Amendment bans military assistance to any government that 
refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to allow inspection of 
its nuclear facilities, as Israel refuses to do;
• 
   That the United States government, including both its major 
parties, has not been an impartial peace broker in this conflict but continues 
to provide political cover and protection to Israel internationally, 
particularly at the United Nations, where it has vetoed scores of Security 
Council Resolutions opposing Israel’s violations of Palestinian human rights and 
international law, thereby undermining the central purpose of the UN Charter to 
maintain international peace and security;
• 
   That US support for Israeli violations against the Palestinian 
people is a main source of antipathy to the US and the West among the world’s 
formerly colonized peoples who identify with Palestinians; that this US support 
not only decreases US/Western national security, but also contributes to Middle 
East and international instability; and
       http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=41982
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/world/14clash.html
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/65b122b6-e8c0-11dd-a4d0-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1
Recognizing that 
this conflict continues to have a devastating ecological 
impact on Israel/Palestine, especially water sources, thereby decreasing 
security for the whole region; and  
Recognizing that 
despite 61 years of continuous diplomatic attempts by the international 
community, it has failed to bring about Israel’s compliance with international 
law or respect for basic Palestinian human rights; and
Recognizing that, 
despite abundant condemnation of Israel’s policies by the UN, International 
Court of Justice, and all relevant international conventions, the international 
community of nations has failed to stop violations by Israel of Palestinian 
human rights in Israel and the OPT, while Israeli crimes continue with impunity, 
as the recent assault on Gaza illustrates; and
Recalling that 
ending institutionalized racism (apartheid) in South Africa demanded an unusual, 
cooperative action by the entire international community in the form of a 
boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaign against apartheid South 
Africa, and that BDS can become the most effective nonviolent means 
for achieving justice and genuine peace between Palestinians and Israelis, and 
in the region, through concerted international pressure as applied to apartheid 
South Africa; and
Recognizing that 
Palestinian resistance to ongoing dispossession has mainly been nonviolent, 
including its most basic form — remaining in their homes, on their land; and 
that while Palestinian armed resistance is legitimate under international law 
when directed at non-civilian targets, we believe that only nonviolent 
resistance will maintain the humanity of Palestinian society, elicit the 
greatest solidarity from others, and maximize the chance for future 
reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians; and
Recognizing, however, 
that our appeal to Palestinians to continue to resist nonviolently in the face 
of ongoing existential threats from Israel is hypocritical unless accompanied by 
substantial acts of international support; and
Recalling that 
in 2005, Palestinian Civil Society appealed to the international community to 
support a BDS campaign against Israel; and
Recalling that in 
response, at least two Green Parties have passed resolutions supporting this BDS 
campaign:
Green Party of the United States in 
2005
  http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2005_11_28.shtml
Green Party of England and Wales in 
2008
 http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=1733;
 We, international Green parties:
Call publicly 
for the implementation of boycott and divestment initiatives against Israel 
similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era; and
Agree to 
pressure our respective governments to impose embargoes and sanctions against 
Israel; and
Support maintaining 
these nonviolent punitive measures until Israel meets its obligation to 
recognize the Palestinian people’s inalienable right to self-determination and 
fully complies with the precepts of international law by:
1.    
Ending its occupation and colonization of all Palestinian lands and dismantling 
the Wall in the West Bank;
2.    
Recognizing the fundamental rights of Palestinian citizens of Israel to full 
equality; and
3.    
Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to 
return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194.
[Statement 
ends here]  
-------------------------------------------------
* Background
•      There is 
international consensus among scholars, including Israeli Jews (David Hirst, 
Benny Morris, Ilan Pappe, Tom Segev) that in 1948, Israel ethnically cleansed at 
least 80% of the native Palestinian Christians and Muslims — the majority 
population — from their lands and homes because they were not Jews, an act of 
genocide under international law. (See Professor Francis A. Boyle, who 
successfully argued before the World Court that ethnic cleansing is a form of 
genocide http://www.mediamonitors.net/francis1.html.) 
In 1948, Palestinian Christians and Muslims owned 93% of the 
land.
•      Since 1948, 
Israel has prevented Palestinian refugees from returning to their homes in 
Israel, while allowing non-native Jews to immigrate there. This constitutes a 
violation of several bodies of international law (law of nationality, customary 
human rights law / refugee law, humanitarian law) and international conventions, 
such as The Universal Declaration of Human rights (Article 13(2), 1948), The 
Fourth Geneva convention, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political 
Rights (1951), all embodied in UN General Assembly Resolution 194 (reaffirmed 
annually since 1948), and Security Council Resolution 237.
