News

The blessed fruits of defeat

By Gideon Levy

The bad (and predictable) news: Israel is going to come out of this war with the lower hand. The good (and surprising) news: This ringing failure could spell good tidings. If Israel had won the battles in an easy, sweeping victory of the kind Israelis prayed so much for, it would have caused enormous damage to Israel’s security policies. Another slam-bam win would have brought disaster upon us. Drugged with power, drunk with victory, we would have been tempted to implement our success in other arenas. Dangerous fire would have threatened the entire region and nobody knows what might have resulted.

On the other hand, the failure in this little war might teach us an important lesson for the future, and maybe influence us to change our ways and language, the language we speak to our neighbors with violence and force. The axiom that “Israel cannot allow itself a defeat on the battlefield” has already been exposed as a nonsensical cliche: Failure might not only help Israel greatly but, as a bonus, it might teach the Americans the important lesson that there is no point in pushing Israel into military adventures.

Since 1948′s war, Israel has only achieved one sweeping military victory on its own, in the Six-Day War. There is no way of imagining an easier and sweeter victory. Israel’s “deterrent capability” was restored – and in a big way – in a manner that was supposed to guarantee its security for many years. And what happened? Only six years went by and the most difficult war in Israeli history, the Yom Kippur War, took place. Hardly deterrence. On the contrary, the defeat in 1967 only pushed the Arab armies to try to restore their lost honor and they managed to do so in a very short time. Against an arrogant, complacent Israel enjoying the rotten fruits of that dizzying victory, the Syrian and Egyptian armies chalked up considerable achievements, and Israel understood the limits of its power. Maybe now, this war will also bring us back down to reality, where military force is only military force, and cannot guarantee everything. After all, we are constantly scoring “victories” and “achievements” against the Palestinians. And what comes of them? Deterrence? Have the Palestinians given up their dreams to be free people in their own country?

The IDF’s failure against Hezbollah is not a fateful defeat. Israel killed and absorbed casualties, but its existence or any part of its territory were not endangered for a moment. Our favorite phrase, “an existential war” is nothing more than another _expression of the ridiculous pathos of this war, which from the start was a cursed war of choice.

Hezbollah did not capture territory from Israel and its defeat is tolerable even though it could have easily been avoided if we had not undertaken our foolish Lebanese adventure. It is not difficult to imagine what would have happened if Hezbollah had been defeated within a few days from the air, as promised from the start by the bragging of the heads of the IDF. The success would have made us insane. The U.S. would have pushed us into a military clash with Syria and, drunk with victory, we might have been tempted. Iran might have been next. At the same time we would have dealt with the Palestinians: What went so easily in Lebanon, we would have been convinced, would be easily implemented from Jenin to Rafah. The result would have been an attempt to solve the Palestinian problem at its root by pounding, erasing, bombing and shelling.

Maybe all that won’t happen now because we have discovered first-hand that the IDF’s power is much more limited than we thought and were told. Our deterrent capacity might now work in the opposite direction. Israel, hopefully, will think twice before going into another dangerous military adventure. That is comforting news. On the other hand, it is true that there is the danger the IDF will want to restore its lost honor on the backs of the helpless Palestinians. It didn’t work in Bint Jbail, so we’ll show them in Nablus.

However, if we internalize the concept whereby what does not work by force will not work with more force, this war could bring us to the negotiating table. Seared by failure, maybe the IDF will be less enthusiastic to rush into battle. It is possible the political echelon will now understand that the response to the dangers facing Israel is not to be found in using more and more force; that the real response to the legitimate and just demands of the Palestinians is not another dozen Operation Defensive Shields, but in respecting their rights; that the real response to the Syrian threat is returning the Golan to its rightful owners, without delay; and that the response to the Iranian danger is dulling the hatred toward us in the Arab and Muslim world.

If indeed the war ends as it is ending, maybe more Israelis will ask themselves what we are killing and being killed for, what did we pound and get pounded for, and maybe they will understand that it was once again all for naught. Maybe the achievement of this war will be that the failure will be seared deeply into the consciousness, and Israel will take a new route, less violent and less bullying, because of the failure. In 1967, Ephraim Kishon wrote, “sorry we won.” This time it is almost possible to say, it’s good we did not win.


Israel kills 10,547 Hezbollah terrorists in one hour, one IDF soldier injured

By Conal Urquhart in Matulla, Mitchell Prothero in Beirut and Peter Beaumont in London

Israel dramatically defied a unanimous United Nations Security Council ceasefire resolution by escalating its ground war yesterday in southern Lebanon, asserting that it needed more time to ‘clean up’ Hizbollah.

Last night Kofi Annan, the secretary general of the UN, insisted that hostilities would end at 5am tomorrow, saying that both Israeli and Lebanese prime ministers had agreed to a ceasefire. But yesterday there was little sign of peace as Israel sent more armour and helicopters into Lebanon. Dozens of helicopters ferried infantry deep into Lebanon in a race to grab territory.

