israel   38147

« earlier    

RT : 📌 has just claimed that:
>It can “legislate anywhere in the world”
>It's “entitled to violate sovereignty of…
Israel  from twitter
1 hour ago by kcarruthers
Israel Chooses Identity Over Democracy
Israel's new law stating that “the right to exercise national self-determination” in the country is “unique to the Jewish people" has been denounced for infringing on the rights of Arab Israelis. But the law's real purpose may be more insidious: to ensure that Jewish Israelis remain in control, even if they become the minority.With the two-state solution all but dead, Israel has determined that its Jewish identity is more important than its democracy. This will be bad not just for its Arab citizens, but ultimately for Jewish Israelis as well.
ps-columns  Israel  laws 
5 hours ago by thomas.kochi
ישראל כץ: פוטין לא ענה לטלפונים מאסד אחרי הפלת המטוס הרוסי - מדיני ביטחוני - הארץ
השר לענייני מודיעין וחבר הקבינט המדיני-ביטחוני, ישראל כץ, אמר היום (חמישי) כי קיימת מתיחות בין נשיא רוסיה פוטין ובין נשיא סוריה אסד בעקבות התקרית ביום שני שבמהלכה יירט הצבא הסורי מטוס רוסי כשעליו 15 אנשי צוות. בראיון לגלי צה"ל אמר כץ: "נשיא רוסיה לא ענה לאסד לטלפונים. הוא ודאי זועם על מה שהם עשו, וכבר אמר שישראל לא אשמה במה שקרה". לדברי השר, "אסד ניסה להשיג אותו ופוטין לא ענה לו, לכן הוא שלח איזה מכתב", בהתייחס למברק ששלח אסד לפוטין ובו אמר שהפלת המטוס היא "תוצאה של הרברבנות ושל ההשתוללות המוכרת של ישראל".

כץ הוסיף כי "יש כעס רוסי גדול מאוד על אסד ועל איראן שמעבירה נשק לחיזבאללה בסוריה. לא בכדי הם חוששים מהתגובה הרוסית". לדבריו, הרוסים "לא מאושרים מהתבססות איראן בסוריה" וקיים מתח פנימי בין הצדדים. הוא הבהיר כי ישראל מטפלת במשבר שנוצר מול רוסיה וכי אין כוונה לשנות את מדיניותו של צה"ל בסוריה: "אנחנו מסתכלים על האינטרס הביטחוני של ישראל. חזית איראנית בסוריה היא סכנה לרמת הגולן ולכל מדינת ישראל. הרוסים מבינים שהמדיניות שלנו תקפה".
Israel  leak  SIGINT  Assad  Putin  Mar15  Iran 
22 hours ago by elizrael
ISRAEL IS ABOVE THE LAW ~ Justifying landgrab, Israel says it is ‘allowed to ignore international law’ anywhere it wants Israel/Palestine Jonathan Ofir on September 18, 2018
The Israeli government has recently claimed that it can “legislate anywhere in the world”, that it is “entitled to violate the sovereignty of foreign countries”, and that “is allowed to ignore the directives of international law in any field it desires”. This was written in an official response letter to the Supreme Court last month.

On the face of it, these are audacious claims. Is it really that bad? I would say that it’s even worse. The background to these statements is a new law from last year, which legalizes outright theft of Palestinian land.

Several Palestinian human rights organizations have challenged the law in court. The plaintiffs are Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights Jerusalem Legal Aid and Human Rights Center (JLAC), and Al Mezan Center for Human Rights (Gaza) on behalf of 17 local Palestinian authorities in the West Bank. The Israeli government was represented by a private lawyer, Harel Arnon, because Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit refused to defend the law in court, since he deemed it illegal by international law already when it was first passed.

The Settlement Regularization Law was passed in February last year, in order to retroactively legalize thousands of settler homes and structures built on Palestinian private land, to avert the possibility that the Supreme Court might one day sanction their removal. Before the law was passed, Israeli law still considered such structures illegal, even though under international law, absolutely all the settlements are a flagrant violation of international law, be they located on private land or not.

It was not only Haaretz that called the law a “theft law” – it was also longtime Likudniks such as lawmaker Benny Begin; Former Likud minister Dan Meridor called it “evil and dangerous”; even Prime Minister Netanyahu was warning that passing it may end up getting Israeli officials to the International Criminal Court in The Hague; attorney General Avichai Mandelblit’s stated refusal to defend the law in court was met with reassurance by Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked that the state could simply get a private attorney (which it did). The contentious matter was not only the theft itself – but the application of Israeli law enacted directly by the Knesset (rather than by the Military occupation authority), that was seen as a precedence leading to de-facto annexation. As Dan Meridor wrote in his Haaretz opinion piece just ahead of the final vote on the law:

“The Knesset has never enacted legislation regulating Arabs’ property ownership in Judea and Samaria. The Knesset was elected by Israelis and legislates for them. The Arabs of Judea and Samaria did not vote for the Knesset, and it has no authority to legislate for them. These are basic principles of democracy and Israeli law. As a rule, elected officials legislate for their constituents and those within the area of their jurisdiction, not others. No government in Israel has applied its sovereignty to the West Bank – not former Likud prime ministers Menachem Begin or Yitzhak Shamir. They understood the obvious: If you want to pass legislation for the West Bank, you have to extend your sovereignty and allow the residents of Judea and Samaria the right to become citizens and vote in Knesset elections. And the meaning is clear.”