Moreover, for those refugees who wish to return, 
feasible plans have been proposed that would have meant minimal displacement of 
the current population, given that about 80% of Israeli Jews live in only 15% of 
the country, and that the vast majority of refugees could return to areas from 
which they came, as they are vacant or under populated.
http://english.aljazeera.net/archive/2005/05/200849162924283293.html
http://www.arts.mcgill.ca/MEPP/prrn/papers/abusitta.html
•      In the 1967 war, 
Israel seized control and has maintained a military occupation of the Syrian 
Golan Heights, Palestinian West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza (OPT), 
in violation of international law, which emphasizes the inadmissibility of the 
acquisition of territory by war no matter how the conflict began or how long it 
endures. During the war, another 300,000 Palestinians became refugees, some for 
the second time.
•      As the Occupying 
Power, Israel continues to violate its responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva 
Convention for the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, by the 
following practices:
–     
ongoing settlement of Jewish-only colonies on West Bank / East Jerusalem 
land, of which         40% 
is privately owned by Palestinians, that contain between 480,000 and 550,0000 
Israelis —         more 
than half settling during the Oslo Peace Process; and since the beginning of 
2009, 73,300 new Jewish-only settlements have been planned for the West Bank/ 
East Jerusalem, along with the        
planned destruction of homes to 1500 Palestinians in the East Jerusalem 
neighborhood of Silwan    

-      denial of 
freedom of movement by over 500 checkpoints and roadblocks
–     collective punishment, 
including curfews and closures, prevention of medical treatment, demolition of 
over 10,000 homes, of which, according to UN figures, only 6% involved any 
security suspects
–     
targeted assassinations
–     detention without 
charge
–     
torture in detention
–     denial of the right to 
peaceful assembly
–     
the uprooting, since 2000 alone, of nearly 2 million trees, and razing 
thousands of acres of         
agricultural land.
In sum, Israel has taken control of more than 50% of 
West Bank land (the whole West Bank represents only 22% of historic Palestine) 
to establish the settlements and reserve land for their expansion; Israel 
controls 100% of West Bank water, diverting 80% for Israeli use, leaving only 
20% for Palestinians — insufficient for Palestinian life and agriculture.  
http://www.btselem.org/English/Publications/Summaries/200205_Land_Grab.asp
http://www.btselem.org/english/water/2008070_acute_water_shortage_in_the_west_bank.asp
http://www.imemc.org/article/48308
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/natres/water/2007/0523arabisrael.htm
http://stopthewall.org/latestnews/1883.shtml
http://apjp.org/israel-planning-73300-new-home/
According to Israel’s human rights group B’Tselem, since 
September 2008, Israel has escalated its policy of separating the West Bank from 
Gaza and forcibly transferring — ethnic cleansing — West Bank Palestinians to 
Gaza, a policy supported by Israel’s supreme court. http://www.btselem.org/english/press_releases/20080910.asp
“Ethnic cleansing by Stealth,” by Seth Freedman, 
Guardian News, September 4, 2008 http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/sep/04/israelandthepalestinians.humanrights
Regarding US support of Israeli “benign” ethnic 
cleansing, see “Ethic Cleansing: Constructive, Benign, and Nefarious.” ZMagazine, August 09, 2006 By Edward S. 
Herman and Grace Kwinjeh http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/3419
•      In 2002, Israel 
began building a 790 km-long (494 mile) “apartheid wall” in the occupied West 
Bank, confiscating huge swaths of Palestinian agricultural land and water 
sources along a route that deviates from the 1967 “Green Line.” In 2004, the 
International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled the barrier to be illegal under 
international law, including the Fourth Geneva Convention, that it must be 
dismantled and reparations paid to Palestinians for losses incurred, and that 
“all States are under obligation not to recognize the illegal situation 
resulting form the construction of the wall in the Occupied Palestinian 
Territory . . . They are also under obligation not to render aid or assistance 
in maintaining the situation created by such construction.” http://www.icj- 
cij.org/docket/files/131/1677.pdf
Similarly, a detailed investigation by B’Tselem 
confirmed that, “under the guise of security,” Israel’s routing of the 
separation barrier was primarily to enable the expansion of illegal settlements 
and protect the economic interests of Israeli real estate developers, all in 
violation of Palestinian human rights, especially self-determination. http://www.btselem.org/Download/200512_Under_the_Guise_of_Security_Eng.doc
Thus far, Israel has refused to comply with the ICJ 
ruling, and continues to build the wall.
•Israel maintains an 
apartheid-like system in the West Bank, where a concrete barrier, two different 
legal systems and a “matrix of control” separate Israeli-Jewish settlers and 
Palestinians, and relegate the latter to a no man’s land of statelessness. For 
example, former US President Jimmy Carter (Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid) and 
B’Tselem describe the institutionalized system of discrimination in the OPT as 
“apartheid.” Similarly, citing the planned system of Jewish-only roads and 
settlements, and two different legal systems, B’Tselem reported in 
2002:
Israel 
has created in the Occupied Territories a regime of separation based on 
discrimination, applying two separate systems of law in the same area and basing 
the rights of individuals on their nationality. This regime is the only one of 
its kind in the world, and is reminiscent of distasteful regimes from the past, 
such as the Apartheid regime in South Africa. http://www.btselem.org/English/Press_Releases/20040616.asp
Again, in their 2004 report, “Discrimination-based 
separation — An Apartheid Practice”:
The roads 
regime, which is based on separation through discrimination, bears clear 
similarities to the racist apartheid regime that existed in South Africa until 
1994. An individual’s national origin determines their right to use various 
roads. This policy is based on a racist premise: that all Palestinians are 
security risks, and it is therefore justifiable to restrict their movement. Thus 
the policy indiscriminately harms the entire Palestinian population, in 
violation of their human rights and of international law. http://www.btselem.org/English/Publications/Summaries/200408_Forbidden_Roads.asp
On November 25, 2008, UN General Assembly President 
Miguel D’Escoto Brockmann also likened Israel’s policies toward the Palestinians 
in the West Bank and Gaza to South Africa’s treatment of blacks under apartheid. 
