A couple of days after Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas declared a halt to hostilities, I met with a few of the many journalists and commentators who roam our streets. They did not think peace had much of a chance. Hamas had already fired rockets into an Israeli settlement in defiance, and Sharon has long shown he is willing to respond to any provocation with more than equal force. Like all of us here, these journalists had seen many cease-fires and declarations come to nothing. A few of them knew colleagues who had been killed.

The mood was so sour that I—a children’s psychiatrist by profession—was suddenly struck by the feeling that I was in a counseling session, trying to instill hope in the hearts of traumatized youngsters. “Do you really trust Hamas to stop terror?” one of the journalists asked me. “Even when they announce that they are not bound by the agreement?”

To his obvious shock I replied, “Yes.”

I have spent many years observing Hamas at close range as it has grown from a small Islamic religious movement into a major army. I have been debating politics with its leaders and members for a long, long time. That experience leads me to believe that Hamas will very soon transform into a political party and will seriously contemplate taking over the government by democratic means.

There are sound reasons for my optimism. The first is that Hamas finally has an incentive to halt terrorist activity. For years, its raison d’etre has been military action. But Hamas has just achieved an astounding victory in municipal elections in the Gaza Strip, winning 70 percent of the seats in local councils. Fatah, the ruling party that had long dominated the political scene, was roundly defeated. Hamas has a guaranteed political future when it chooses to abandon the armed struggle. Furthermore, close observers have noted important signs of change within Hamas over time. From remarks made by its spiritual leader, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, before his assassination by the Israelis last year, we understand that Hamas is now prepared to accept a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And as the recent elections showed, Hamas now participates fully in the democratic process—something that it once called a Western conspiracy, and even a sin.

Many Palestinians express horror at the atrocities…but go on to say, “The Israelis deserve what they get until they stop killing our children.”

Hamas is becoming more organized, more sophisticated and more confident in itself. For example, in the first intifada, Hamas was quick to charge people with collaboration with Israel and to kill them. That was a sign of insecurity. The Hamas of today pledges not to kill fellow Palestinians, but instead urges the Palestinian Authority to enforce its laws.

This confidence has grown as popular support for Hamas has increased, thanks to its wide network of social programs, its incorruptible image, its adherence to Islamic morals and, most importantly, its record of fighting Israel. It is important to understand that while suicide bombings have made Hamas synonymous with terror to many, Palestinians see these tactics as a way to balance the terror Israel shoves down our throats. Many Palestinians express horror at the atrocities perpetrated by Hamas in the streets of Jerusalem, but go on to say, “The Israelis deserve what they get until they stop killing our children.”

In short, Hamas has earned its popular support and it does not want to lose that support, nor its role in the future of Palestine. And that is why I believe it will cooperate with Abu Mazen, as Palestinians respectfully refer to President Abbas. It is precisely because Hamas has such a strong grass-roots base that it recognizes that most Palestinians have learned that violence only inspires retaliation.

The leaders of Hamas have repeatedly declared their respect for Abbas and for the democratic process that elected him. And though there have been violent incidents by defiant elements, the organization’s leaders quickly backed down when the president denounced the attacks. Abu Mazen’s quick response to the breaching of the cease-fire, besides speaking out against Hamas he sacked top generals and declared a state of emergency—reflects a man willing to go beyond the vocabulary of peace. He is showing conviction, courage, and determination. In contrast to the late Yasser Arafat, he does not see peace as just one tactic, along with violent struggle, for getting Israel to accept a Palestinian state. While Abbas shares the goal of statehood, he believes that only peace can bring it about.
—Dr. El Sarraj is a Palestinian psychiatrist in Gaza

---

12,000 homes demolished in the Occupied Territories since 1967
Israel Halts Some Palestinian Home Demolitions
“There is no recognition that making innocent people suffer for the crimes of a family member is simply wrong by any reasonable ethical standard.”

Israeli Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz has called a halt to the policy of punitive home demolitions of the homes of Palestinian suicide bombers and their families. It is another positive development in recent days. The particular policy of punitive demolitions has been controversial since its implementation. There is an obvious injustice in having the entire family of any criminal, terrorist or otherwise, pay for the crimes of one individual.

The obvious moral question has always been, “How would you feel if you were made homeless because of the crime of your son or your brother or your sister?” Would any of us consider deterrence an acceptable excuse for such a practice, even in time of war? It seems unimaginable that anyone would if we were the subjects of such a policy. Yet somehow, many people seemed able to live with it when it was applied to the Palestinians. That an Israeli military investigation determined that the practice was not even an effective deterrent makes the suffering of 270 Palestinian families affected by the policy in the past two years all the more tragic.