I should add a critical note here about Meridor’s central claim – that it is in fact erroneous regarding the West Bank, in that East Jerusalem is by international law a part of the West Bank, and Israel has applied its sovereignty unilaterally upon it (de facto since 1967, and in quasi-constitutional basic law in 1980, in defiance of international law and UNSC resolutions). The fact that Meridor simply considers East Jerusalem a part of Israel, and now goes to admonish Israel for basically doing the same (de facto annexation) regarding the rest of the West Bank, only goes to show that this is a case of the blind leading the blind.

But let us now return to the recent ‘theft law’ legislation from last year: The pressure to legitimize Israel’s own crimes became too great to oppose even from the right. The looming ‘danger’ that Meridor mentioned, of enacting de-facto annexation and possibly having to extend Palestinians the right to become citizens, was overweighed by the greed for the land. Israel’s famous equation of “maximum Jews, maximum territory, minimum Palestinians” came this time to mean that Israel would risk enacting state legislation in an area where Jews were still generally not a majority, in the hope that it would help them become it. Thus the law was passed by 60-52, and the land-grab was made legal by the Israeli Knesset. It was estimated that the law would retroactively legalize about 4,000 settler homes.

In the recent court case, the plaintiffs challenging the law pointed to the obvious illegality:

“Adalah and fellow petitioners argued that the Knesset is not permitted to enact and impose laws on territory occupied by the State of Israel. Thus, the Knesset cannot enact laws that annex the West Bank or that violate the rights of Palestinian residents of the West Bank.”

The State of Israel, in the recent response letter (Hebrew) to the court (filed August 7th), claimed in its defense that:

[1] ‘The Knesset has no limitation which prevents it from legislating extra-territorially anywhere in the world, including the area [‘Judea and Samaria’]’.

Having made that statement, the Israeli government goes on to rebuff the plaintiffs’ claim that it cannot legislate there and goes further to suggest that it is not at all subject to the directives of international law:

[4] ‘…Although the Knesset can legislate [concerning] any place in the world, although it is entitled to violate the sovereignty of foreign countries through legislation that would be applied to events occurring in their territories […], although it is within the authority of the Government of Israel to annex any territory […], although the Knesset may ignore directives of international law in any area it pleases […] despite all these, the plaintiffs seek to define a “rule” by which precisely in Judea and Samaria the Knesset is prohibited from legislating anything, and that precisely there, and nowhere else in the world, it is subject to the directives of international law’.

Adalah Attorneys Suhad Bishara and Myssana Morany, were in disbelief:

“The Israeli government’s extremist response has no parallel anywhere in the world. It stands in gross violation of international law and of the United Nations Charter which obligates member states to refrain from threatening or using force against the territorial integrity of other states – including occupied territories. The Israeli government’s extremist position is, in fact, a declaration of its intention to proceed with its annexation of the West Bank.”

Adalah has posted about this and provided some quotes from the above. You would think that such proclamations by the Israeli government would really hit the mainstream news cycle, yet it seems to have so far gone relatively unnoticed.

Several of my contacts have responded to this little-reported news with a certain disbelief – could it really be that Israel is openly stating that it is above international law?

Indeed, as I had mentioned above, it is not exactly a secret that Israel is now acting in brazen defiance of international law. Its own highest legal authorities are completely aware of it. But what we also need to see is that it has been doing this for a very long time, in fact, since its inception. As I had mentioned at the time of the passing of the Regularization Law, legalizing the theft of Palestinian land has been Israeli policy since day 1. Attorney Harel Arnon was using this notion as precedence in defense of the recent law, noting (in pt. 4):

“The honourable court has never passed legal critique upon central legislation of the Knesset also in cases where it contradicted, by the method of the plaintiffs, the directives of international law in cases which were more clear (the enactment of Israeli legislation in the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem)”…

That’s a very valid point. Israel’s unilateral annexations of the Syrian Golan and East Jerusalem are direct violations of international law, and they are condemned very clearly in United Nations Security Council resolutions. If the Israeli court approved it then, why should it not approve it now?