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1226404827209
•      Even before the 
current hostilities, Gaza was an immense open-air prison for 1.5 million people 
— two-thirds of whom are refugees from 1948 and 1967 — squeezed into 140 square 
miles and hemmed in on all sides by 25-foot-high walls separated by a vast 
expanse of bulldozed earth. (See “The Gaza Strip: A Humanitarian Implosion,” 
March 2008, http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/2008/images/03/06/gaza.implosion.pdf.) 
In late 2005, Israel unilaterally withdrew its soldiers and 8,000 settlers but 
continued to control Gaza from the air and sea, and monitor all exits and 
entries of persons and supplies. A blockade began after January 2006 when Hamas 
won parliamentary elections in the OPT, a result not accepted by Israel, the US 
and the EU, which withdrew aid from Gaza despite the facts that the election was 
regarded as fair and democratic, with a huge voter turnout (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1181813074587), and that Hamas had rescinded its call for Israel’s 
destruction and offered of a long-term truce in exchange for Israeli withdrawal 
from all the OPT. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/12/israel. 
The US then covertly armed Hamas’ political rival, Fatah, to provoke a 
Palestinian civil war and overthrow Hamas. After intense fighting, Hamas gained 
full control of Gaza in June 2007. http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/04/gaza200804?printable=true&currentPage=all
Since then, Israel has defined Gaza as an “enemy entity” 
and maintained a siege that intensified on November 5, 2008. http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n02/sieg01_.html. By 
December 2008, according to UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights for the OPT, 
Richard Falk, Gaza had a malnutrition rate of 75%, and healthcare and economic 
systems on the verge of collapse with 95% of factories closed and the highest 
unemployment rate in the world. http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N08/489/88/PDF/N0848988.pdf?OpenElement
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-falk/understanding-the-gaza-ca_b_154777.html
In November 2008 Israel denied entry of humanitarian aid 
to Gaza as UN food aid was running out. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7726943.stm. 
On 12/30/08 Israel rammed and severely damaged the SS Dignity in international waters. It was 
carrying medical supplies to Gaza with a delegation of physicians and human 
rights activists, including former US congresswoman and US Green Party’s 2008 
presidential candidate, Cynthia McKinney.
http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=162
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/12/30/gaza.aid.boat/?iref=hpmostpop#cnnSTCText
In sum, these are violations of international law under 
which Israel remains the Occupying Power charged with the protection of 
Palestinians in OPT, including Gaza. (“Israel prepares for war crimes over Gaza” 
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout&cid=1232171555977&utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss)
According to UN Special Rapporteur Falk’s 8/25/08 report 
to the UN General Assembly:
The whole approach taken 
toward Gaza by Israel and by the United States of America, and the European 
Union, since the Hamas electoral victory in January 2006, involves a massive and 
unlawful systematic violation of article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, 
which unconditionally prohibits collective punishment.
•    
Israel also maintains an 
apartheid-like system in Israel (within the 1967 “Green Line”) that 
systematically discriminates against its non-Jewish citizens, especially the 20% 
of its population who are Palestinian-Israelis.
Unlike South African institutionalized racism 
(apartheid), the non-Jewish citizens of Israel can vote in elections for members 
of parliament (Knesset) where they can have representation, though they have 
never been part of a governing coalition. Yet, the presence of these rights 
obscures Israel’s unacknowledged history of ethnic cleansing of the non-Jewish 
majority inhabitants of historic Palestine (1947–49; 1967) and their continuing 
dispossession, and masks the fundamental structures of the Israeli state that 
preclude equality and discriminate against non-Jewish citizens on an ethnic 
basis.
Indeed, not all rights are citizenship rights. In 
Israel, other rights, defined as “nationality” rights, are reserved for Jews 
only: exclusive use of land, privileged access to private and public employment, 
special educational loans, home mortgages, preferences for admission to 
universities, among others. From its official beginning, the Declaration of 
Independence, Israel established itself as a Jewish state, with a Jewish 
character, principles on which its Basic Laws are 
anchored.