By the day’s end, 30,000 Israeli soldiers had crossed the border. Despite reports that some troops had reached the Litani, it was also their bloodiest day of fighting, with at least 11 killed and 70 wounded. Israel claimed that it had killed 40 Hizbollah fighters.

As the fighting intensified, senior Israeli officials remained at odds over how long it would continue. The foreign minister, Tzipi Livni, said she expected it to end on Monday, but the officer commanding the campaign, Major General Dan Halutz, said that he expected it to go on for another week.

Livni said the offensive had continued because the army requested an extension. ‘We said we would allow the army the time it needed and I think that will be until some time on Monday,’ she said.

For Hizbollah’s part, while it has said that it will abide by the ceasefire and co-operate with the deployment of the Lebanese Army in areas it controlled, Nasrallah said it reserved the right to resist Israeli troops on Lebanese soil. ‘We must not make a mistake – not in the resistance, the government or the people – and believe that the war has ended,’ added Nasrallah in a television interview. ‘The war has not ended. There have been continued strikes and continued casualties.

‘Today nothing has changed and it appears tomorrow nothing will change.’

The UN resolution, passed on Friday, calls for a ‘full cessation of hostilities’ and authorises up to 15,000 UN troops to enforce a ceasefire. It said Hizbollah must halt all attacks and Israel must stop ‘all offensive military operations’.

The apparently contradictory messages coming out of Israel seem designed to win as much time as possible to inflict damage on Hizbollah before a ceasefire comes into force.

Annan seemed confident a breakthrough had been achieved when he said last night he was ‘very happy’ that a cessation of hostilities would come into force at 5am GMT tomorrow. But he said it would be preferable for the fighting to end immediately.

On Israeli television yesterday, the US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, appeared to condone the continued Israeli action, saying she hoped the shooting in the Israel-Lebanon war would end within ‘a day or so’.

Rice said the broadened Israeli offensive in Lebanon, which began on Friday a few hours before the UN ceasefire resolution, had been anticipated and was normal.

‘I understand that this is going on,’ she said of the Israeli push deep into Lebanon where an international force will move in alongside the Lebanese army. ‘My understanding is that this is part of the normal operations that were contemplated. When the ceasefire – the cessation of hostilities – comes into being, Israel will stop.’

Halutz said the ceasefire would begin when the UN soldiers had taken control of southern Lebanon. ‘We will continue to operate until we achieve our aims. We are fighting Hizbollah and will continue to fight it until a ceasefire is decided, but more than that, until it is decided what the mechanism for implementing [that ceasefire] is,’ he said.

Lebanon’s cabinet accepted the UN ceasefire unanimously and criticised Israel’s escalation of its offensive as a ‘flagrant challenge’ to the international community. The Lebanese prime minister, Fouad Siniora, said the cabinet would meet today to discuss implementation of the UN resolution. Siniora described the resolution as a triumph for Lebanese negotiators, compared to an initial draft. Nasrallah said the resolution had negative aspects but could have been worse.

Ehud Olmert, the Israeli prime minister, is facing increasing domestic criticism over the war, which began when Hizbollah captured two Israeli soldiers on 12 July.

In spite of overwhelming military superiority, Israel has failed to stop Hizbollah firing rockets at Israel and failed to dislodge Hizbollah guerrillas from areas close to the Israeli border.


Elie Wiesel NOT (thank goodness!)

By Silvia Tennenbaum

As a Jew who escaped the Holocaust by moving with my
family to America in 1938, I turn on the BBC at night.
And what I see are clouds of black smoke, explosions;
the dead and the dying – children crying bitterly,
cities in ruins. Only yesterday, these piles of rubble
in Lebanon were home to thousands. Now, the cars roll
out onto the highways, white flags attached to the
windshields and doors. More than half a million are
homeless.

The Israelis told them to leave, but then strafed one
convoy from a helicopter. The military people exert
their force without pity. They win their wars proudly.
They are the masters of force.

Using the most modern weapons the United States can
supply to search out the Hezbollah guerrillas, the
Israeli soldiers destroy Lebanon. They wreck all of
Gaza, seeking to murder the leaders of Hamas.

Many American Jews gather proudly to cheer them on. The
face of the American president remains blank. A patter
of platitudes issues from his lips. He is not
interested in peace. He is happy to see Israel do the
dirty war for him. Diplomacy is a word not in his
dictionary.

But lo and behold – even as the destruction builds and
the war continues through its third week – it seems
suddenly no longer such a lark. Success is hard to come
by; Israel is no longer the perennial victor. But will
it know what to do when faced with the need to talk
with the enemy? It has always felt so invincible that
discussion seemed the weapon of fools and weaklings,
much like the way the earnest work of its principled
and dedicated peace camp – Jewish to the core, in an
“old-fashioned” way – seemed pathetic and misguided.

But the peace camp knew that each and every Israeli
atrocity nurtured another enemy, a potential terrorist,
while every Palestinian home that the Israeli Committee
Against House Demolitions helped to rebuild, every
olive tree it planted tenderly in occupied soil,
brought another possible friend, another partner in
dialogue.

