Israel occupying Palestinian lands for more than half a century

Fifty-five years after Israel began occupying Palestinian lands; it is more difficult than ever to imagine a way out. The seeds of the two-state solution that were planted by visionary leaders on both sides have failed to take root. 

All that remains is a fatalistic acceptance of the conflict’s insolubility. For both the occupied and the occupier, the future is bleak

Over the last 55 years Israel has been occupying Palestinian lands, there have been two intifadas, four wars in Gaza, and a long series of failed efforts to negotiate a two-state solution roughly adhering to Israel’s pre-1967 borders. The situation may truly be as hopeless as it seems.

Intransigence on both sides—which no US president has managed to overcome, though virtually every one since the Six-Day War has tried—has gotten us to this point. While the Palestinians have sometimes embraced international diplomacy, they have also engaged in periods of obdurate resistance. It was the Palestinians who thwarted two promising peace initiatives, led by the forward-looking Israeli governments of Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert.

Given sentiment in Israel today, they might not get another chance. With each failed peace process, the promise of peace has lost its potency as a mobilizing cause in Israel. Meanwhile, Israel has gradually tightened its control over the occupied territories, with virtually no international pushback. Even the Arab states—six of which have normalized ties with Israel—seem to have grown indifferent to the agony of the Palestinians.

All of this has driven Israeli voters radically to the right, leaving Israel’s peace camp demoralized and weak. The religious-nationalist bloc that former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu leads now represents the majority of Israelis. And as far-right as Netanyahu may be, he is practically a leftist compared to the tens of thousands of radical Jewish nationalists who marched through Jerusalem’s Muslim Quarter on Jerusalem Day last month waving Israeli flags, repeating violent and Islamophobic chants like ‘death to Arabs’, and attacking Palestinians.

When Algerians rebelled against their French occupiers in one of the most brutal anti-colonial wars of the post-1945 era, the philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre wrote, ‘It is not their violence, but ours, which turns back on itself.’ In fact, the French found the violence being enacted in their name so abhorrent that 75% of them voted to grant Algeria independence in the 1961 referendum.

A similar sentiment is difficult to discern in Israel. On the contrary, popular support for the military’s fight against ‘Palestinian terrorism’ is overwhelming.

To be sure, Israel has known its share of mass demonstrations in support of a peace deal, with protest movements like Women in Black still going strong. Israeli non-government organizations such as B’Tselem, Peace Now and Breaking the Silence work hard to alert Israeli society of the sins of occupation. Joint Israeli–Palestinian organizations, like those bringing together family members of those lost to the ongoing conflict, do similarly admirable work.

But none of these efforts has had a transformative impact on the peace process. This stands in stark contrast to the experience in Northern Ireland during the Troubles, when checkpoints, home searches, abusive language, blackmail, beatings and arbitrary arrests were once standard practice, just as they are today in the occupied Palestinian territories.

In Northern Ireland, pressure from civil-society groups and NGOs eventually drove the security forces to curb abusive practices, improve their recruitment processes and introduce training for dealing with intercommunity tensions. The path to peace in Northern Ireland was paved largely by a mobilized civil society.

In Israel, however, only the Supreme Court stands between the military and worse behavior. The reason seems to lie in the nature of the conflict. Algeria’s war of independence was an anti-colonial struggle taking place far away from France’s shores. And the Troubles came down to an intercommunity cleavage, which could be resolved through disarmament and power sharing.

The Israeli–Palestinian conflict, by contrast, is existential. The question of where to draw borders is not merely practical; it has deep religious and cultural significance. For the Palestinians, Israel is the occupying power, impinging on their right to self-determination, but it is also their homeland. And for the now-dominant Israeli right, the occupied territories are the cradle of Jewish Biblical civilisation.

By fighting for the same lands, the two sides are effectively calling for the unconditional exclusion, even destruction, of the other. That goes a long way towards explaining their eagerness to alter the demographic balance—Israel through Jewish immigration and the expansion of settlements, and the Palestinians by demanding the ‘right of return’ for all refugees. Yasser Arafat, the late founder of the Palestine Liberation Organization, once called the womb of the Palestinian woman his ‘strongest weapon’ against Israel, as it would give the Palestinians a demographic advantage in the occupied territories.

Even if Israel did accede to the creation of a Palestinian state, it might continue to face threats to its survival. After all, Palestine wouldn’t be located far from its borders, like Algeria was from France.

What if a radical Islamist group rose to power in Palestine and challenged the peace agreement? What if state-building faltered or failed, generating rising instability on Israel’s doorstep? Or what if Palestine became a frontline outpost of a hostile foreign power? Already, Hamas and Hezbollah—with robust assistance from Iran—have turned Gaza and southern Lebanon, respectively, into launching pads for missiles targeting Israeli territory.

 

Pakistan one of the best customers of IMF

According to a report by The Express Tribune dated April 29, 2019, Pakistan has borrowed around SDR 13.79 billion from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), out of which 47% of the loans were secured by PPP, followed by PML-N at 35%, while the military dictatorships lag behind with a mere 18%.

Pakistan joined (IMF) in 1950 as newly established country was facing fiscal problems since its creation in 1947 from British rule. In 1958, for the first time, Pakistan went to IMF for bailout. For this, IMF lent out US$25,000,000 ‑ originally the loan-amount is given in SDR; for this article it is considered to be 1SDR = 1USD to Pakistan on standby arrangement basis on December 08, 1958.

Pakistan again went to IMF in 1965. This time, IMF gave US$37,500,000 to war-torn nation on 16 March 16, 1965.

Three years later, Pakistan again went to IMF for third time for balance of payment problems for which IMF gave US$75,000,000 on October 17, 1968.

In 1971, Pakistan lost its Eastern half, East Pakistan, after the Bangladesh Liberation War. This war caused huge loses to Pakistan. For which, Pakistan got loan a loan of US$84,000,000 in 1972, second loan of US$75,000,000 in 1973 and fourth of US$75,000,000 in 1974 to meet its growing needs. 

In 1977, a standby arrangement of US$80,000,000 was made on urgent basis. 

Three years later, an extended facility of US$349,000,000 was reached in 1980.

Struggle of Pakistan continued, as Pakistan withdrew another US$730,000,000 as Pakistan was already part of US cold war against Soviet Union.

Another era was started, as democracy came back to Pakistan but old ways to handle economy poorly continued. 

Benazir Bhutto government withdrew US$194,480,000 as standby arrangement and another US$382,410,000 in shape of structural adjustment facility commitment on December 28, 1988.

In 1990, government of Nawaz Sharif decided against going to IMF instead arranged donations from friendly countries like Saudi Arabia.

In 1993, Benazir Bhutto again came to power and her government again went to IMF and reached an agreement to get standby arrangement of US$88,000,000 on September 16, 1993.

Poor handling of economy continued by her government as she got loan of US$123,200,000 under the extended fund facility and another US$172,200,000 were borrowed on February 22, 1994.

During that period economy of Pakistan remained in poor shape and Pakistan had to go to IMF again for record third in the period of Bhutto government.

This time Pakistan got an amount of US$294,690,000 on 13 December 1995.

 In 1997, Nawaz Sharif came to power. Benazir Bhutto government was sacked and left economy of Pakistan in worst shape.

Sharif government went to IMF on urgent basis for the first time and reached an agreement to get two amounts of US$265,370,000 and US$113,740,000 on October 20, 1997.

In 2008, Yousaf Raza Gillani received a US$7.6 billion loan from the IMF.

In 2018, Imran Khan became Prime Minister of Pakistan. For this, they arranged friendly loans from Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and China to avoid tough IMF conditions. 

In 2019, when economic conditions worsened, they went to IMF for the twenty-second time for a loan of US$1 billion. 

IMF gave loan based on conditions such as hike in energy tariffs, removal of energy subsidy, increase in taxation, privatization of public entities and fiscal adjustments to the budget.

Israel takes aim at ruining Iran Turkey ties

In the recent past, Israel has launched an all-out media campaign against Iran that included bizarre claims of Iranian threats against ordinary tourists in neighboring Turkey. 

Israeli media and officials first issued warnings of imminent alleged threats from Iran to Israeli tourists in Turkey and then claimed that several attacks were foiled as a result of Turkish-Israeli security cooperation.

“The operational efforts with the Turkish security forces have borne fruit,” Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett claimed.  “In recent days, in a joint Israeli-Turkish effort, we thwarted a number of attacks and a number of terrorists were arrested on Turkish soil.”

Neither Bennett nor other Israeli officials have offered any kind of evidence to support their claims.

The string of warnings began last week when several Israeli officials alleged that there were concrete threats that Iran was allegedly trying to target Israelis in Istanbul over the weekend, and urged all Israeli citizens to leave Turkey immediately.