While Israel has no constitution, this Declaration and 
its Basic Laws are viewed as the equivalents of constitutional law. For example, 
the 1985 amendment to Section 7a of the Basic Law (ironically, the “Anti-Racist 
Law”) bars any political party from participating in elections that explicitly 
or implicitly denies the Jewish and democratic character of the State of 
Israel; and the 1992 Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, which reiterates the 
Jewish and democratic characters of the state (Section 1a): “The purpose of the 
basic law is to protect human dignity and liberty, in order to establish in a 
Basic Law the values of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic 
state.”
Indeed, in the midst of the Gaza crisis, several 
violations of human rights and democracy occurred against Palestinian Israelis: 
the Israeli Elections Committee banned the participation of two 
Palestinian-Israeli parties (50% of Arab parties, representing 160,000 people) 
in the February 2009 elections (as had occurred in 2003) because they opposed 
the assault on Gaza and called for Israel to become a state of all its citizens 
rather than a Jewish state.  These 
positions were seen as violations of Israel’s Basic Law 7A forbidding candidates 
from calling for the destruction of the state 
of Israel as a democratic and Jewish state; incitement of racism; or support of 
a terrorist organization or an enemy state during a conflict, including visiting 
an enemy country in the seven years prior to their candidacy. [In response to a 
petition from a Palestinian human rights organization (Adalah), the Israeli 
Supreme Court did reinstate some of the candidates.  http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054867.html; 
http://news.antiwar.com/2009/01/12/israel-bans-arab-parties-from-election/ 
]
Similarly, during the Gaza 
assault, Palestinian-Israelis were banned from non-violently protesting the 
Israel’s actions. According to legal scholars Sharon Weill and Valentina Azarov 
(“Israel’s Authoritarian Transformation,” February 26, 2008 http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2009/02/26/israel-s-authoritarian-transformation):
[D]uring 230 such 
demonstrations, 801 protestors were arrested, 277 of them children and 
juveniles; arrests were made for "disturbing the peace," waving Palestinian 
flags, and "hurting the nation's morale." As of 7 February 2009, 255 people were 
still under arrest, including 89 children and juveniles; 114 indictments were 
submitted to the courts. Others were called in for interrogation by the security 
services, and were warned not to take part in any demonstration; some were put 
under house arrest and were prohibited from entering certain cities.
In sum, Israel’s self-definition defies logic: Israel 
cannot simultaneously be a Jewish state and democratic — which would require 
defining itself as the state of all its citizens. Instead, by law and unlike any 
other country in the world, Israel defines itself as the state of all the Jews 
in the world, to whom privilege over (even native) non-Jewish citizens is given. 
This exclusivity contrasts sharply with the alternative of designating the 
country as the “homeland” for the Jewish people, an inclusive designation that 
could be applied to the other people for whom the country is also homeland, the 
Palestinians.
In analyzing Israel’s Basic Laws, Palestinian-Israeli 
Nadim Rouhana (Henry Hart Rice Professor of Conflict Resolution, George Mason 
University and Director of the Arab Center for Applied Social Research in Haifa) 
underscores the inherent contradiction between Israel’s self-identity as Jewish 
and democratic (Palestinian Citizens in 
an Ethnic Jewish State, 1997), p. 46:
According 
to Kretzmer (1990), simply by introducing the 1985 amendment to Section 7a of 
the Basic Law . . . the Israeli Knesset demonstrated that the ‘recognition 
of Israel as the state of the Jewish people has indeed become an 
incontrovertible constitutional fact.’ 
But again, how can this definition of the state of Israel align with the essence 
of democracy: having the state as an equally accessible tool of all of its 
citizens? It simply precludes all non-Jewish citizens from claiming the state as 
equally theirs. If the state is the apparatus that concentrates power, 
determines the distribution of resources, rights and duties, benefits and 
national priorities, determines the criteria for significant national goals, and 
promulgates laws and regulations to achieve these goals, then by defining itself 
as the state of only one group of its citizens (and some who are not its 
citizens), the state cannot avoid violating the principles of 
democracy.
As the international community shunned apartheid South 
Africa in the late 20th century, the growing international opposition 
to Israel’s attempt to legitimize Jewish ethnic dominance reflects 
21st century world consciousness and consensus that such 
institutionalized dominance is archaic and undemocratic. Professor Virginia 
Tilley concludes (The One-State 
Solution, pp. 181–182):
[S]elf-styled 
as the ‘only 
democracy in the Middle East,’ 
Israel remains the only ethnic democracy claiming membership in the 
Euro-American international community. That claim is becoming an intolerable 
embarrassment, as the model is long obsolete elsewhere. For instance, the 
“White 
Australia” 
project sustained a racial democracy in the early twentieth century, banning 
Asian immigration and excluding Aborigines on the belief that only racial 
homogeneity could permit whites to freely enjoy a democratic practice brought 
from Europe. Southern states in the United States used a host of methods, 
official and unofficial, to exclude black voting and secure white dominion well 
into the 1960’s. 