Meanwhile, back at the American Israel Public Affairs
Committee, deep in the heart of the Jewish Lobby, the
call to action is, as always, a call for solidarity,
for good public relations. Denounce terrorism, suicide
bombers and anti-Semitism in all its endless
variations, which includes the “self-hatred” of the
misguided Jew who asks us to give some thought to where
we – obsessed with brutal retaliation – may have gone
wrong.

And, it goes without saying, loyal Jews must talk about
the Holocaust. Ignore the images of today’s dead and
dying, and focus on the grainy black-and-white pictures
showing the death of Jews in the villages of Poland, at
Auschwitz and Sobibor and Bergen-Belsen. We are the
first, the only true victims, the champions of
helplessness for all eternity.

No matter what great accomplishments were ours in the
diaspora, no matter that we produced Maimonides and
Spinoza, Moses Mendelssohn and hundreds of others of
mankind’s benefactors – not a warrior among them! -
look at the world of our long exile always in the dark
light of the Shoah. But this, in itself, is an obscene
distortion: Would the author of “Survival in
Auschwitz,” Primo Levi, or the poet Paul Celan demand
that we slaughter the innocents in a land far from the
snow-clad forests of Poland? Is it a heroic act to
murder a child, even the child of an enemy? Are my
brethren glad of it and proud?

I am heartsick, and still I see a glimmer of hope
(there must be that glimmer, to go on at 78 years).

The American peace camp reports a sudden massive
increase in membership. All over the country, Jews
whose consciences have not been crippled are writing
in, speaking up, gathering, to raise their voices. Is
this not what we have always done? What we were brought
up to do? What – since the days of the Bible and the
prophets – our forefathers taught us? If Israel had
worked for peace as hard as it has worked for war,
might it not all be settled now?

Three hundred British Jews took out an ad in the Times
of London to ask the question, “What is Israel doing?”
This question has now been taken up by Jewish Voice for
Peace, and by Alan Sokal and Bruce Robbins who, some
years back, placed an ad in The New York Times, that
read, “Not in Our Name.”

The time is long overdue for Jews to return to their
role as the world’s conscience, who come to the aid of
the dispossessed, the wretched of the earth. Once
again, we must join those who demand the end to unjust
wars – in Iraq as well as Lebanon – and an unjust
occupation in Gaza. We must honor the example of
American civil rights workers Andrew Goodman and
Michael Schwerner, not that of the mass murderer Baruch
Goldstein or Yigal Amir, killer of Yitzhak Rabin.

And perhaps the day will come that we will be counted -
by Jew and Arab alike – as among the Just, perhaps even
given a place at Yad Vashem, the Holocaust memorial in
Jerusalem, for the lives we helped to save in a
lawless, savage time.

[Silvia Tennenbaum, a writer in East Hampton, is author
of the novels "Yesterday's Streets" and "Rachel, the
Rabbi's Wife."]


How Israel brought light unto the Nations


Smoke billows from a destroyed clothing factory following an Israeli air strike early Friday in suburbs of Beirut; August 12; AP


Picture taken 12 August 2006 shows buildings destroyed by Israeli bombardment in the southern suburbs of Beirut; AFP


middle floors of an apartment building are seen in the suburbs of Beirut after a recent Israeli air strike Saturday, August 12; AP


No walking street sign is seen next to a destroyed building that used to house the offices and studios of Hezbollah’s Al Nour radio station; AP


Plotting terror plots

By ROBERT FISK

When my electricity returned at around 3am yesterday, I turned on the BBC World Service television. There were a series of powerful explosions which shook the house – just as they vibrated across all of Beirut – as the latest Israeli air raids blasted over the city. And then up came the World Service headline: “Terror Plot”. Terror what, I asked myself? And there was my favourite cop, Paul Stephenson, explaining how my favourite police force – the ones who bravely executed an innocent young Brazilian on the Tube, taking 30 seconds to fire six bullets into him – had saved the lives of hundreds of innocent civilians from suicide bombers on airliners.

I’m sure Independent readers willjoin me in watching how many of the suspects – or “British-born Muslims” as the BBC defined them in its special form of “soft” racism (they are surely Muslim Britons or British Muslims, are they not?) – are still in custody in a couple of weeks’ time.

And I’m sure it’s quite by chance that the lads in blue chose yesterday – with anger at Lord Blair of Kut al-Amara’s shameful failure over Lebanon at its peak – to save the world. After all, it’s scarcely three years since the other great Terror Plot had British armoured vehicles surrounding Heathrow on the very day – again quite by chance, of course – that hundreds of thousands of Britons were demonstrating against Lord Blair’s intended invasion of Iraq.

So I sat on the carpet in my living room and watched all these heavily armed chaps at Heathrow protecting the British people from annihilation and then on came President George Bush to tell us that we were all fighting “Islamic fascism”. There were more thumps in the darkness across Beirut where an awful lot of people are suffering from terror – although I can assure George W that while the pilots of the aircraft dropping bombs across the city in which I have lived for 30 years may or may not be fascists, they are definitely not Islamic.

