December 11, 1998 - VOL 5 NO 26
by: Nina Sovich
After weeks of protests over the continued detention of Palestinian prisoners, tensions rose in Jerusalem on December 2 when a Palestinian street cleaner was stabbed and killed by a Jewish assailant. This is the eighth such stabbing in Jerusalem against a Palestinian in the last six months. Later in the week demonstrations broke out in al-Bireh outside the settlement Bet El, where protesters beat an Israeli soldier who was traveling with a settler. Demonstrations in Abu Dis, culminated in the death of one Palestinian protester by gunshot to the head and the injury of scores more.
Meanwhile, the Palestinian Authority continued preparations for President Clinton's visit to Gaza and Bethlehem. Clinton's original plan to fly into Gaza airport on Air Force One was met with hostility both by Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Israeli foreign minister Ariel Sharon, who claim that such a move legitimizes Palestinian aspirations for statehood. A Palestinian spokesman gleefully commented that it took 30 years for an American president to visit Israel, but only four years for one to visit the Palestinian territories. The Israelis won out again, however, as Clinton is now scheduled to fly into Ben Gurion Airport and take a helicopter to Gaza. The Israelis continued to complain about the visit, however, saying that the US president's itinerary, half time in Palestinian areas and half time in Israel, insults Israel on its 50th anniversary; an Israeli spokesperson commented that they thought the only reason Clinton was going to Gaza was to muscle the Palestinians into convening the PNC to delete sections of the covenant that call for the destruction of Israel.
Israeli public reaction to the beating of an Israeli soldier outside Bet El was strong-the soldier will face court-martial for not using his gun against demonstrators-allowing prime minister Netanyahu the lee-way to impose further conditions on redeployment. The conditions are: (1)stop asking for the prisoners; (2) stop inciting violence; (3) stop the preparations for the declaration of statehood next May. The PA responded by demanding the release of prisoners and advising Israel to dismantle settlements as they will be illegal in the future Palestinian state. The Palestinian Prisoners Society echoed the sentiment of the street, by calling for the release of all the prisoners and US secretary of state spokesman James Rubin expressed American frustration with Israeli demands, condemning the new conditions as beyond the scope of the agreement.
While prime minister Netanyahu tries to save his government, foreign minister Ariel Sharon continued making incendiary comments and distanced himself from the Wye agreement, stating that further redeployments are out of the question, as Palestinians have violated the agreement. Sharon went on to say that if the Palestinians declare a state, Israel will annex parts of the West Bank. Secretary of state Madeleine Albright quickly met with the foreign minister, remonstrating him for using the threat of occupation as a method to solve disputes with the Palestinians over the implementation of Wye. In an attempt to foment an effective policy to combat settlements, PLC Speaker Ahmed Qrei responded to Sharon's previous call to the settlers to “take the hills” by suggesting that Palestinians fight settlers for the hills. This advice comes on the heels of several weeks of discussion in the PLC on settlements.
[Back to contents]
Israelis Lobby for extradition
of Palestinians to US
by: Charmaine Seitz
In what would prove to be a fateful decision, Joyce Boim and her family, in 1986, left teeming New York City for the religious West Jerusalem neighborhood of Har Nov.
Eleven years later, her 17-year old son, David, was gunned down outside the West Bank settlement of Beit El, while waiting for a ride with four of his friends. Since then, Boim has been doing her best to get what she calls “justice” for herself and other Israeli victims of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
“I just want at least to know that justice is being done,” says Boim. That means seeing her son's attackers in an Israeli “ not Palestinian “ jail.
The Israeli government agrees with Boim, and has issued 36 transfer requests to the Palestinian Authority for Palestinians that it believes were involved in attacks against Israelis. Most of those requests have been ignored by the Palestinian Leadership, while two have been flatly denied.
At Wye Plantation talks in October, the Israeli government tried again to get the Palestinian Authority to hand over the wanted persons. When those attempts failed, Israeli negotiators settled for a verbal commitment that the Palestinian Authority would arrest 30 of those Palestinians in three stages. According to a late November statement by Palestinian President Yasser Arafat, 12 of those 30 are already in jail.
But Boim, unhappy with the standoff and “feeling that Jewish blood is not [considered] important,” has upped the ante. She and the relatives of 11 American Israelis allegedly killed by Palestinians have taken their case to the American government, asking it to extradite Palestinians they believe are responsible for the deaths.