But the civil movements that challenged and defeated these systems carried with 
them more than local or national change; they campaigned for and consolidated an 
international normative discourse that rejected ethnoracial supremacy as an 
inherent source of injustice, dehumanization, and human suffering. The shift 
rose to catch South Africa and quickly discredited apartheid; 
Milosevic’s 
Serbian ambitions also came too late and hit the cresting wave. The lessons from 
World War II had at last come to fruition: ethnic nationalism generates 
unacceptable discourses of ethnic supremacy and inferiority, grant moral 
authority to ethnic cleansing, and precludes equal rights before the law, which 
is the foundational principle of Western democracies. If a state is to be truly 
democratic — 
with all its citizens held equal before the law — 
it cannot be based on ethnic dominion. Whatever Israel claims based on the past 
sins of Europe or on its own mythologized past of peaceful resistance to 
ferocious Arabs, if the Jewish state claims membership in the Western club, it 
cannot expect to be held exempt from these principles.
Similarly, Jewish-American Professor Joel Kovel (former 
NY Green Party nominee for Senate) attributes Israel’s fatal flaw to its 
structurally racist nature as a Jewish state (Overcoming Zionism, 
p.165):
 [I]f you sign on to the idea of a Jewish 
state, you are taking the particularism that is the potential bane 
of any state, 
mixing it with the exceptionalism that is the actual bane of Judaism, and giving 
racism an objective, enduring, institutionalized, and obdurate character.  You accept, in that one moment, a state 
that systematically denies basic human rights to a fraction of its people and 
systematically grants another set of people superior right over them.  Thus racism is set into motion, and 
remains so, grounded in an exclusion based not on what the Other does but 
entirely on what the Other is, or to be more exact, is not, namely 
Jewish.  By this one gesture, no 
matter how one rationalized a Jewish state as owed the Jews by virtue of their 
sufferings, or ethical superiority, or promises made to ancestors, or 
generations of landlessness, or a Covenant with God, or cultural genius, or just 
because it feels good to have a state for one’s own kind—one violates the whole 
law by which humanity has risen above the much of narrow self-interest and 
cyclical vengeance.  And you cannot 
overcome that violation unless you undo the compact that locks it into place. 
     
Thus, Israel’s institutionalized racist policies toward 
non-Jews, meet the criteria of the “crime of apartheid,” which are described in 
Article II, International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the 
Crime of Apartheid (1973): http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/11.htm
For the 
purpose of the present Convention, the term ‘the crime of apartheid’, which 
shall include similar policies and practices of racial segregation and 
discrimination as practised in southern Africa, shall apply to the following 
inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining 
domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons 
and systematically oppressing them:
(c) Any 
legislative measures and other measures calculated to prevent a racial group or 
groups from participation in the political, social, economic and cultural life 
of the country and the deliberate creation of conditions preventing the full 
development of such a group or groups . . .
(d) 
Any measures, including legislative measures, designed to divide the population 
along racial lines by the creation of separate reserves and ghettos for the 
members of a racial group or groups, the prohibition of mixed marriages among 
members of various racial groups, the expropriation of landed property belonging 
to a racial group or groups or to members thereof;
See 
also 
For a side-by-side comparison of the convention’s 
definition of “apartheid” with examples of Israel’s human rights record within 
Israel as well as in the Occupied Territories, see report by Israeli Uri 
Strauss, “Defining Apartheid: Israel’s Record” http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article689.shtml
"Israel's 'Ethnocracy' and the Demographic Threat: Dr. 
As'ad Ghanem on Israel's Palestinian Citizens, October 21, 2009. http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/ht/d/ContentDetails/i/2359/pid/223
“Neither two states nor one: Disengagement and ‘creeping 
apartheid’ in Israel/Palestine” by Prof. Oren Yiftachel, The Arab World Geographer, Vol.8, No. 3, 
2005, http://www.geog.bgu.ac.il/members/yiftachel/new_papers_eng/Yiftachel%20in%20Arab%20World%20Geographer.pdf;
“Democracy or Ethnocracy: Territory and Settler Politics 
in Israel/Palestine” by Oren Yiftachel, http://www.merip.org/mer/mer207/yift.htm 
(Summer, 1998)
“Apartheid In the Holy Land” Paper Prepared Nafeez 
Mosaddeq Ahmed for the United Nations Conference Against Racism, Racial 
Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, 31st 
August–7th September, 2001 South Africa, http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq11.html
Some of the Israel laws discriminating 
against Israel’s non-Jewish citizens
Exclusive 
citizenship/immigration laws:
•      Law of Return 
(1950) and the Citizenship Law (1952)
•      Population 
Registry Law (1965)
• Citizenship and Entry into Israel law (July 
2003)
Exclusive use 
of state land by Jews
As a consequence of the laws listed below, non-Jews— 
“non-nationals” — who had succeeded in remaining in their native land, were 
dispossessed of their property at Israel’s founding in 1948, internally 
displaced and excluded by law from leasing, purchasing, building, or farming 93% 
of the land of Israel within the Green Line — land that is regarded by Israel as 
the inalienable patrimony of the Jewish people wherever they live, and is owned 
by the Jewish National Fund and the state and regulated by the Israel Land 
Authority.  Jewish-Israeli Uri Davis 
describes the process by which these quasi-governmental agencies maintain 
Israel’s racist land policies (Apartheid Israel, p. 