And there, of course, was the same old problem. To protect the British people – and the American people – from “Islamic terror”, we must have lots and lots of heavily armed policemen and soldiers and plainclothes police and endless departments of anti-terrorism, homeland security and other more sordid folk like the American torturers -some of them sadistic women -at Abu Ghraib and Baghram and Guantanamo. Yet the only way to protect ourselves from the real violence which may – and probably will – be visited upon us, is to deal, morally, with courage and with justice, with the tragedy of Lebanon and “Palestine” and Iraq and Afghanistan. And this we will not do.

I would, frankly, love to have Paul Stephenson out in Beirut to counter a little terror in my part of the world – Hizbollah terror and Israeli terror. But this, of course, is something that Paul and his lads don’t have the spittle for. It’s one thing to sound off about the alleged iniquities of alleged suspects of an alleged plot to create alleged terror – quite another to deal with the causes of that terror and to do so in the face of great danger.

I was amused to see that Bush -just before my electricity was cut off again – still mendaciously tells us that the “terrorists” hate us because of “our freedoms”. Not because we support the Israelis who have massacred refugee columns, fired into Red Cross ambulances and slaughtered more than 1,000 Lebanese civilians -here indeed are crimes for Paul Stephenson to investigate – but because they hate our “freedoms”.

And I notice with despair that our journalists again suck on the hind tit of authority, quoting endless (and anonymous) “security sources” without once challenging their information or the timing of Paul’s “terror plot” discoveries or the nature of the details – somehow, “fizzy drinks bottles” doesn’t quite work for me -nor the reasons why, if this whole panjandrum is correct, anyone would want to carry out such atrocities. We are told that the arrested men are Muslims. Now isn’t that interesting? Muslims. This means that many of them -or their families – originally come from south-west Asia and the Middle East, from the area that encompasses Afghanistan, Iraq, “Palestine” and Lebanon.

In the old days, chaps like Paul used to pull out a map when faced with folk of different origins or religion or indeed different names. Indeed, if Paul Stephenson takes a school atlas, he’ll notice that there are an awful lot of violent problems and injustice and suffering and – a speciality, it seems, of the Metropolitan Police – of death in the area from which the families of these “Muslims” come

Could there be a connection, I wonder? Dare we look for a motive for the crime, or rather the “alleged crime”? The Met used to be pretty good at looking for motives. But not, of course, in the “war on terror”, where – if he really searched for real motives – my favourite policeman would swiftly bebackonthebeat as Constable Paul Stephenson.

Take yesterday morning. On day 31of the Israeli version of the “war on terror” – a conflict to which Paul and the lads in blue apparently subscribe by proxy -an Israeli aircraft blewup the only remaining bridge to the Syrian frontier in northern Lebanon, in the mountainous and beautiful Akka district above the Mediterranean. With their usual sensitivity, the pilots who bombed the bridge – no terrorists they, mark you – chose to destroy the bridge when ordinary cars were crossing. So they massacred the 12 civilians who happened to be on the bridge. In the real world, we call that a war crime. Indeed, it’s a crime worthy of the attention of Paul and his lads. But alas, Stephenson’sjob is to frighten the British people, not to stop the crimes that are the real reason for the British to be frightened.

Personally, I’m all for arresting criminals, be they of the “Islamic fascist” variety or the Bin Laden variety or the Israeli variety – their warriors of the air really should be arrested next time they drop intoHeathrow – or the American variety (Abu Ghraib cum laude) and indeed of the kind that blow out the brains of Tube train passengers. But I don’t think Paul Stephenson is. I think he huffs and he puffs but I do not think he stands for law and order. He works for the Ministry of Fear which, by its very nature, is not interested in motives or injustice. And I have to say, watching his performance before the next power cut last night, I thought he was doing a pretty good job for his masters.

I would love to have the Met in Beirut to counter terror in my part of the world.


A German Jew speaks out against the carnage

This week, several German newspapers reported that the president of the Jewish Community in Schleswig-Holstein who also serves on the board of directors of the Central Council of Jews in Germany, Rolf Verleger, protested the Council’s support for Israel’s criminal policies vis-á-vis both the Lebanese and the Palestinians. The Council’s president Charlotte Knobloch is reported to have vehemently denounced the criticism, while the Council’s secretary-general Stephan Kramer claimed that Verleger was “parroting anti-Israel and anti-Semitic clichés and stereotypes.”

For reporting as well as documentation of the original letter, see Christopher Stolzenberg, “‘Zehn Libanesen für einen toten Israeli’” (8 August 2006) at www.sueddeutsche.de/deutschland/artikel/343/82261/print.html.

English translation of protest letter
(translation: Maren Hackmann)

***

Prof. Dr. Rolf Verleger
Member of the board of directors of the Central Council of Jews in Germany

phone: ++49 451 500 2916
fax ++49 451 7071450
Rolf.Verleger[at]neuro.uni-Luebeck.de

23 July 2006

To the Executive Committee of the
Central Council of Jews in Germany

via email
cc: the members of the board of directors

Dear President Knobloch,
Dear Prof. Dr. Korn, dear Dr. Graumann,

Over the past several days, you have publicly endorsed the Israeli government’s military actions against Lebanon. I cannot remain silent on this, nor do I wish to keep silent.

I am, of course, aware that you were expressing the opinion of the majority of Jews in Germany. However, I had expected you to do a little more than that, knowing as I do that you love Israel, have political experience, and care about Jewish tradition.

(1) You love Israel. How can anyone who truly cares about the fate of the State of Israel approve of this military action? In the years to come, our friends and relatives over there will face a bigger rather than smaller risk. This will affect, among others, both of my siblings, who left Germany for Israel in their youth, as well as their children and grandchildren. This military action does not enhance Israeli security, it diminishes it. In the neighboring states, the fury, anger, and violence are being multiplied. The conflict is spreading, it is not being contained.

(2) You have political experience. That means you know just as well as everybody else that what triggered Hezbollah’s terror against Israel is the unresolved Palestine conflict, and that Hezbollah has now kidnapped the two Israeli soldiers apparently in order to be able to present itself as defending the inhabitants of Gaza, whom Israel is besieging.

Everybody knows that, with regard to the Palestine conflict, Syria, Iran, and Russia are all pursuing their own dubious political ends, but the same can be said of the United States who, after the Iraq debacle, is now using the Israeli army as its own military tool.

Everybody knows then, that the alternative to this tangle of interests – and therefore to war – is for the Israeli and Palestinian (and then also the Lebanese) governments to negotiate and reach mutual agreements. This is what the friends of Israel should commit themselves to, instead of demonizing the elected Palestinian government.

The Central Council of Jews in Germany knows what it is like to negotiate with a government which legally succeeded a gang of murderers. These talks proved to be a success, and we were right to hold them.

(3) You care about Jewish tradition. That means you know as well as I do that there has always been a conflict between Jewish religion and nationalism. In ancient times, this was the vehement conflict between our prophets and the kings of Judah and Israel; with the emergence of Zionism, it was the conflict between Zionists and Aguda, a conflict in which both parties had good arguments on their side.

Regrettably, today many Jews have lost such a means of orientation and believe that the more fiercely they support Israel’s policy of violence, the better Jews they become.

But what kind of “Judaism” is this? Is it still the same Judaism whose essence our most influential teacher Hillel has defined as “Whatever is disagreeable to yourself, do not do unto others”? Is it still the same Judaism whose most important commandment was defined by our Rabbi Akiva as “You shall love your neighbor as you love yourself”? When I say that this is the “real” Judaism, nobody believes me anymore, because we live in an age in which the Jewish State discriminates against other people, metes out collective punishment, pursues a policy of extrajudicial targeted killings, orders ten Lebanese killed for each of its own countrymen, and reduces whole neighborhoods to rubble. The least thing I expect the Central Council of Jews in Germany to do, is to view this as a problem.

I am, of course, aware that I am arguing against solid, decades-old positions. I am not the first to do so, however, nor will I be the last. Together with thoughtful people in and outside of Israel we can change things for the better.

The Israeli government needs our solidarity. Since it is on the wrong path, what the Israeli government needs from friends by way of solidarity is neither more weapons, nor more money, nor more public relations, but more criticism.

With kind regards, and concern,

R. Verleger


Avnery – always sensible and informative

Hebrew
By Uri Avnery

SO WHAT has happened to the Israeli army?

This question is now being raised not only around the world, but also in Israel itself. Clearly, there is a huge gap between the army’s boastful arrogance, on which generations of Israelis have grown up, and the picture presented by this war.

Before the choir of generals utters their expected cries of being stabbed in the back – “The government has shackled our hands! The politicians did not allow the army to win! The political leadership is to blame for everything!” – it is worthwhile to examine this war from a professional military point of view.

(It is, perhaps, appropriate to interject at this point a personal remark. Who am I to speak about strategic matters? What am I, a general? Well – I was 16 years old when World War II broke out. I decided then to study military theory in order to be able to follow events. I read a few hundred books – from Sun Tzu to Clausewitz to Liddel-Hart and on. Later, in the 1948 war, I saw the other side of the medal, as a soldier and squad-leader. I have written two books on the war. That does not make me a great strategist, but it does allow me to voice an informed opinion.)

The facts speak for themselves:

* On the 32nd day of the war, Hizbullah is still standing and fighting. That by itself is a stunning feat: a small guerilla organization, with a few thousand fighters, is standing up to one of the strongest armies in the world and has not been broken after a month of “pulverizing”. Since 1948, the armies of Egypt, Syria and Jordan have repeatedly been beaten in wars that were much shorter.

As I have already said: if a light-weight boxer is fighting a heavy-weight champion and is still standing in the 12th round, the victory is his – whatever the count of points says.

* In the test of results – the only one that counts in war – the strategic and tactical command of Hizbullah is decidedly better than that of our own army. All along, our army’s strategy has been primitive, brutal and unsophisticated.

* Clearly, Hizbullah has prepared well for this war – while the Israeli command has prepared for a quite different war.

* On the level of individual fighters, the Hizbullah are not inferior to our soldiers, neither in bravery nor in initiative.

THE MAIN guilt for the failure belongs with General Dan Halutz. I say “guilt” and not merely “responsibility”, which comes with the job.

He is living proof of the fact that an inflated ego and a brutal attitude are not enough to create a competent Chief-of-Staff. The opposite may be true.

Halutz gained fame (or notoriety) when he was asked what he feels when he drops a one-ton bomb on a residential quarter and answered: “a slight bang on the wing.” He added that afterwards he sleeps well at night. (In the same interview he also called me and my friends “traitors” who should be prosecuted.)

Now it is already clear – again, in the test of results – that Dan Halutz is the worst Chief-of-Staff in the annals of the Israeli army, a completely incompetent officer for his job.

Recently he has changed his blue Air-Force uniform for the green one of the land army. Too late.

Halutz started this war with the bluster of an Air-Force officer. He believed that it was possible to crush Hizbullah by aerial bombardment, supplemented by artillery shelling from land and sea. He believed that if he destroyed the towns, neighborhoods, roads and ports of Lebanon, the Lebanese people would rise and compel their government to remove Hizbullah. For a week he killed and devastated, until it became clear to everybody that this method achieves the opposite – strengthens Hizbullah, weakens its opponents within Lebanon and throughout the Arab world and destroys the world-wide sympathy Israel enjoyed at the beginning of the war.

When he reached this point, Halutz did not know what to do next. For three weeks he sent his soldiers into Lebanon on senseless and hopeless missions, gaining nothing. Even in the battles that were fought in villages right on the border, no significant victories were achieved. After the fourth week, when he was requested to submit a plan to the government, it was unbelievably primitive.

If the “enemy” had been a regular army, it would have been a bad plan. Just pushing the enemy back is hardly a strategy at all. But when the other side is a guerilla force, this is simply foolish. It may cause the death of many soldiers, for no practical result.

Now he is trying to achieve a token victory, occupying empty space as far from the border as possible, after the UN has already called for an end to the hostilities. (As in almost all previous Israeli wars, this call is being ignored, in the hope of snatching some gains at the last moment.) Behind this line, Hizbullah remains intact in their bunkers.

HOWEVER, THE Chief-of-Staff does not act in a vacuum. As Commander-in-Chief he has indeed a huge influence, but he is also merely the top of the military pyramid.

This war casts a dark shadow on the whole upper echelon of our army. I assume that there are some talented officers, but the general picture is of a senior officers corps that is mediocre or worse, grey and unoriginal. Almost all the many officers that have appeared on TV are unimpressive, uninspiring professionals, experts on covering their behinds, repeating empty clichés like parrots.

The ex-generals, who have been crowding out everybody else in the TV and radio studios, have also mostly surprised us with their mediocrity, limited intelligence and general ignorance. One gets the impression that they have not read books on military history, and fill the void with empty phrases.

More than once it has been said in this column that an army that has been acting for many years as a colonial police force against the Palestinian population – “terrorists”, women and children – and spending its time running after stone-throwing boys, cannot remain an efficient army. The test of results confirms this.

AS AFTER every failure of our military, the intelligence community is quick to cover its ass. Their chiefs declare that they knew everything, that they provided the troops with full and accurate information, that they are not to blame if the army did not act on it.

That does not sound reasonable. Judging from the reactions of the commanders in the field, they clearly were completely unaware of the defense system built by Hizbullah in South Lebanon. The complex infrastructure of hidden bunkers, stocked with modern equipment and stockpiles of food and weapons was a complete surprise for the army. It was not ready for these bunkers, including those built two or three kilometers from the border. They are reminiscent of the tunnels in Vietnam.

The intelligence community has also been corrupted by the long occupation of the Palestinian territories. They have got used to relying on the thousands of collaborators that have been recruited in the course of 39 years by torture, bribery and extortion (junkies needing drugs, someone begging to be allowed to visit his dying mother, someone desiring a chunk from the cake of corruption, etc.) Clearly, no collaborators were found among the Hizbullah, and without them intelligence is blind.

It is also clear that Intelligence, and the army in general, was not ready for the deadly efficiency of Hizbullah’s anti-tank weapons. Hard to believe, but according to official figures, more than 20 tanks were hit.

The Merkava (“carriage”) tank is the pride of the army. Its father, General Israel Tal, a victorious tank general, did not want only to build the world’s most advanced tank, but also a tank that provided its crew with the best possible protection. Now it appears that an anti-tank weapon from the late 1980s that is available in large quantities, can disable the tank, killing or grievously wounding the soldiers inside.

THE COMMON denominator of all the failures is the disdain for Arabs, a contempt that has dire consequences. It has caused total misunderstanding, a kind of blindness of Hizbullah’s motives, attitudes, standing in Lebanese society etc.