Boim knows who killed her son David, the boy she describes as an “apple-cheeked” jokester. One week after the 1996 shooting, Bir Zeit University student Amjad Hinawi turned himself in to Palestinian officials. At a Jericho military court in February of this year, Hinawi was sentenced to 10 years hard labor. He pled innocent to the crime, claiming that he had not known that another student, Khalil Ibrahim Sharif, intended to shoot Boim while riding in Hinawi's car.
Sharif, in turn, was unavailable to testify. Several months before the trial, Israeli intelligence had identified him through DNA testing as one of the three young men who detonated themselves, killing four, on Ben Yehuda street on September 4th, 1997.
But knowing that Hinawi was tried and convicted by the Palestinian Authority is not enough for Boim. She points to reports that Hinawi was given a prison furlough on a Muslim holiday as proof that “murderers are walking around free” (Boim doesn't mention that Israeli prisoners in Israeli jails are regularly given leave for weddings, funerals, or bar mitzvas).
Boim believes that the Palestinian Authority did not do an adequate job of searching for Sharif, and claims that he was briefly jailed and then let go. Sharif's family, however, says that to their knowledge, he was never arrested. In fact, several family members and friends were detained without charge and tortured by Palestinian security forces in attempts to find the then 22-year old Sharif.
While the Palestine Report made repeated inquiries to both the Palestinian Preventative Security and National Security services for information regarding the case, no statements have been forthcoming.
In her search for justice, Boim has taken her cause to the American people. Last winter, she traveled from one US coast to another, speaking to audiences as varied as the Zionist Organization of America and a Christian breakfast group. Congressional support came from regular backers of Israeli interests: Senators Arlen Specter (Republican from Pennsylvania) and Alfonse D'Amato (Republican from New York) and House Representatives Steve Rothman (Democrat from New Jersey) and Eliot Engel (Democrat from New Jersey).
Riding the wave created by Boim's tour, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wrote a letter to Representative Matt Salmon of Arizona. “I am deeply concerned about the Palestinian refusal to transfer terrorists either to us or”when the victims are America”to the US,” wrote Netanyahu. “That murderers are allowed to go free and live without fear of prosecution in areas ruled by the Palestinian Authority is particularly worrisome. This is not just a travesty of justice but a very wrong message to potential terrorists.”
The result was House Resolution 220, sponsored by Salmon and two other representatives, urging Clinton to demand that the Palestinian Authority hand over Palestinian killers of Americans to the US, as required by the US Anti-terrorism Act of 1986.
When questioned off-the-record, Palestinian security officials find the idea that the Clinton administration would request the hand-over of alleged killers laughable. Judging by the cold reception that Boim says she is now receiving from the American Consulate, perhaps their nonchalance is warranted.
However, history has shown that the Netanyahu government has mastered the art of using congressional contacts to further balance the peace process in its favor. “The word on the street is that Bibi controls the US Senate,” says Israeli politics professor Paul Liptz.
In the past, Netanyahu used an Israeli organization's outing of Palestinian Authority news programs and statements to legitimize his accusations of incitement. Once the American Congress saw a videotape of Palestinian Authority broadcasts and statements, Palestinian “incitement” became an important issue in the negotiations. The signed Wye agreement now authorizes a committee to monitor official statements that are deemed against the spirit of the peace process.
The Netanyahu government has also used private religious organizations to spread the word through Congress that the Palestinian Authority is bad for Christians.
In fact, during the negotiations at Wye, Ha'aretz reported that an FBI investigation team was in Israel questioning Justice Ministry officials about the nine Palestinians who have been accused of attacking Israelis. While their investigation has been kept secret, and Boim was unable to meet with the delegation, their trip shows that the US government is responding, while perhaps unwillingly, to Israeli pressure. Some analysts speculated at that time that the United States would use the offer of extraditing Palestinians to break an Israeli-Palestinian impasse.
For Hinawi, that may actually be the best thing. While Israel has not succeeded in getting the Palestinian leadership to transfer the men it wants, it has succeeded in taking and killing a few.
Palestinian Preventative Security Chief Jibril Rajoub withdrew from negotiations with Israel after he says the Shabak “kidnapped” two Palestinian suspects on the road to Nablus. Muhi A-Din Sharif died in a Ramallah explosion that many say was the act of Israeli intelligence. And the Awdallah brothers, while not on the list of those requested from the Palestinian Authority, were killed by the Shabak in a house near Hebron.
Now that more pressure is being applied to Libyan leader Mu'ammar Khadafi to turn over Libyans accused of exploding an airliner above Lockerbie, Scotland, Boim and others like her are bound to argue that the US must use anti-terrorism legislation to indict Palestinian suspects abroad.
by: Muna Hamzeh-Muhaisen
During United States' President Bill Clinton's upcoming visit to Israel and the Palestinian territories, Israel expects him to attend a special Palestinian parliamentary session to revoke the PLO National Charter which, in some clauses, calls for the destruction of the Jewish State. Not so say the Palestinians, who insist that during his four-day visit, Clinton will play host to a “festival” displaying public support for the Wye peace memorandum.
And what about the charter? Palestinian officials maintain thatdignitaries from all governing bodies, including the Palestine National Council, will approve a letter from Arafat to Clinton (dated January 22, 1998) which affirms the Palestinians' commitment to cease advocating revolutionary acts aimed at regaining land that is now part of Israel.The officials contend that this “approval” will take place during the official ceremony at which Clinton and Arafat are both scheduled to
speak.
The White House confirmed that Clinton will visit Israel, Gaza, and Bethlehem between December 12-15. In addition to meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu and PA President Yasser Arafat, the White House announced that the US President will “speak to the Israeli and Palestinian people about the importance of the Wye Memorandum and the need to continue to support the Middle East peace process.”
The PLO's founding covenant was adopted in May 1964 and includes nearly 30 references to the destruction of Israel as a state. The Wye Memorandum, signed in Washington on 23 October, requires the PLO Executive Committee and the 120-member Central Council to “reaffirm” the January letter from Arafat to Clinton, but falls short of referring to a formal vote.
Instead, the Memorandum's only other reference to the PLO charter indicates that members of the PNC, the Central Council, the Council and Palestinian ministers will be invited to attend a meeting, to be addressed by Clinton and Arafat, in order to “reaffirm their support for the peace process and the forementioned decisions of the Executive Committee and the Central Council.”
But Israel's interpretation of this reaffirmation measure is that the 600-member PNC “ which once included only 120 members “ will convene to vote down the charter. The Palestinians, on the other hand, insist that the PNC already amended the PLO charter in April 1996 (in Gaza) by a vote of 504-54. This 1996 amendment was accepted by then Israel's Labor government and the U.S. administration but Netanyahu's Likud government insists that specific changes be made to the text of the charter in what it claims is in accordance with the Wye agreement.
For his part, Arafat has already expressed his willingness to call for a new vote to cancel anti-Israeli clauses from the charter. “If they want a
vote, they'll get a vote,” Arafat reportedly told journalists in mid-November, indicating that, if necessary, he will convene the PNC to make the necessary amendments. But this could be easier said than done. Arafat is already facing opposition from inside the ranks of the PLO itself.
In a meeting in Damascus on November 9, 10 Palestinian factions who oppose Arafat's peace deals withIsrael vowed to block any plans for a
charter amendment. The factions, including the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Hamas and Islamic Jihad, consider the charter the backbone of the PLO and believe that it must not be amended until Israel withdraws from the remainder of the occupied Palestinian territories. They further believe that following a complete withdrawal and the establishment of a Palestinian state, the charter will automatically be replaced by a constitution.
More significantly, the opposition is concerned that the annulment of the charter will mean that Arafat's National Authority will replace the PLO
as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.
The danger in this lies in the fact that the PLO represents both the Palestinians who live in the diaspora as well as those who live in the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem, whereas the National Authority was elected to represent only the Palestinians in the territories. Since, unlike the PLO, the National Authority is bound by the agreements it has signed with Israel, the Palestinian opposition is worried that Arafat's Authority will have a free hand in the final status negotiations with Israel without having the PLO there to act as a deterrent.
In what could be a last attempt to block the annulment of the charter, a two-day Palestinian national conference, approved by the preliminary committee of the PNC, will be held in Damascus on December 12 through the 13.
The conference is expected to be attended by previous and current members of the PNC who oppose the Oslo agreement. According to the Syrian newspaper, Tishreen, 10 members representing each of the Palestinian opposition groupswill attend the conference as well as well-known PNC members such as Professor Edward Said, Shafiq al-Hout, Anis al-Sayegh, Ahmed Sidqi Dajani and Rifaat al-Nimer.
In addition to rejecting the Oslo, Hebron, and Wye agreements, the conference is expected to assert commitment to the PLO charter and reject the annulment or amendment to any of its clauses. Furthermore, the conference will call for the rebuilding of the PLO and its institutions based on the Palestinian national charter.
By early next week, attention will be focused on Gaza and Damascus to see how the fate of the nearly three-decade old PLO charter will be determined.
by: Hayat Ayyad & Samar Shahin
Um Ahmad, 36, says her daily life has become unbearable. Problems with her three co-wives and their children increase day by day in a house no bigger than 150 square meters. In addition, she is plagued constantly by psychological turmoil and anxiety due to her husband's threats that he will divorce her or one of his three other wives.