48):
In other words, in the 
critical areas of immigration, settlement and land development the Israeli 
sovereign, the       Knesset, 
which is formally accountable to all its citizens, Jews and non-Jews alike, has 
formulated and passed legislation ceding state sovereignty (including taxation) 
and entered into Covenants vesting its responsibilities with organization such 
as the WZO [World Zionist Organization], the JA [Jewish Agency], and the JNF 
[Jewish National Fund] which are constitutionally committed to serving and 
promoting the interests of Jews and Jews alone.  It is through this procedure of legal 
duplicity, the ceding of state sovereignty and vesting its responsibilities . . 
. with Zionist organizations constitutionally committed to the exclusive 
principle of ‘only for Jews’, that legal apartheid is regulated in Israel.  It is through this mechanism of legal 
duplicity that the State of Israel has successfully veiled the reality of 
Zionist apartheid in the guise of legal democracy since the establishment of the 
State of Israel to date.
Such land control mechanisms perpetuate a legally 
enforced system of territorial separation, by which Palestinian-Israelis (20+% 
of the population) now own only 3% of the land. This situation is actually worse 
than apartheid South Africa’s policy of “influx control” restricting the 
residence and land available to black South Africans citizens — 13% — while the 
remaining 87% was reserved for “white South Africa.”
1949:   Emergency Regulations (Cultivation 
of Waste Lands) Ordinance
1950:   Absentee Property 
Law
1952:   World Zionist Organization –Jewish 
Agency for the Land of Israel (Status) Law
1953:   Land Acquisition Law; Law for 
Confiscating Land for Public Interests; Jewish National Fund 
Law
1954:   Covenant between the Government of 
Israel and the Zionist Executive / Executive for the Jewish Agency for the Land 
of Israel
1960:   Basic Law; Israel Lands; Israel 
Lands Law; Israeli Lands Administration Law
1961:   Covenant between the State of 
Israel and the Jewish National Fund
1980:   Land Acquisition Law (Peace Treaty 
with Egypt): seizes thousands of dunams of Palestinian land to expand Jewish 
communities in the Negev
Discrimination and ethnic cleansing continues for 
Palestinian–Israelis:
Unrecognized Arab 
villages in Israel: At least eighty thousand Palestinian Bedouin–Israelis live 
in about 45 “unrecognized” villages in the Negev desert in the south of Israel. 
Following the adoption of the Planning and Construction Law of 1965, the 
villages did not appear on any Israeli map and were not recognized by any 
official government and ignored by all government planning projects. These 
Bedouin are citizens of Israel and have the right to vote in national elections 
and are expected to pay taxes. Yet their villages are deprived of basic 
services, like housing, water, electricity, education and health care. According 
to a report by anti-apartheid peace activists Bangani Ngeleza and Adri 
Nieuwhof:
There are 
disturbing similarities in living conditions between unrecognised villages and 
informal settlements under apartheid. These include lack of access to adequate 
potable water, lack of proper sanitation facilities, absence of proper road 
infrastructure, the lack of educational facilities, houses built of corrugated 
iron sheets (in some cases of black plastics and cardboard) etc. The 
similarities are striking between racially based policies that lay behind the 
creation of white settlements under the apartheid regime in South Africa then 
and the establishment of Jewish settlements by the Israeli 
government.
“Unrecognised villages in the Negev expose Israel’s 
apartheid policies” Bangani Ngeleza and Adri Nieuwhof, The Electronic Intifada, 21 December 
2005 http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article4358.shtml;
“Bedouin ask UN to help fight systemic discrimination in 
Israel” http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=734096
For an update on rising Israeli support for 
“transferring” out their fellow Palestinian citizens, see “Ethnic cleansing and 
Israel,” by Conn Hallinan, Counterpunch, March 3, 2009 http://www.counterpunch.org/hallinan03032009.html
Continuing 
efforts to “Judaize” Arab–Israeli areas like the Galilee, Negev and East 
Jerusalem
Israel continues policies to constrain 
Palestinian–Israeli life while privileging that of Jewish–Israelis.