Iran has officially responded to Israeli hyperboles. Iran believes that Israel is openly spreading lies unworthy of a response.

Nour News, a news outlet close to Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, said Iran is determined to avenge the assassination of Colonel Sayad Khodaei but it’ll not target innocent people. 

“Given the past experiences, Israel is well aware of the certainty of Iran’s response to this regime’s mischief and terrorist moves such as the martyrdom of Sayad Khodaei,” Nour News said, adding, “The officials of this regime also know that the Islamic Republic of Iran will not punish innocent individuals when taking vengeance on the Zionist government’s crimes.”

The outlet said the leaders of Israel know that only the perpetrators and those who issued orders will be punished. This is why Israeli officials seek to mobilize the public with unfounded claims to increase the cost of Iran’s revenge, according to Nour News. 

The Israeli claims are intended to achieve another goal. According to Nour News, Israeli officials want to pitch Turkey and Iran against each other through unfounded claims. This is while the Iranian and Turkish foreign ministers have recently spoken over the phone and discussed ways to boost bilateral ties. 

This month, Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian and his Turkish counterpart Mevlut Cavusoglu spoke over the phone twice in less than a week. In the first call, they discussed the latest developments in bilateral relations, according to the Iranian foreign ministry.

Amir Abdollahian stressed the need to keep up the consultations between the two countries and promote cooperation, especially in bilateral trade and consular issues. The top Turkish diplomat invited his Iranian counterpart to visit Ankara for talks on issues of mutual interest in the near future.

In the second call, Cavusoglu once again extended an invitation to Amir Abdollahian to visit Turkey and expressed hope that continued negotiations between the officials of the two countries will help boost bilateral ties and increase their cooperation.

Amir Abdollahian reaffirmed Tehran’s determination to boost ties with Turkey more than ever before. The top Iranian diplomat also expressed hope that the two sides will hold more consultations over the matter.

The Israeli claims come against a backdrop of broader tensions between Iran and Israel. Israeli officials have ramped up their threats against Iran and, recently, even boasted about taking the battle into Iran. Bennett and other Israeli officials are now talking of ‘Octopus Doctrine’ a new strategy allegedly aimed at dealing with Iran directly instead of countering its allies in the West Asia region.

“The past year has been a year of changing course in Israel’s strategy vis-à-vis Iran,” Bennett said on June 7 at a meeting of the parliamentary defense and foreign affairs committee, according to the New York Times. “We have shifted into a higher gear. We are acting at all times and places, and we will continue to do so.”

Iran has said it will respond to Israeli provocative measures. Amir Abdollahian has recently said Israel must stop its provocative and hostile behavior.

In late May, IRGC chief Major General Hossein Salami vowed revenge for Sayyad Khodaei. He blamed the assassination of Khodaei on Israel, underlining that Iran will avenge his killing.

 

Iraq clears US$1.6 billion Iranian debts

Both, Iran and Iraq have announced that Baghdad has cleared its debts to Iran after months of talks over how to move forward with the financial issue. The move came after intensive diplomacy between Iran and Iraq.

A few weeks ago, Iranian Ambassador to Iraq Mohammad Kazem Al Sadeq met with the Governor of Iraq’s Central Bank Mustafa Ghaleb Mokhif in Baghdad to discuss ways to clear Baghdad’s gas and electricity debts to Iran.

During the meeting, they discussed aspects of banking and economic cooperation between the two countries, the payment of financial dues from Iraq, and overcoming the obstacles facing the work of Iranian companies in Iraq.

The repayments of Iraq’s debts faced two major problems: first, the Iraqi Parliament’s delay in approving the country’s fiscal budget and Second, US unilateral sanctions on Iran. 

Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi had sought to find a solution to both issues. He said, “One of the problems that caused the delay in the payment of dues to Iran is the absence of the budget.” 

It seems that this issue has been resolved in recent weeks. Al-Kadhimi said Iraq’s debts date back to before 2020. Al-Kadhimi had cleared the responsibility of his government, which was formed in May 2020, from Iran's gas debt, amounting to about US$1.6 billion. He said, “There are no debts owed by the current government regarding Iranian gas.”

Iraq’s Electricity Ministry echoed a similar point in its statement announcing the repayment of debts. “The ministry announces the start of the payment procedures that will be completed within the next two days, bearing in mind that the issue of financial obligations towards neighboring Iran is one of the problems carried over by previous governments, and the current government has borne it, by heading towards internal borrowing to pay off debts, which were not paid due to the scarcity of financial allocations resulting from not approving the budget for that year,” it said. 

After much bickering, Iraq paid its debts to Iran and Tehran confirmed that it received its money from Iraq. 

Iranian Oil Minister Javad Oji announced that Iran had received US$1.6 billion in arrears for gas exports to Iraq. 

“In light of the active energy diplomacy, and after several months of negotiations, we received, hours ago, US$1.6 billion in arrears due from past years regarding gas exports to Iraq,” Oji wrote on Twitter. 

“Since the beginning of current Iranian year, as compared to the same period last year, the country's gas exports have increased by 25%, and the receipt of hard currency earnings from it has increased by 90%,” he added. 

Iraq relies on Iranian gas to operate electric power plants. Earlier, the Iraqi Minister of Electricity Adel Karim announced that Iraq needs Iranian gas for 5-10 years while confirming the ministry’s agreement with the Iranian side to supply the country with 50 million cubic meters of gas per day.

The repayment of Iraq’s debts to Iran came at a time when US unilateral sanctions against Iran are still in place. This may be the reason why some analysts underlined the need for South Korea to follow in the footsteps of Iraq. South Korea owes Iran US$7 billion in oil debts and has been reluctant to clear its debts. Iran has called on Seoul to pay its debts but the Iranian demand has fallen on deaf ears. 

South Korea has linked the repayment of debts to the outcome of talks in Vienna over reviving the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh pointed to South Korea’s stonewalling in his Monday presser. “A new government has come to power in South Korea and they have made promises that they want to pay off Iran's debt, but we have not seen any move,” he said.

Khatibzadeh noted, “We are waiting to see the difference between the new government and the previous non-compliant government in terms of debt repayment.”

He then appeared to compare South Korea with Iraq. “We give the new Korean government time to show in practice what it is doing to repay its debts, like the friends we had in the region,” he said. 

 

Is Pakistan at the verge of technical default?

This mornings I was alarmed to listen to three rumours: 1) banks are unable to buy foreign exchange for their clients from the inter-bank market, 2) whatever US dollars are still held by the central bank just can’t be used and 3) most probably the PML-N will do, what it did in nineties ‑ freezing of foreign currency accounts of Pakistanis till the time forex starts flowing into Pakistan.

I had brief chat with some of the senior analysts and the conclusion was, “Pakistan is at the verge of technical default”.

The overwhelming consensus was, “It is not because of any weakness of the economy of the country, but due to the inability of the decision makers to make prudent and timely decisions”.

The consensus was, “If the casual attitude of the policy planners is not changed immediately, they will only hasten the default”.

The first and the worst habit of the incumbent government is that it spends more time on blaming the previous government, but does not take into accounts its own acts.

It talks about austerity, but indulges in extravaganzas.

It even fails in listening to what the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and friendly countries (also willing to support Pakistan) are saying.

The coalition partners were too keen to control the reigns, but neither had the plans to take the country out of the crisis.

Someone was indecent but may be right, “They wanted to take their names out of Exit Control List (ECL) as well get immunity to rule the country”.

They neither have the will nor the spine to make difficult decisions.

Raising POL prices and electricity tariffs are the easiest decisions because all their expenses are borne by the government.

Their thinking is still not synchronized with what the IMF is saying.

They have not only failed in containing the twin deficits (budget deficit and current account deficit) which is also proliferating the third deficit – confidence deficit.

War in Ukraine could last years, NATO chief

From the very beginning, I have the strongest belief that Russia-Ukraine conflict has been instigated by the United States to weaken one of the largest crude oil producing country. I also have sympathy with the people of Ukraine who have been dragged in this war by offering a ‘lollipop’. NATO/European Union membership. 

While no efforts have been made by United States to solicit ceasefire, tons of ‘outdated’ arsenals have been hurdled into Ukraine. My faith gained further strength after reading one of the statements Head of NATO, “War in Ukraine could last for years’.    

Reportedly, the Head of NATO said on Sunday, the war in Ukraine could last for years, as Russia stepped up its assaults after the European Union recommended that Kyiv become a candidate to join the bloc.

Jens Stoltenberg said supplying state-of-the-art weaponry to Ukrainian troops would boost the chance of freeing its eastern region of Donbas from Russian control, Germany's Bild am Sonntag newspaper reported.

"We must prepare for the fact that it could take years. We must not let up in supporting Ukraine," Stoltenberg, the Secretary General of the military alliance, was quoted as saying.

"Even if the costs are high, not only for military support, also because of rising energy and food prices."

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who visited Kyiv on Friday, also spoke of a need to prepare for a long war.

This meant ensuring "Ukraine receives weapons, equipment, ammunition and training more rapidly than the invader," Johnson wrote in an opinion piece in London's Sunday Times.

"Time is the vital factor," he wrote. "Everything will depend on whether Ukraine can strengthen its ability to defend its soil faster than Russia can renew its capacity to attack."

Ukraine received a significant boost on Friday when the European Commission recommended it for candidate status, decision EU nations are expected to endorse at a summit this week.

That would put Ukraine on course to realize an aspiration seen as out of reach before Russia's February 24 invasion, even if membership could take years.

The industrial city of Sievierodonetsk, a prime target in Moscow's offensive to seize full control of Luhansk — one of the two provinces making up the Donbas — faced heavy artillery and rocket fire again, the Ukrainian military said.

"Russian forces will likely be able to seize Sievierodonetsk in the coming weeks, but at the cost of concentrating most of their available forces in this small area," analysts at a Washington-based think tank, the Institute for the Study of War, wrote in a note.

Serhiy Gaidai, the Ukrainian appointed Governor of Luhansk, told Ukrainian television, "All Russian claims that they control the town are a lie. They control the main part of the town, but not the whole town."

In the twin city of Lysychansk across the river, Gaidai said on the Telegram messaging app, residential buildings and private houses had been destroyed, adding, "People are dying on the streets and in bomb shelters."

Ukraine's military acknowledged that "the enemy has partial success in the village of Metolkine," just southeast of Sievierodonetsk.

Russia's state news agency TASS said many Ukrainian fighters had surrendered in Metolkine, citing a source working for Russian-backed separatists.

One of Russian President Vladimir Putin's stated goals in ordering troops into Ukraine was to halt the eastward expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance and keep Moscow's southern neighbour outside the West's sphere of influence.

However, the Western media continue to say, the war has killed thousands, reduced cities to rubble and sent millions fleeing. It is having opposite effect — convincing Finland and Sweden to seek to join NATO — and helping to pave the way for Ukraine's EU membership bid.

 

US Ambassador readying people of Bangladesh for an ‘engineered’ election

On June 13, 2022, I had posted a blog titled “United States starts playing regime change mantra in Bangladesh”. I quoted Jamie Raskin, Member of US House of Representatives, urging his colleagues to join him in standing with the people of Bangladesh, especially those bravest and most vulnerable. 

Today, I am quoting what the US Ambassador to Bangladesh, Peter Haas has said lately.

US Ambassador said the sanctions on Rab will not damage the bilateral relationship and that the two countries, which have deep ties, will move on and work together based on shared values of democracy and human rights.

“…A lot of people ask me if I think this will damage our bilateral relations. And I just say, I don’t think it has to,” he said in a talk show titled AmTalk. Video of the event has been uploaded to the Embassy’s Facebook page.

The envoy said there are frictions in the relationship. “And that’s okay when you have a relationship as broad and deep as ours. But what I want to see us do both on Rab and every other aspect is to sit down and to talk about… what do we need to do to resolve this issue.”

Last year, Washington imposed sanctions on Rab and some of its current and former officials.

Haas said his country heard a lot of times how Bangladesh was surprised when the US imposed sanctions.

“And maybe we’re almost surprised they’re surprised, because already in 2018, we stopped providing training to the Rab, because of our concerns on human rights.

For several years, we’ve published in our human rights reports our concerns. We’ve raised it with them in bilateral meetings. And so, while the sanctions may have come as a surprise, the idea that we had concerns should not have.”

The envoy said the US is also not perfect when it comes to democracy but that the striving for democracy must continue.

Referring to Bangladesh, he said there are things that the Bangladeshi people and the government can work on as well and the elections provide a good framing for that, because they’re still more than a year out.

“We don’t favour any particular party, or platform, or anything else … But what we would like to see is what I think all Bangladeshis would like to see, which is an election run at international standards that allow the people of Bangladesh to choose their next leaders in an open, competitive process free of violence and free of coercion.”

Haas said he welcomes some of the signs, some of the signals that they have been receiving.

“Foreign Minister [Abdul] Momen has made it clear that Bangladesh will welcome international observers. And I think that’s critical.

“But the election actually has already started. And so, it’s important to be looking at it all the way from now to make sure that everyone feels safe and secure in their decision on whether or not to participate in any aspect of the upcoming elections,” he added.