It should be noted that the failure of this policy to deter acts of violence against Israelis is the sole stated reason for the discontinuation of the policy. There is no recognition that making innocent people suffer for the crimes of a family member is simply wrong by any reasonable ethical standard. The closest anyone comes is the former chief of the Central Command, Gen. Yitzhak Eitan, who said that the policy actually motivated more violence out of vengeance.

“House demolitions had the opposite effect from what Israel expected. The policy turned into an incentive for attacks motivated by vengeance.”

An internal army study published at the end of 2003 summing up the first 1,000 days of the conflict, said that “as of today, there is no proof of the deterrent influence of the house demolitions.” The number of attacks, said the report, even rose after the army began demolishing houses. Eitan, in charge of the Central Command of the intifada, said that the house demolitions had the opposite effect from what Israel expected. He said the policy turned into an incentive for attacks motivated by vengeance.

Perhaps of greatest importance, however, is that home demolitions are not usually carried out for punitive reasons. In 2004, according to the Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem, 184 houses were demolished for punitive reasons, while 1609 were demolished either for permit violations or for ‘military purposes’, which generally means to clear space for settlements, bypass roads or army outposts. The announced change applies only to punitive demolitions.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD) welcomed the decision of the Israeli Army to halt its policy of demolishing Palestinian houses either as punishment for acts of violence or as a deterrent measure. This policy constituted a clear violation of international law, both because it by-passed due process of law in cases where perpetrators were punished before being tried and because it constitutes collective punishment against the families of perpetrators who are innocent of any crime. The IDF committee recommending the cessation of punitive demolitions did so only because, in its evaluation, demolitions generate more resistance than deterrence among the Palestinians.

It is important to point out that punitive demolitions represent only a small part of house demolitions. The Palestinian homes demolished under this policy represent less than 10 percent of the 4000-5000 Palestinian homes demolished during the four years of the Intifada and only three percent of the 12,000 homes demolished in the Occupied Territories since 1967. Fully 60 percent of the Palestinian homes demolished during the intifada were destroyed in military operations. More than 1000 homes of innocent Palestinian civilians with no connection to violence or resistance were demolished by court order because the families were unable to obtain building permits. This last type of demolition, intended to confine the Palestinian population to small enclaves in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, continues apace.

—from Jewish Voice for Peace and ICAHD reports
Jewish Voice for Peace is part of the campaign to get the Illinois Caterpillar Corporation to stop selling its bulldozers to the Israeli army for the purpose of home demolition.
For more information visit www.catdestroyshomes.org

---

By Nathan Guttman, Washington
Getting Tight with the Bible Belt
“I try to strengthen the Jewish-Christian common denominator
which has a scathing dispute with Islam.”

Knesset Member Benny Elon (National Union Party) invests more time and effort than any other Israeli in nurturing the relationship with Evangelical Christians in the US. As minister of tourism during the intifada, Elon promoted visits by Evangelical churches to Israel. He still attends their conferences, speaking out against diplomatic compromise on the Land of Israel.

In Elon’s view, it is a productive relationship. Evangelical churches in the United States, with a combined membership of more than 50 million, are the closest thing to Israel’s Yesha Council of Settlements on the other side of the Atlantic. Church leaders believe the Land of Israel belongs to Jews, and that only after the Jews settle the land will Jesus be able to return. There is a minor argument, of course, over what will happen in the end of days—these Evangelicals believe Jews will either cease to exist or will convert to Christianity—but this argument is on hold for now.

At a major conference of evangelical broadcasters in Anaheim California recently, Elon introduced his soon-to-be-released book, “God’s Covenant with Israel: Establishing Biblical Boundaries in Today’s World.” The book is a first attempt to formulate in writing the points of agreement and cooperation between Israel and Evangelical Christians in the US. For Elon, it is also a first attempt to join politics and the Bible in the discourse between the two sides.

“I don’t play it objective,” says Elon about his book. He says that in his numerous encounters with Christian believers around the US he has felt a breach between the cold discussion of political and diplomatic issues, and the spiritual religious experience, as expressed in outbursts of Hallelujah and Amen by believers. Elon feels that he is now tying together the loose ends and essentially giving religious-biblical underpinnings to his diplomatic doctrine. “If Sharansky is going for democracy and shared values, and Netanyahu is going for the war on terror, then I am going for the Bible,” he says.