See “A Campaign to Challenge Israeli Apartheid” March 
31, 2005 by Kole Kilibarda http://www.caiaweb.org/files/kilibarda.jamjoum-JNFcampaign.pdf
Isabelle Humphries, a British researcher on Palestinian 
internal refugees, attests to institutionalized Israeli discrimination towards 
Palestinian–Israelis displaced from their homes in the Galilee in 1948 but not 
expelled:
While 
Israel continues to claim that it is a democracy, it finds ways to discriminate 
and implement an apartheid system — and no more so than in the allocation of 
land and town planning. While the state and high court system maintain the 
pretense of keeping opportunities open to all, independent private organizations 
have no obligation to do so. Thus the state delegates and coordinates its work 
with Zionist establishments technically able to act as quasi-state institutions, 
despite the fact that their mandates openly state their aim of serving one 
ethnic group alone. The latest development plan for the Galilee and Negev is in 
full cooperation with the World Zionist Organization (WZO), the Jewish Agency 
(JA) and the Jewish National Fund (JNF) — non-state actors with an open Zionist 
and racist agenda. http://www.wrmea.com/archives/Sept_Oct_2005/0509012.html
See also:
 “Policy of 
Settlement and ‘spacial’ Judaization in the Naqab” by Hana Hamdan, Adalah’s Newsletter, Vol 11, October, 
2005 http://www.adalah.org/newsletter/eng/mar05/ar2.pdf  
“Case Studies in Ethnic Cleansing” complied by the 
Applied 
Research Institute-Jerusalem’s (ARIJ) http://www.poica.org/editor/case_studies/index.php?Y=2009
Segregated 
education systems until university
According to a 2006 Human Rights Watch 
report,
The 
Israeli government operates two separate school systems for its 1.8 million 
school children: a Jewish system and an Arab system. The students in the latter 
are Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel, nearly one quarter of all Israeli 
school children. Under international law, states may offer children separate 
educational systems for linguistic or religious reasons, but they may not 
discriminate in doing so . . . despite small advances in recent years, the 
discriminatory practices against Palestinian Arab school children that are 
institutionalized in its education system place Israel in violation of its 
international legal obligations. http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2006/01/02/discrimination-against-palestinian-arab-children-israeli-education-system
Also see “Discrimination Against 
Palestinian Arab Children in the Israeli Education System” by 
Zama Coursen-Neff in the New York University Journal of International Law and 
Politics, January 2, 2006.
While Israeli education is integrated at the university 
level, discrimination persists. Beyond the fact that the system advantages 
Jewish–Israelis in competing for university places, in 2003 Israel universities 
stopped an experimental admission procedure when it became clear that the main 
beneficiaries were Palestinian–Israelis rather than those intended — 
Jewish–Israeli students from low-income development towns. According to Ha’aretz’s Relly Sa’ar (“Universities return to 
aptitude exams to keep Arabs out”):
There’s 
no politically correct spin to put on it, and the facts speak for themselves: As 
soon as Israel’s top university administrators noticed that the big winners from 
admissions policy changes were not Jewish youngsters from low-income towns, but 
rather Arabs, they reverted back to the old admissions system. http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=365572
 
 Environmental Degradation 
in Israel/Palestine as a Result of the Conflict
 
The often violent 
implementation of Zionist policies toward Palestinians--populating 
Israel/Palestine with Jews while ridding the territory of Palestinians--and 
Palestinian resistance to these policies have resulted in severe environmental 
degradation.  Professor Joel Kovel 
(The Enemy of Nature), describes the state of ecological damage in Israel 
in his book Overcoming Zionism (2007, pp.110-111):
 
Israel, or to take into 
account the entity that Zionism now controls, Israel/Palestine, is an 
environmental      
nightmare, all the more so in relation to its ideals, wealth, and 
technological expertise. . . .All of Israel’s rivers are seriously polluted 
except for the Upper Jordan, and some have been polluted to literally lethal 
levels; .  .88 percent of Tel Aviv’s 
wells contain persistent organic pollutants; as for the air, a quadrupling of 
nitrous oxide emissions has been observed since 1980; asthma rates among 
children have gone from 5.6 percent in 1980 to 11.2 percent in 1989 and 17 
percent in 2002; Israel has one of the highest breast cancer incidences in the 
world, with a 32 percent increase in the 1990’s; in the 1970s the breast milk of 
Israeli women contained some 800 times the concentration of benzene hexachloride 
as American women.
 
Kovel 
specifies certain factors “intrinsic to Zionism” that continue to harm the tiny 
environment of Israel/Palestine.  
These factors include: “Zionism’s incessant pressure to fill Israel with 
Jews in order to keep a step ahead of the Palestinians,” leading to the 
ecologically disastrous combination of a sixfold population increase within half 
a century, rapid industrialization and conspicuous consumption of resources; and 
since 1967, the literally earth-shattering effects of settling over 500,000 Jews 
in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and Gaza, accompanied by destructive 
efforts to constrain Palestinian life such as razing millions of trees and 
fields, imposition of over 500 checkpoints, roads, military zones;   building of a nearly 800 km-long 
apartheid Wall whose construction has destroyed hundreds of acres of farm land 
along the Wall’s route and caused severe flooding from dammed up water, 
resulting in pervasive destruction 
of crops, greenhouses and other agricultural infrastructure; and pollution like 
that described by Nora Barrows-Friedman across the West Bank where “villagers 
watch as crops and orchards become poisoned and contaminated 
from raw sewage being actively pumped into their land from the sewage treatment 
facilities inside Israeli settlements.”