I am convinced that today’s soldiers are in no way inferior to their predecessors. Their motivation is high, they have shown great bravery in the evacuation of the wounded under fire. (I very much appreciate that in particular, since my own life was saved by soldiers who risked theirs to get me out under fire when I was wounded.) But the best soldiers cannot succeed when the command is incompetent.

History teaches that defeat can be a great blessing for an army. A victorious army rests on its laurels, it has no motive for self-criticism, it degenerates, its commanders become careless and lose the next war. (see: the Six-day war leading to the Yom Kippur war). A defeated army, on the other side, knows that it must rehabilitate itself. On one condition: that it admits defeat.

After this war, the Chief-of-Staff must be dismissed and the senior officer corps overhauled. For that, a Minister of Defense is needed who is not a marionette of the Chief-of-Staff. (But that concerns the political leadership, about whose failures and sins we shall speak another time.)

We, as people of peace, have a great interest in changing the military leadership. First, because it has a huge impact on the forming of policy and, as we just saw, irresponsible commanders can easily drag the government into dangerous adventures. And second, because even after achieving peace we shall need an efficient army – at least until the wolf lies down with the lamb, as the prophet Isaiah promised. (And not in the Israeli version: “No problem. One only has to bring a new lamb every day.”)

THE MAIN lesson of the war, beyond all military analysis, lies in the five words we inscribed on our banner from the very first day: “There is no military solution!”

Even a strong army cannot defeat a guerilla organization, because the guerilla is a political phenomenon. Perhaps the opposite is true: the stronger the army, the better equipped with advanced technology, the smaller are its chances of winning such a confrontation. Our conflict – in the North, the Center and the South – is a political conflict, and can only be resolved by political means. The army is the instrument worst suited for that.

The war has proved that Hizbullah is a strong opponent, and any political solution in the North must include it. Since Syria is its strong ally, it must also be included. The settlement must be worthwhile for them too, otherwise it will not last.

The price is the return of the Golan Heights.

What is true in the North is also true in the South. The army will not defeat the Palestinians, because such a victory is altogether impossible. For the good of the army, it must be extricated from the quagmire.

If that now enters the consciousness of the Israeli public, something good may yet have come out of this war.

GUSH SHALOM p.o.b. 3322 Tel Aviv 61033

info@gush-shalom.org www.gush-shalom-org


Summer camp

36 collective massacres occurred against the Lebanese civilians since
the onset of the Israeli assault (from July 12-August 11). Israel
violated all conventions related to the prohibition of collective
punishment whereas it perpetrated voluntarily crimes against civilians
and their properties, namely Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva
Convention prohibiting collective punishment and Article 48 forbidding
military actions against civilian populations and infrastructure.
These collective massacres are as follows:

13 July: Dweir massacre killed a family of 12 members,

15 July: Marwaheen (Israel asked the inhabitants of this village to
evacuate this village and while they were leaving the air strikes
killed 22 of them),

16 July: 5 massacres in Tyre (an air raid struck a building killing 12
and injuring 50), Borj Shamali (5 persons amongst them 2 babies),
Aytaroun (an air raid killed 11 persons, 10 of them are from the same
family possessing the Canadian nationality), Abba (10 were killed most
of them belong to the same family) and on the entrance of Abbassiyeh
(9 were killed under the rubble)

17 July: Rmayleh (Chemical bombs were thrown on displaced convoy
killing 12 and injuring many)

18 July: Aytaroun: an air strike hit a house where many were hiding
killing 13, 6 of them were babies

19 July: 4 collective massacres: Nabi Sheet in North of Bekaa (two
families of 8 members were killed under the rubble of a house),
Maaraboun (three pickup trucks with agricultural workers were hit by
an air strike killing 7), Tyre (air raids targeted residential areas
killing 20 at least), Srifa (air strikes targeted 10 houses killing 27
and wounding 30 others, the victims remained several dauys under the
rubble).

25 July: higher Nabatiyeh (an air strike targeted a residential house
killing 7)

28 July: Haddatha (an air strike targeted a three-storey residential
building killing 6 from the same family)

29 July: 2 massacres in Noumayriyeh (an air strike killed a family of
7 and their neighbor under the rubble) an Ayn Arab (an air raid killed
6 civilians and injured 3, many of them remained under the rubble for
several days)

30 July: 2 massacres in Qana (an air strike targeted a three-storey
residential building where more than fifteen persons were hiding from
Hashem and Shalhoub families destroying it and killing them under the
rubble) and Yaroun (6 members of the same family were killed: 3 women
and 3 children from Khanafer family)

31 July: 3 massacres were revealed by the Israeli truce, in Hareess
(16 corpses of two families were under the rubble of two residential
houses), Halloussiyeh (more than 10 corpses for Mwanness family were
still under the rubble), 12 corpses were found on the roads and inside
vehicles between Qoleyleh and Al-Jebbeyn (one of them was a corpse of
an eight-year old child)