Um Ahmad is living with one of many cases of polygamy in Palestinian society, rampant particularly in Beit Hanoun in northern Gaza where there is hardly a home which does not house more than one wife for every man.
Dr. Fadl Abu Hein, associate professor of mental health at the College of Education in Gaza and Director of the Center for Social Training and Crisis Administration, says that polygamy is prevalent in villages. In rural areas in general, polygamy results from an identification with the community and a man's love for both his extended family and children. He added that the phenomenon of having many children is common among those who take pride in family and use it to build on power and fatherly security. The increase in children (especially sons) is an increase in power and pride and a source of boasting between families.
Abu Hein pointed out that polygamy is also caused by the absence of cultural awareness since marriage merely satisfies biological and security needs. He added that the mentality of many men regarding marriage is that is it for pleasure and possession.
He also said that early marriages also lead to polygamy caused by immaturity in the intellectual and emotional interactions between couples “ i.e. hostility and hasty divorce. The man then seeks a solution for these problems by marrying again and again. Abu Hein also mentioned that Palestinian families in the Gaza Strip do not intermingle nor marry their daughters into other families. Because of this, polygamy spreads within these families, and is even encouraged among the menfolk.
The mental health professor explained that social advancement and development within a civilization makes marriage an institution of stability and comfort. If we do not have stability we live in a constant state of frustration where the wife is, in many cases, a kind of ventilation for this frustration, Abu Hein argues. This is manifested in family violence which naturally leads to a lukewarm relationship between the two. If the man wants to take revenge on his wife for their unhappy relationship, he marries another woman.
Despite the injustice of polygamy, co-wives speak of the matter as if it is something ordinary and undisputed -- with the exception of a few educated women who refuse the principle of polygamy altogether.
Um Ahmad says she is her husband's first wife; he now has three other wives. Um Ahmad was married at 16 and had three children in the first three years of her marriage. Her husband later married an older woman after her. Two more wives followed.
According to Um Ahmad, her husband prefers one wife to the others and threatens the other wives with divorce since he says he would like to marry another woman. “What will happen to me and my children if he divorces me after 20 years of marriage and seven children all in school?”
Um Raed from Rafah is wife number three. However, she was not aware of her husband's marriage to other women when she accepted his proposal. He married her in Egypt and when she returned to the Gaza Strip with him she was shocked to find that she was the third wife in the house. “Problems between us kept growing even though I had five children from him,” she explains. The marriage finally ended in divorce and Um Raed now lives alone with her children and supported by others. “I live in constant agony. What can I do now that I am responsible for five children after my husband abandoned me?” asks Um Raed. Her husband now has twenty-two children altogether from four wives -- he left three of them and is living with the fourth.
Raeda, from Rafah Refugee Camp says her father married three women all of whom suffer from the situation in addition to the suffering of the children. “Sometimes my father doesn't remember all of his children since he has so many,” says Raeda. “Sometimes he doesn't even know that the child standing in front of him is his own.” Raeda strongly opposes the principle of polygamy saying that it works at destroying marriage life and the children involved. Raeda expressed that she feels very insecure and inferior among her classmates when they find out that her father is married to more than one woman.
There are various opinions regarding polygamy. One Gaza resident Siham Mohammed, thinks that polygamy is an injustice to the man, more than to the woman, because he basically brings injustice upon himself. He will not be able to be completely fair between the co-wives, creating dissension in the household. Mohammed calls upon men not to take polygamy as a policy in their lives.
Samiya Khalid, a university student at al-Azhar University in Gaza says that polygamy is an injustice to the woman at first, that later spreads to the family as a whole. She believes that polygamy even poisons the children's relationships with each other.
Dr. Abu Hein clarified that polygamy is a very serious phenomenon which generates negative ramifications such as sensitivity, jealousy and tension within the family. It also generates serious problems between the man and his wife by shaking the emotional and mental stability of their children, especially since the emotions of the children are so closely linked to the emotions of the mothers. In this way, the children fall victim to their parents' decisions.
ramifications of polygamy on society, said Dr. Abu Hein, are the dismemberment of the family unity and the dismemberment of societal relations. Feelings of hatred and contempt spread throughout the society, thus all the energy of the society is directed towards destruction rather than construction.
Dr. Abu Hein stressed that cultural advancement is necessary and called on fathers to give up their personal needs for their children's happiness. He believes Palestinian society must move away from this phenomenon which threatens the family and leads to its dismemberment and the waste of social energy.