Aside from emphasizing the Jewish-Christian partnership in the matter of the Bible and the Land of Israel, the book also devotes extensive discussion to the third side—the Muslims. “I try to strengthen the Jewish-Christian common denominator, which has a scathing dispute with Islam,” he says. “I’m not proposing to burn down mosques or make provocations, but neither am I suggesting that the common enemy be disregarded.” As Elon sees it, while Christians and Jews agree on a single historical and chronological outlook, Islam rejects it and proposes an alternative. This is particularly true when it comes to the issue of choice. The Muslims, Elon writes in his book, do not accept the historical story according to which at each stage God chose one and rejected the others, and therefore the People of Israel, the descendants of Jacob, are the chosen people.

Israel has viewed the American Evangelical community as a significant source of support for more than two decades. What began as a marginal dalliance between groups in the Israeli right and leaders of the Evangelical Church has become one of the primary channels of contact between the official State of Israel and American Christians. Along the way, this alliance has succeeded in overcoming more than a few hurdles—the established Jewish community in the US at first responded coolly to the closer relations while expressing reservations about the rightist approach of the Evangelicals in American politics, an approach that is alien to most of the Jewish community; nor did the previous Democratic administration have much fondness for this church.

Shifts in the American and Israeli political maps—as well as the intifada, which damaged Israel’s standing in the international community—removed most of the hurdles that stood in the way of the closer links between Israel and the Evangelicals. They were the only group to support Israel without reservation in the past few years, and one of the only groups to send delegations of tourists—church members—to Jerusalem at a time when the hotels stood empty.

Liberal Jews are still uncomfortable with the alliance between Israel and the Evangelicals, who represent all that the traditional political and social values of the Jewish community are not. They also warn that, in the long term, this closeness will harm Israel’s status and image in the American mainstream and among its ruling elites. But the American Jewish establishment has taken the approach that this is not a time to be picky about the choice of friends and allies.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

By Uri Avnery, in Tikkun magazine
Dunam After Dunam*
“Twenty percent of the citizens of Israel [Arabs] are denied the right
to buy a home in large parts of the country.”

What would we say if an American institution, holding a seventh of all the land in the United States, adopted statutes that allowed it to sell or rent land only to White Anglo-Saxon Protestants? We would not believe it. And it is, indeed, impossible. But that’s the way things are in Israel. This us now the subject of a stormy public debate.

These are the facts: The Jewish National Fund [KKL in Hebrew] holds 13 percent of all the land in Israel. Its statutes explicitly prohibit the sale or rental of land to non-Jews. This means that every Jew in the world, living anywhere from Timbuktu to Kamchatka, can get land from the KKL—without even coming to Israel!—while an Arab citizen of Israel, whose forefathers have lived here for hundreds or even thousands of years, cannot acquire a house or an apartment on its land.

The debate arose after a recent ruling of the Israeli Supreme Court which proscribed discrimination between citizens in the distribution of land. On the strength of this, the KKL has

*One dunam = 1000 square meters—one-quarter of an acre—a Turkish measure still used in Israel.

been sued. Now the Attorney General has decided that the Government cannot discriminate against Arab citizens, even while distributing land belonging to the KKL. This is all very nice, but there is a ‘but.’ The best legal brains looked for a way out: How to keep the discrimination alive in spite of the court’s decision? No Problem. The Attorney General simply proposes that for every dunam that the KKL will have to distribute—God forbid!—to Arabs, the government will compensate it with another dunam somewhere else. The alternative land will be in the ‘peripheral’ areas, the Negev desert and the Galilee, where it is much more profitable. Thus the cake will be divided but remain whole.

In this situation, 20 percent of the citizens of Israel [one million Arabs are citizens of Israel] are denied the right to buy a home in large parts of the country, while this right is enjoyed by Jews living in Brooklyn and Odessa.

---

Temple Mount Guarded Against Jewish Extremists

Dozens of police reinforcements have been deployed around Jerusalem’s disputed mosque compound for fear of an attack by Jewish extremists trying to sabotage the Gaza pullout plan. Around 40 extra officers have been deployed to the site inside the walled Old City recently, while around a million dollars has been allocated for police to acquire electronic surveillance equipment.

The mosque compound, which is called Al-Haram al-Sharif (Noble Sanctuary) by Muslims, shelters the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque. The site is also revered by Jews as it was once the site of the Jewish temple, the holiest shrine in Judaism, which was destroyed by the Romans in 70 CE. Israel’s domestic intelligence Shin Beth uncovered a plot in the early 1980s to detonate a huge explosion in the compound in a bid to derail the peace agreement with Egypt. A controversial visit there by then opposition leader Ariel Sharon on September 28, 2000, sparked clashes between Palestinians and the Israeli police that led to the eruption of the intifada, or uprising.