    Similarly, 
Palestinian-American Green Party member Professor Mazin Qumsiyeh, (Mammals of 
the Holy Land; Sharing the Land of Canaan) recently returned to his 
native West Bank where he teaches at Bethlehem University.  He describes the ecological damage he 
has witnessed over the years due to Zionist settlement policies (February 27, 
2009 http://www.qumsiyeh.org/rightsblog2009/:    
 
But it is not just humans 
that are the victims of Zionist master plans.  Nature is also.  With a 
huge network of military bases, industrial zones, new infrastructure (for Jewish 
settlers so as not to use or improve Palestinian roads), massive apartheid 
walls, and disregard for environmental protection, the West Bank has become an 
environmental disaster area. The loss of village lands (to land confiscation, 
walls, etc.) around Bethlehem area for example made many villagers come live in 
Bethlehem which makes it a very crowded area and there are few open areas (some 
of which receive sewage and trash from Jewish settlements).  The extent of 
the environmental damage is more noticeable to me as a biologist.  I know 
this since I studied animals here for three decades and places that I used to be 
able to catch and study many animals representing many species now yield nothing 
or at best one or two lonely animals of once ubiquitous species.  The toads 
in the valley near my house are all gone (an early spring sound and image that 
remains only in my memory).  
Water 
security has probably been most negatively impacted by the conflict.  Since 1967, Israel has not only 
arrogated regional water supplies and diverted over 80% of West Bank water for 
Israeli use, but the whole area now faces an absolute shortage of water because 
of over consumption and development.  
Meanwhile, (Mediterranean Sea) salt water is seeping into Gaza’s water as 
its water table falls; and USAID is expected to fund an Israeli plan to retain 
West Bank water sources in exchange for a desalination plant providing 
(privatized) water to the Territories. According to New Scientist http://www.wilpf.org/jane/israel_lays_claim, 
this “would leave independent Palestine more dependent on desalination than 
almost any other nation in the world. ” and, writes Stephen Lendman, “given the 
cost of desalinated water, it will be out of reach for the great majority of 
impoverished Palestinians.” http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/natres/water/2008/0718westbank.htm) 

Not a recipe for 
peace and security.
All in 
all, the conflict has become a zero-sum game antithetical to the human 
cooperation required for ecological security and sustainability.  As Joel Kovel (Overcoming 
Zionism, pp.115-116) concludes, this situation cannot change as long as 
Zionism informs Israeli policies toward the Palestinians:
This has 
led to an ecological situation unique to history, and one that precipitously 
hurtles toward environmental ruin.  
Human communities are ecosystems, too, and their capacity to fit into the 
great regulatory patterns of nature depends upon their internal integrity, 
manifest in mutual recognition and coherent communication.  Estrangement or alienation, is the human 
form taken by ecological breakdown; it is a failure of recognition between human 
agents, which makes cooperative action impossible and splits humanity from 
nature as well as itself.  It 
follows that the most severely estranged society will also be the most subject 
to eco-disintegration.  This more or 
less describes the State of Israel, and certainly its Occupied Territories, 
which comprise one of the most bizarre social formations ever planted upon this 
earth.  Here, on a tiny plot of 
ground, dwell two people with two radically different legal and social systems, 
one the beneficiary of a powerful state and living in comfort while it works to 
terrorize and strangle the other, who is stateless and bent upon surviving; the 
two are therefore radically denied any cooperative arrangement as can be 
imagined, and primed to be an eco-destructive accelerant to the State of Israel 
as a whole.      

 See also 

In 
Photos: Flooding in Qalqilya and Tulkarm March 12th, 2009 http://stopthewall.org/photos/1885.shtml 

“When 
the Occupation Gets Really Filthy” August 21, 2007 by Nora Barrows-Friedman, 
Internet Press Service http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=38964
“Drought 
and Israeli Policy Threaten West Bank Water Security,” by Stephen Lendman, July 
18, 2008, http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/natres/water/2008/0718westbank.htm
“Israel lays claim to 
Palestine's water “ May 29, 2004 by Fred Pearce, Jerusalem New Scientist 
http://www.wilpf.org/jane/israel_lays_claim
“The 
Water Crisis in Gaza” by Alice Gray by Alice Gray, February, 2007, International 
Viewpoint Online http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?page=print_article&id_article=1211
“Water 
crisis looms over Palestinians as Israel withholds water resources” July 30.2007 
http://www.almubadara.org/new/edetails.php?id=3267
“The 
effects of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict on Water Reserves in the Jordan 
River Basin” by Eugenia Ferragina, Global Environment (2), 2008 http://www.globalenvironment.it/ferragina.pdf
 
 
 
_________________________________________________________________
Express your personality in color! Preview and select themes for Hotmail®.
http://www.windowslive-hotmail.com/LearnMore/personalize.aspx?ocid=TXT_MSGTX_WL_HM_express_032009#colortheme
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20090321/38b2ebe2/attachment.html>