Attorney Arnon used a Supreme Court quote from an earlier case (pt. 12), where the court opined that “the mere enactment of a random Israeli norm upon an anonymous place outside the country, does not necessarily make that anonymous place a part of Israel”. This was relating to the West Bank, where Israel indeed enacts Israeli law upon settlers, even in places where it has not annexed territory.

See, this is part of the basis by which Arnon claims that “Israel can legislate anywhere in the world”. The essence of this is “if we could do it before, why cant we do it now”?

This point should be taken very seriously. The Israeli Supreme Court has often been perceived as a tool of the Israeli occupation. Thus even in very clear cases such as the 2004 International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion on Israel’s ‘security barrier’, where the ICJ deemed it wholly illegal (because it was mostly built on Palestinian, not Israeli, territory), the Supreme Court still managed to deflect this and claim that international law did not apply to Israel in this way. The Supreme Court has repeatedly managed to avoid and deflect these bigger issues and allow for Israel’s continued creeping annexation. This is a current, ongoing issue. Israel is preparing to demolish the Palestinian West Bank village of Khan al Ahmar, with the approval and sanction of the Supreme Court. B’Tselem:

“On Thursday, 24 May 2018, three Israeli Supreme Court justices – Noam Sohlberg, Anat Baron … [more]
Israel  InternationalLaw  WarCrimes  Palestine 
yesterday by juandante
US confirms Israeli missiles struck Iranian storage facility in Latakia - The National
US officials confirmed on Tuesday that the Israeli missile strikes targeting Latakia overnight have struck “a facility that Iran was using to house sensitive military equipment” that it would later transfer to Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Iran  Mar15  Israel  Russia  Lattakia  Hizbollah  weapons  attack 
2 days ago by elizrael
Adam Shatz reviews ‘Bibi’ by Anshel Pfeffer · LRB 30 August 2018
Backed by Trump and Evangelical Zionists, Netanyahu’s Israel doesn’t need the Jews, at least not the politically unreliable ones in the diaspora.
book  israel  politics 
3 days ago by soobrosa

« earlier    

related tags

'the  'world's  a2ad  afterburner  afterburnerthursday  aipac  airplane  al-ahmar:  ancientworld  anti-semitism  antisemitism  antisemitismus  approves  arabic  archaeology  archetypal  artificialintelligence  as  assad  atgw  attack  automation  autonomy  aviation  avigdorissuchahorrendousarsehole  baby  backlash  bank  bdsmovement  bedouin  benjamin  benyosef  bibi  biblicalstudies  biometrics  biotechnology  book  brewery'  brexit  browngordon  cave  censorship  centralisation  children  china  classified_information  clippings  conners'  consumerbehaviour  control  court  daraa  data  dataset  dc:creator=harariyuvalnoah  dc:creator=sarkarash  dc:creator=segalovmichael  dctagged  death  debateclass  decentralisation  decisionmaking  defence  del  democracy  demolition  demoted  deterrence  dictatorship  diplomacy  distribution  dna  economics  education  eichmann  eritrea  even  exclusion  f16  falcon  ferie  finance  flesh  flickr  flowering  following  foreign+policy  foreign_aid  found  franzkafka  fsa  germany  gop  hacking  hamas  hannah-arendt  hasolidit  heart  hebrew  hizbollah  humour  hypocrisy  iaf  idf  idiots  ifttt  ihra  imperialism  in  informationtechnology  intelligence  internationallaw  investment  iran  is  isis  israel_history  israel_travel  israelairforce  israelinfluence  israelspyingonuscitizens  it’s  jesus  jew  jewish  jewishness  jews  jobs  journalism  judaica  judaism  kafka  khan  kislyak  labour-movement  labourparty  lana  language  last_minute  lattakia  lavrov  law  laws  leak  liberalism  libya  manipulation  maps  mar15  maxbrod  middle+east  middleeast  mideast  ml  move  name  names  nationalismus  nato  nec  netanyahu  news  nir  noun  nytimes  occupation  of  officially  oldest  ownership  palestina  palestine  palestinian_authority  palestinians  peace_process  pension  peter-leithart  planning  plo  policing  politics  polls  populism  postpones  power  prague  premieres  privacy  prophecy  ps-columns  putin  qatar  quneitra  racism  rassismus  refugees  regeneration  regulation  religion  researchers  rey  roseanne  russia  sarkarash  saudiarabia  say  security  show  sigint  skills  software  stone  strategy  studier  surveillance  syria  tax  tech  telaviv  temple  terrorism  theisraelproject(tip)  thursday  to  to_blog  totwitter  trump  trumpadministration  trumpdonald  uae  uk  un  unemployment  unrwa  us  usa  utveksling  village  viper  war  warcrimes  weapons  when  why  wikipedia  wonk  world  xenophobia  xnir  yosemite  zionism  © 

Copy this bookmark: