Coming
in October
From AK Press
Today's
Stories
September
19, 2003
Clare
Brandabur
Hitchens
Smears Edward Said
September
18, 2003
Mona Baker
and Lawrence Davidson
In
Defense of the Boycott of Israeli Academic Institutions
Wayne
Madsen
Wesley
Clark for President? Another Neo-Con Con Job
Alexander
Cockburn
and Jeffrey St. Clair
Wesley Clark and Waco
Muqtedar Khan
The Pakistan Squeeze
Dominique
de Villepin
The
Reconstruction of Iraq: This Approach is Leading Nowhere
Angus Wright
Brazilian Land Reform Offers Hope
Elaine
Cassel
Payback is Hell
Jeffrey
St. Clair
Leavitt
for EPA Head? He's Much Worse Than You Thought
Website
of the Day
ALA Responds to Ashcroft's Smear
Recent
Stories
September 17, 2003
Timothy J. Freeman
The
Terrible Truth About Iraq
St. Clair / Cockburn
A
Vain, Pompous Brown-noser:
Meet the Real Wesley Clark
Terry Lodge
An Open Letter to Michael Moore on Gen. Wesley Clark
Mitchel Cohen
Don't Be Fooled Again: Gen. Wesley Clark, War Criminal
Norman Madarasz
Targeting Arafat
Richard Forno
High Tech Heroin
Alexander Cockburn
Behold,
the Head of a Neo-Con!
Website of the Day
The Ultimate Palestine Resource Site!
September 16, 2003
Rosemary and Walt Brasch
An
Ill Wind: Hurricane Isabel and the Lack of Homeland Security
Robert Fisk
Powell
in Baghdad
Kurt Nimmo
Imperial Sociopaths
M. Shahid Alam
The Dialectics
of Terror
Ron Jacobs
Exile at Gunpoint
Christopher Brauchli
Bush's War on Wages
Al Krebs
Stop Calling Them "Farm Subsidies"; It's Corporate
Welfare
Patrick Cockburn
The
Iraq Wreck
Website of the Day
From Occupied Palestine
September 15, 2003
Stan Goff
It Was
the Oil; It Is Like Vietnam
Robert Fisk
A Hail of Bullets, a Trail of Dead
Writers Bloc
We
Are Winning: a Report from Cancun
James T. Phillips
Does George Bush Cry?
Elaine Cassel
The Troublesome Bill of Rights
Cynthia McKinney
A Message to the People of New York City
Matthew Behrens
Sunday Morning Coming Down: Reflections on Johnny Cash
Uri Avnery
Assassinating
Arafat
Hammond Guthrie
Celling Out the Alarm
Website of the Day
Arnold and the Egg
September 13 / 14, 2003
Michael Neumann
Anti-Americanism:
Too Much of a Good Thing?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Anatomy of a Swindle
Gary Leupp
The Matrix of Ignorance
Ron Jacobs
Reagan's America
Brian Cloughley
Up to a Point, Lord Rumsfeld
William S. Lind
Making Mesopotamia a Terrorist Magnet
Werther
A Modest Proposal for the Pentagon
Dave Lindorff
Friendly Fire Will Doom the Occupation
Toni Solo
Fiction and Reality in Colombia: The Trial of the Bogota Three
Elaine Cassel
Juries and the Death Penalty
Mickey Z.
A Parable for Cancun
Jeffrey Sommers
Issam Nashashibi: a Life Dedicated to the Palestinian Cause
David Vest
Driving in No Direction (with a Glimpse of Johnny Cash)
Michael Yates
The Minstrel Show
Jesse Walker
Adios, Johnny Cash
Adam Engel
Something Killer
Poets' Basement
Cash, Albert, Curtis, Linhart
Website of the Weekend
Local Harvest
The Great Alejandro Escavedo Needs Your Help!
September 12, 2003
Writers Block
Todos
Somos Lee: Protest and Death in Cancun
Laura Carlsen
A Knife to the Heart: WTO Kills Farmers
Dave Lindorff
The Meaning of Sept. 11
Elaine Cassel
Bush at Quantico
Linda S. Heard
British
Entrance Exams
John Chuckman
The First Two Years of Insanity
Doug Giebel
Ending America as We Know It
Mokhiber / Weissman
The Blank Check Military
Subcomandante Marcos
The
Death Train of the WTO
Website of the Day
A Woman in Baghdad
September 11, 2003
Robert Fisk
A Grandiose
Folly
Roger Burbach
State Terrorism and 9/11: 1973 and 2001
Jonathan Franklin
The Pinochet Files
Niranjan Ramakrishnan
Postcards to the President
Norman Solomon
The Political Capital of 9/11
Saul Landau
The Chilean Coup: the Other, Almost Forgotten 9/11
Stew Albert
What Goes Around
Website of the Day
The Sights and Sounds of a Coup
September 10, 2003
John Ross
Cancun
Reality Show: Will It Turn Into a Tropical Seattle?
Zoltan Grossman
The General Who Would be President: Was Wesley Clark Also Unprepared
for the Postwar Bloodbath?
Tim Llewellyn
At the Gates of Hell
Christopher Brauchli
Turn the Paige: the Bush Education Deception
Lee Sustar
Bring the Troops Home, Now!
Elaine Cassel
McCain-Feingold in Trouble: Scalia Hogs the Debate
Norman Finkelstein
Hitchens
as Model Apostate
Hammond Guthrie
When All Was Said and Done
Website of the Day
Fact Checking Colin Powell
Hot Stories
Steve Niva
Israel's
Assassination Policy: the Trigger for Suicide Bombings?
Dardagan,
Slobodo and Williams
CounterPunch Exclusive:
20,000 Wounded Iraqi Civilians
Steve
J.B.
Prison Bitch
Sheldon
Rampton and John Stauber
True Lies: the Use of Propaganda
in the Iraq War
Wendell
Berry
Small Destructions Add Up
CounterPunch
Wire
WMD: Who Said What When
Cindy
Corrie
A Mother's Day Talk: the Daughter
I Can't Hear From
William Blum
Myth
and Denial in the War on Terrorism
Standard Schaefer
Experimental Casinos: DARPA and the War Economy
Uzma
Aslam Khan
The Unbearably Grim Aftermath of War:
What America Says Does Not Go
Paul de Rooij
Arrogant
Propaganda
Gore Vidal
The
Erosion of the American Dream
Francis Boyle
Impeach
Bush: A Draft Resolution
Click Here
for More Stories.
|
September
19, 2003
End of the Road Map
Preparting
for the Struggle Against Apartheid
By JEFF HALPER
Everyone pooh-poohs the road map. From State Department
and other "quartet" officials through the office of
Ariel Sharon to international activists and the average person
on the streets of Palestine and Israel, one would be hard-pressed
to find a single believer in the "road map." From the
start it has been dismissed as another failed initiative, joining
a long line from Mitchell and Tenet to Gunnar Jarring and the
Roger's Plan. But is it? In my view the road map possesses a
significance that has been lost even on its adherents.
If The Road Map Fails:
Permanent Apartheid
Looked at from the ground up, from the
perspective of Israel's completion of its three-decade campaign
to create irreversible "facts on the ground," the road
map represents the last gasp of the two-state solution. This
is the crunch. As anyone who has spent even a few hours in the
Occupied Territories readily understands, Israel has entered
in the last phase of fully and finally incorporating the West
Bank into Israeli proper, of transforming a temporary occupation
into a permanent state of apartheid. Sharon's implementation
of Jabotinsky's doctrine of the "Iron Wall" establishing
such massive "facts on the ground" that the Palestinians
will despair of ever having a viable state of their own has reached
its critical mass. The Israeli settlement blocs are so extensive,
their incorporation into Israel proper by a massive system of
highways and "by-pass roads" so complete and the Separation
Wall physically confining the Palestinians to tiny cantons so
advanced as to render any genuine two-state solution impossible
and ridiculous. Given the unwillingness of the international
community to force Israel's withdrawal from the Occupied Territories
and in particular the American Congress's refusal to countenance
any meaningful pressure on Israel, we may say that Israel is
on the brink of emerging as the world's next apartheid state.
Only the road map, the last dying breath of the two-state solution,
stands between the hope of Palestinian self-determination in
their own viable and truly sovereign (if tiny) state and the
de facto creation of one state controlled by Israel. Rather than
merely another failed initiative on the way to yet others, we
must view the road map as a watershed in the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict. Its final failure will alter fundamentally the entire
nature of struggle for a just and sustainable solution to the
Palestinian issue.
The problem has less to do with vision,
content and process than with implementation. As a document,
the road map has a number of commendable elements. It is the
first international document approved by the US that calls for
"an end to the Occupation." Indeed, it is the first
that uses the term "occupation" at all, defying Israel's
longstanding denial that it even has an occupation. It is also
the first initiative that sets as a goal the establishment of
a viable Palestinian state, putting it far beyond the vague and
open-ended negotiations of the Oslo Accords. The mere use of
the term "viable" raised hopes that the international
community had finally gotten wise to Israel's strategy of creating
"facts on the ground" that prejudice any negotiations
and render a genuine Palestinian state impossible. The fact that
the time-line was short and finite an independent, democratic,
and viable Palestinian state living side by side in peace and
security with Israel by the year 2005 stood the road map in good
stead. So, too, did the performance-based, mutual nature of the
process, monitored by the Quartet rather than by the Americans
exclusively, and the fact that the terms of reference included
UN resolutions, agreements previously reached by the parties
and the Saudi initiative. Both in its content and structure the
road map is a well-conceptualized, do-able and potentially just
attempt at achieving "a final and comprehensive settlement
of the Israel-Palestinian conflict."
But, as everyone knew from the start,
the will to make it work was lacking. Four months after its release
the road map appears almost dead in its tracks. Russia and the
UN never entered into the process in the first place, and Europe,
as is its wont, passed all responsibility to the US. Bush, dutifully,
announced in Aqaba that the US would once again assume the role
as the sole mediator, acquiescing to one of Israel's key "reservations."
While much effort was expended ensuring "reforms" in
the Palestinian Authority (including the undemocratic installation
of a Prime Minister with no public credibility) and while a low-ranking
State Department official was dispatched to deal with "security
concerns," Israel's campaign to finally consolidate its
hold over the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza proceeded unencumbered.
Since no one had any illusions that the road map would produce
any other result, there is no smug, self-congratulatory "I-told-you-so"
attitude among its critics, nor any real sense of another missed
opportunity. Instead there is a general hunkering down, a steadfast
determination to continue the struggle against the Occupation
regardless of how long it takes. The road map, alive only because
it has not been declared dead, is on its way to being consigned
to the dustbin of history, another one of the forgettable attempts
to achieve a just peace in the Middle East.
The significance of the road map derives
as much from its timing as its content. Coinciding with the completion
of Israel's irreversible incorporation of the West Bank, only
immediate international pressure to truly end the Occupation,
to force Israel to withdraw fully from the territories conquered
in 1967 (with minor territorial adjustments) will secure the
fundamental requirement of the two-state solution: a viable and
truly sovereign Palestinian state. If the road map fails or,
more likely, falters, the initiative never being officially declared
dead we enter into a state of de facto apartheid. Israel will
be permitted to continue its incorporation process, the United
States enters into an extended American presidential period in
which no pressures will be applied on Israel at all, and another
period of a year or two elapses before the next initiative is
formulated. By that time even the illusion that a viable Palestinian
state can be achieved will be finally gone. By its own hand Israel
will have prevented the emergence of a viable Palestinian state
and have created instead a single state. To be sure, Sharon,
in signing on to the road map, declared his support for the two-state
solution. The great danger facing Palestinians in the limbo of
a non-dead road map process is that his version of a Palestinian
state a truncated bantustan with no control of its borders, no
freedom of movement, no economic viability, no access to its
water resources, no meaningful presence in Jerusalem and no genuine
sovereignty, one that leaves Israel with 90% of the country will
be "sold" by the US as a viable Palestinian state,
the successful outcome of the road map. This is Sharon's scenario.
As advocates for a just resolution of the conflict we must be
on guard against such an eventuality and develop effective strategies
to defeat it.
The Impending Struggle
for a Single State
The looming failure of the road map to
prevent de facto apartheid in Palestine-Israel will fundamentally
alter the entire nature of the conflict. Israel by its own hand
has rendered a viable two-state solution impossible. The only
Palestinian "state" that could emerge from Israel's
matrix of control is a Palestinian bantustan. Assuming this is
not an acceptable "solution," only one other possibility
exists: the creation of a single state in Palestine-Israel. (I
have suggested in previous writings that given the permanence
of Israeli control a truncated Palestinian state might be acceptable
as a part of a "two-stage" solution involving the establishment
of a wider Middle East Union in which residency is disconnected
from citizenship. This, however, is so unlikely at this stage,
and the need to end the Occupation so acute, that it cannot serve
as a plan of action for the immediate future.)
The stage is thus set for the next phase
of the struggle for a just resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict: an international campaign for a single state. Since
the Palestinian and Jewish populations are so intermingled (a
million Palestinians live throughout Israel while some 400,000
Jews live throughout the Occupied Territories), the feasibility
of a bi-national state, with the two peoples living in a kind
of federation, seems unworkable. The permanency of Israel's presence
makes it imperative to incorporate it into any workable political
arrangement (though neutralizing it as an agency of control).
Given this "reality" on the ground, the most practical
solution seems to be a unitary democratic state offering equal
citizenship for all. If that is the case, our slogan in the post-road
map period will be that of the South Africans' struggle against
apartheid: One Person, One Vote.
In this indeterminate twilight of the
road map, we are still in a transition from the two-state solution
in which our energies are devoted to ending the Occupation to
a campaign for a single state, which acknowledges that the Occupation
is permanent and therefore seeks to neutralize its controlling
aspects by creating a common state framework. None of the actors
are yet ready for such a shift -- not the Palestinians, not the
international community, not the peace and human rights activists,
not world Jewry and certainly not Israeli Jews. Representatives
of the Palestinian Authority have even suggested that raising
the issue today is counterproductive since it goes beyond calls
what even the most liberal proponents of peace are currently
ready to accept.
As long as the road map offers a glimmer
of hope that something can be done about Israel's Occupation,
discussion of alternative scenarios will be by definition premature.
Such discussion will inevitably come, however, if and when the
road map process fails and the stark reality of Israel's permanent
presence sinks in. Regardless of how we feel about a single state,
it is time we begin to prepare ourselves conceptually and programmatically
for such an eventuality and for the struggle an anti-apartheid
campaign would generate. Following are a few of the elements
that would inform such an effort:
(1) In our framing of the campaign for
a single state, we should stress that as much as Israel might
object, it is its own settlement and incorporation policies that
are responsible. Since a Palestinian "state"-cum-bantustan,
the only alternative entertained by Israel, is totally unacceptable
and unworkable, Israel has brought the single state solution
upon itself. A two-state solution that leaves Israel intact has
been proposed by both the Palestinians and by the Arab League
through the Saudi initiative. Indeed, it is a basic term of reference
in the road map. As in the case of South Africa, however, where
apartheid was put in place by white South African governments,
Israel has only itself to blame if it has created, through its
own settlement and occupation policies, a single state. Despite
repeated warnings from the critical peace camp, successive Israeli
governments, Labor as well as Likud, have locked the country
into such a dead-end situation. The Israeli public may not support
the vision of a "Greater Land of Israel" (recent polls
say 65% of Israelis would like "separation" from the
Occupied Territories), but its support of governments pursuing
such policies makes it complicit and ultimately responsible.
If the road map fails, it is in large measure because of the
indifference of the Israeli public to its own leaders' subversion
of the initiative. To turn around and then complain that the
demand for a democratic state in the entire country is "anti-Israel"
and "anti-Zionist" is downright disingenuous. When
the struggle for two states becomes, as I believe it must, a
struggle for one democratic state, we must make it crystal clear
that this development arises exclusively out of Israel's refusal
to countenance a viable Palestinian state on even 22% of the
country.
Perhaps the realization of where Israel
is headed will finally impel its Jewish public to reject policies,
parties and leaders that maintain the Occupation. In that case
the two-state option may be revisited. Until that happens, however,
the priority of a campaign for a single state has been dictated
by Israel itself.
(2) We must shift the focus of our efforts
from ending the Occupation (which, when the road map fails, we
must all admit will never happen) to achieving a democratic state.
The slogan "One Person, One Vote" should provide a
common mobilizing call for an international movement that must
reach the scope and effectiveness of the campaign against South
African apartheid. Indeed, the emergence of a single state as
an agreed-upon goal something we lack today will make organizing
much easier. On the way we must continue, of course, to oppose
the Occupation and all its manifestations, including the ongoing
repression of the Palestinian people. We might even advocate
certain intermediate steps, such as an international protectorate
over the Palestinian areas, in order to freeze Israel's ongoing
process of incorporation while protecting the civilian population.
We must prepare ourselves nevertheless for the most likely upshot:
a campaign against apartheid and for a single democratic state.
(3) We should couch our campaign in the
language and requirements of human rights and international law.
A campaign for a democratic state is intended to secure the rights
of all the country's inhabitants; it is not against the Israeli
people or seeking in any way to delegitimize Israeli society
or culture. Upholding the notion that the security and well-being
of all the peoples of the region is guaranteed only through a
political solution that addresses every people's human rights
and that national self-determination will have to find its expression
through a regional Middle East Union we must present the single
democratic state as a vehicle that will facilitate collective
and individual rights rather than posing a threat. The fact that
occupation and apartheid constitute fundamental challenges to
a world ruled by human rights and law should also be a central
message. Since the Israel-Palestinian-Arab conflict is emblematic
to the Arab and Muslim worlds, certainly the notion that the
international system will never find stability (including a response
to terrorism) unless this issue is resolved will help raise wide
concern over the effects of the conflict.
(4) We should call on the Jewish public
Israeli and diaspora to avoid the suffering witnessed in the
struggle against apartheid in South Africa and engage pro-actively
in this best chance for a just, secure and positive resolution
to an otherwise irresolvable conflict. More than anything else,
Zionism was about Jews taking responsibility for their own fate.
A Jewish state has proven politically and, in the end, morally
untenable. It is time we salvage the good parts of Israel its
vibrant national culture, society, institutions and economy and
let go of that which cannot be saved: exclusive "ownership"
of a country in which the Jews will soon be the minority.
(5) We must recreate an international
movement similar to the anti-apartheid one. This will be difficult;
Israel has far greater credibility and support than apartheid
did. But we find a way to link the many disparate NGOs and activist
groups into a coherent and coordinated network focusing on the
issue of the democratic state itself, and then forge them into
a worldwide movement that goes far beyond our various groups
and networks.
The Unitary State
of Palestine/Israel: Fears and Opportunities
Although the establishment of a single
democratic state in Palestine was long the program of the PLO,
it is a truly wrenching option for many Palestinians today. Even
if it acquires a Palestinian majority, a single state will have
to incorporate a strong Israeli-Jewish society, culture, institutions
and economy which, as in the case of the Europeans in South Africa,
will not merely disappear. Besides having to share a state with
others, thus not achieving full self-determination, some Palestinians
fear that they may become a subordinate underclass in their own
country. Thus, despite their grave doubts over implementation,
many Palestinians are reluctant to abandon the road map or to
contemplate the demise of the two-state solution.
For the Israelis, too, the prospect of
a single state is obviously wrenching. Indeed, since a Jewish-Israeli
state already exists, its transformation into a single state
including a Palestinian majority is far more threatening to them.
It means the end of Zionism, the end of a Jewish state qua Jewish
state. But the Israeli public has only itself to blame. Despite
repeated warnings from intellectuals in the critical peace camp,
it allowed successive governments, Labor as well as Likud, to
lock it into such a distressing situation. The "two-state"
solution envisioned by all Israeli governments since 1967 a cantonized
Palestinian mini-state affiliated or not with Jordan is simply
unacceptable, not only to Palestinians but also to the international
community. Not only does it fail to address fundamental Palestinian
needs, thus leading to continued conflict, but also as apartheid
system involves by its very nature massive violations of human
rights and international law. Although we, as members of the
international civil society must be prepared to fight Israeli
apartheid, just as we led the struggle against apartheid in South
Africa despite support for the regime from the US and other governments,
we must proceed from the assumption that a new apartheid situation
will not be countenanced by the international community and cannot
serve as a political "solution."
As an Israeli, I must say that the prospect
of a single state encompassing our two peoples challenges rather
than threatens me. Even without the Occupation, the notion of
a Jewish state is demographically impossible, and Israel faces
a fundamental transformation. Most Jews some 75% of them never
came to Israel. Wherever they had a choice, most Jews preferred
to migrate elsewhere. The Jewish majority stands at only 72%
and is dwindling in relation to the growing Palestinian-Israeli
population, the influx of some 400,000 non-Jewish immigrants
from the former Soviet Union, and large-scale emigration (it
is estimated that up to a half million Israeli Jews live permanently
abroad). Maintaining a "Jewish" state on such a narrow
base is becoming increasingly non-sustainable. The measures Israel
must take to ensure its "Jewish character" are becoming
progressively more repressive. By law "non-Jews" are
forbidden to buy, rent, lease or live on "state lands"
75% of the country. The Palestinian citizens of Israel, almost
20% of the population, are confined to 2% of the land. Only a
few weeks ago the Knesset enacted a law preventing Palestinian
citizens of Israel from bringing their spouses from the Occupied
Territories to live with them in Israel. An Israel belonging
to all its citizens and beyond that, a democratic state of Israel-Palestine
will finally release us from the preoccupation with the "demographic
bomb" and lead us into a productive involvement in the wider
region. This "homecoming," after all, was a cardinal
aim of Zionism, as was the creation of an Israeli culture and
society that will only flourish under conditions of regional
development. The Saudi offer of regional integration indicates
that such an eventuality is indeed possible.
As cultural Zionists like Ahad Ha-am,
Martin Buber and Judah Magnes argued, Jewish national identity
does not require a state of its own, only a cultural space where
it may develop and flourish. For all its shortcomings, the state
of Israel provided that cultural space. The vitality of Israeli
culture, society, polity and economy is no longer dependent upon
a state structure, a kind of political "greenhouse."
"Israeliness" has reached a stage of maturity that
it no longer needs the protection of a state and, indeed, is
being held back by it, since the conflicts that state generates
prevents healthy social and cultural development. A true homecoming
in which Israeli "natives" engage with their neighbors
in a peaceful and prosperous Middle East marks, if you will,
the ultimate triumph of Zionism ("triumph" in its own
terms, not over anyone else).
Still, two major reservations of Jews
to a single state must be noted and addressed. First, the issue
of self-determination. For nationalist Jews, the issue of cultural
development was subordinated to the perceived need to control
their destiny, to never again be dependent upon others given
the Jews' history of persecution. Since the vast majority of
Jews chose to settle abroad and not in Israel (including a considerable
portion of Israeli Jews themselves), this issue seems to be moot.
It is doubly moot given the fact that the Jewish majority in
Israel is dwindling, and that exclusive control cannot be reconciled
with democracy. For better or worse, the internal contradictions
between control of one's destiny and living as a minority among
others become too great to reconcile. Those of us in the Israeli
peace movement would argue that Jewish security is best protected
in an inclusive world order based on the enforcement of human
rights and international law. The other objection to a single
state revolves around the issue of refuge. Where could Jews find
refuge in a time of need a pertinent question given the Jewish
experience (including recent ones of Ethiopian Jews). If the
vision of a single state is founded on the belief that Israeli
Jews and Palestinians can live together in peace and mutual respect,
then this concern could be addressed by an article in the new
state's constitution specifying that both Jews and Palestinians
possess the right of return to the country, and that members
of both peoples in need of refuge will be automatically accepted.
The very enactment of such a law would go a long way towards
assuring each people of the good intentions of the other.
For Palestinians, too, the prospect of
a single state need not appear a concession to the idea of self-determination
in a state of their own. A single state would give Palestinians
access to the entire country and would resolve absolutely the
issue of refugee return. Since the Palestinians will become the
majority between the Jordan and the Mediterranean within a decade,
they will exert a considerable measure of self-determination
and will, to a large extent, set the tone for the country. The
issue of Palestinian national expression still remains outstanding,
however. Since 1948 the very character of the Palestinian people
has been changed from a people living on its native land to a
diaspora nation comprised of refugees, the "internally displaced"
and those who have made new lives abroad. The vital Palestinian
Diaspora will certainly play a key role in developing the Palestinian
sector as well as the state as a whole, and will provide a counterweight
to internal Israeli hegemony.
Although the failure of the road map
marks the end of two nationalisms Israeli Jewish and Palestinian
the prospect of a unitary democratic state offers integration,
security, development, a mode of life far more conducive to the
modern world than narrow sectarian states. If the road map fails
and with it the two-state solution, it is hoped that Israel will
finally realize the futility of pursuing the path of domination
and apartheid, and will pro-actively seize the opportunity to
create for itself and its neighbors a peaceful Middle East in
which Israeli Jews and Palestinians together will be among the
leading forces for democratization and development.
Jeff Halper
is the Coordinator of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions
and the author of An Israeli in Palestine (Pluto Press: forthcoming).
He can be reached at icahd@zahav.net.il
Weekend
Edition Features for Sept. 13 / 14, 2003
Michael Neumann
Anti-Americanism:
Too Much of a Good Thing?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Anatomy of a Swindle
Gary Leupp
The Matrix of Ignorance
Ron Jacobs
Reagan's America
Brian Cloughley
Up to a Point, Lord Rumsfeld
William S. Lind
Making Mesopotamia a Terrorist Magnet
Werther
A Modest Proposal for the Pentagon
Dave Lindorff
Friendly Fire Will Doom the Occupation
Toni Solo
Fiction and Reality in Colombia: The Trial of the Bogota Three
Elaine Cassel
Juries and the Death Penalty
Mickey Z.
A Parable for Cancun
Jeffrey Sommers
Issam Nashashibi: a Life Dedicated to the Palestinian Cause
David Vest
Driving in No Direction (with a Glimpse of Johnny Cash)
Michael Yates
The Minstrel Show
Jesse Walker
Adios, Johnny Cash
Adam Engel
Something Killer
Poets' Basement
Cash, Albert, Curtis, Linhart
Website of the Weekend
Local Harvest
Keep CounterPunch
Alive:
Make
a Tax-Deductible Donation Today Online!
home / subscribe
/ about us / books
/ archives / search
/ links /
|