Sharon’s plan to pull troops and settlers out of the Gaza Strip by the end of 2005 has attracted increasingly virulent opposition, with extremists even threatening to dig up the premier’s late wife from her grave. The Israeli parliament has approved a one-billion-dollar compensation package night for the 8,000 Gaza settlers, and around 300 inhabitants of four small Jewish enclaves in the northern West Bank who are also to be evacuated.
—Agence France Presse

By Sally Hunsberger, Christian Peacemaker Team in Hebron
Shepherd Engages in Non-Violent Resistance.

A standoff occurred between a Palestinian shepherd, Israeli military, and police when the shepherd refused to leave his grazing land. An angry, armed settler and four military soldiers confronted a Palestinian shepherd accompanied by CPTers Barbara Martens and Sally Hunsberger (while intentionally grazing his sheep on Palestinian land next to an illegal Israeli settlement). In the past, while shepherding at a greater distance from the illegal Jewish Ma’on settlement, settlers chased him from his land.

The settler got out of his jeep and immediately approached Martens and Hunsberger, yelling: “I hate you!” “Go back home!” “Why are you here?” “You Americans, go give back your land to the Indians.” One of the soldiers accompanying the settler, yelled, “Look what you have done in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Vietnam.”

Martens replied, “I am Canadian, and you are right. I have opposed my own government because of its mistreatment of the First Nations people.” When Martens tried to draw the settler into conversation by asking him, “How do you see that there could be peace here?” he refused to answer, moving back to the group of soldiers.

Martens called the police to intervene in the standoff and the Israeli District Coordinating Officer (DCO) for corroboration of the Palestinian ownership of this land. In spite of the intimidation by the settler and soldiers, the shepherd stood his ground. His family joined him up on the hillside, quietly standing in solidarity with him. After three hours of standoff, the DCO arrived. The final decision was to call a meeting three days later of only Israelis—settlers, and authorities—to determine the status of the land. Once again, Palestinians are excluded when future land ownership of currently owned Palestinian land is being determined.

—CPT release. Christian Peacemaker Teams is an ecumenical initiative to support violence reduction. More information: http://www.cpt.org

Jimmy Carter Visits Nazareth Village
“He seemed touched…when the guide spoke about Jesus’ mandate for his followers to love their enemies, even during Roman occupation, violence, and turmoil.”

Former US President Jimmy Carter, in the Middle East as observer for the Palestinian elections, found time to drive north to Nazareth to visit ‘Nazareth Village,’ a full-scale replica of a Roman-period Jewish town showing life in the time of Jesus. President Carter and wife Rosalyn have been honorary chairs for Nazareth Village since the inception of the idea in 1997. Accompanied this time by former New Jersey Governor Christie Whitman and former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt, Carter toured the village with a group that included the Nazareth mayor and board members of the Village.

The group stepped back in time as they toured reconstructions of first-century houses, an olive press, a wine press, and an ancient synagogue. Nazareth Village Executive director, Michael Hostetler, guided the tour. President Carter was surprised to discover this fascinating site in the heart of modern Nazareth, just few blocks away from where Jesus grew up. He expressed interest in the numbers of visitors to the site and their religious affiliations. He urged NV staff to invite religious leaders beyond those of the Christian faith to visit, adding that he had already encouraged Muslim leaders in Jerusalem to do so.

Carter, a peanut farmer from Georgia, former leader of the first world, and Nobel Peace Prize winner, was given a typical first-century meal with fresh bread baked over the open fire, thyme, olive oil, cheese, and olives. During the meal he heard an explanation of the significance of gathering around the table for food in Middle Eastern cultures—a symbol of reconciliation between opponents. Himself a veteran Sunday school teacher, Carter was impressed by the message of life and teachings of Jesus conveyed throughout the tour. He seemed touched by the Village scriptural cornerstone when it was read from Luke 4:17-19, and also when the guide spoke about Jesus’ mandate for his followers to love their enemies even during a time of Roman occupation, violence, and turmoil.

The tour concluded with the presentation of a set replica of ancient ceramic oil lamps as symbols of light which Jesus calls his followers to be. Just before departing, Carter expressed interest in a future visit to Nazareth with his wife, Rosalyn.

**For photos of Jimmy Carter at Nazareth Village, click here or on http://mennonitechurch.ca/news/jerusalemletter/

---

We welcome your letters about the articles we include,
or your suggestions on other topics you would like to read about.

---