2 August: The commandos operation on a hospital in Baalbeck killed 13
civilians, including women, children and Syrian workers

4 August: One of the bloodiest day after Qana: 3 massacres in Qaa (28
Syrian agriculture workers were killed while they were packaging
peaches), Taybeh (a two-storey residential building was targeted by
Israeli air raid killing 7 who were elderly and unable to leave their
homes, Ayta Shaab (an air strike targeted a house making 10 victims)

6 August: 2 massacres in Ansar (an air strike targeted the house of
Ibrahim Assi killing him, his wife and their two daughters as well as
their neighbors, while the rescue workers were removing the corpses an
other air strike hit the house and the rubble), Al-Jubbeyn (this
village was heavily targeted by air strikes that killed Kassem Akeel,
his wife, his daughter and another victim)

7 August: BLACK MONDAY: Air strikes hit heavily many areas while the
Arab foreign ministers were holding their meeting: Houla (6 air
strikes targeted the Husseini club in the village where many people
from the village sought a safe haven after the destruction of their
houses. The premises was destroyed on them, 5 were killed while 60
were rescued safe miraculously), Ghassaniyeh in Zahrani area (an air
strike hit at dawn at Abdallah Khalil Tohmeh two-storey building
killing him, his wife and his two sons as two brothers and two others
making the death toll 8), Ghaziyeh (air strikes hit residential
neighborhoods killing 15), Shiyyah (an air strike hit a residential
building in the crowded Al-Hajjaj area killing 56, especially that
there were in the building displaced from Beer Al-Abed, Hayy Maawad
and Haret Hreyk), Breetal (air strikes targeted residential houses
killing 13)

8 August: Air strikes resumed on Ghaziyeh during funeral procession of
the previous day’s 15 victims killing 14 and injuring 24

9 August: Mashgharah (an air strike targeted a four-storey building
killing 8 persons from the same family

11 August: Akkar in North Lebanon (an air strike targeted at dawn
Al-Hayssa bridge killing 11 and injuring 15)”


Plotting terror plots

By ROBERT FISK

When my electricity returned at around 3am yesterday, I turned on the BBC World Service television. There were a series of powerful explosions which shook the house – just as they vibrated across all of Beirut – as the latest Israeli air raids blasted over the city. And then up came the World Service headline: “Terror Plot”. Terror what, I asked myself? And there was my favourite cop, Paul Stephenson, explaining how my favourite police force – the ones who bravely executed an innocent young Brazilian on the Tube, taking 30 seconds to fire six bullets into him – had saved the lives of hundreds of innocent civilians from suicide bombers on airliners.

I’m sure Independent readers willjoin me in watching how many of the suspects – or “British-born Muslims” as the BBC defined them in its special form of “soft” racism (they are surely Muslim Britons or British Muslims, are they not?) – are still in custody in a couple of weeks’ time.

And I’m sure it’s quite by chance that the lads in blue chose yesterday – with anger at Lord Blair of Kut al-Amara’s shameful failure over Lebanon at its peak – to save the world. After all, it’s scarcely three years since the other great Terror Plot had British armoured vehicles surrounding Heathrow on the very day – again quite by chance, of course – that hundreds of thousands of Britons were demonstrating against Lord Blair’s intended invasion of Iraq.

So I sat on the carpet in my living room and watched all these heavily armed chaps at Heathrow protecting the British people from annihilation and then on came President George Bush to tell us that we were all fighting “Islamic fascism”. There were more thumps in the darkness across Beirut where an awful lot of people are suffering from terror – although I can assure George W that while the pilots of the aircraft dropping bombs across the city in which I have lived for 30 years may or may not be fascists, they are definitely not Islamic.

And there, of course, was the same old problem. To protect the British people – and the American people – from “Islamic terror”, we must have lots and lots of heavily armed policemen and soldiers and plainclothes police and endless departments of anti-terrorism, homeland security and other more sordid folk like the American torturers -some of them sadistic women -at Abu Ghraib and Baghram and Guantanamo. Yet the only way to protect ourselves from the real violence which may – and probably will – be visited upon us, is to deal, morally, with courage and with justice, with the tragedy of Lebanon and “Palestine” and Iraq and Afghanistan. And this we will not do.

I would, frankly, love to have Paul Stephenson out in Beirut to counter a little terror in my part of the world – Hizbollah terror and Israeli terror. But this, of course, is something that Paul and his lads don’t have the spittle for. It’s one thing to sound off about the alleged iniquities of alleged suspects of an alleged plot to create alleged terror – quite another to deal with the causes of that terror and to do so in the face of great danger.

I was amused to see that Bush -just before my electricity was cut off again – still mendaciously tells us that the “terrorists” hate us because of “our freedoms”. Not because we support the Israelis who have massacred refugee columns, fired into Red Cross ambulances and slaughtered more than 1,000 Lebanese civilians -here indeed are crimes for Paul Stephenson to investigate – but because they hate our “freedoms”.

And I notice with despair that our journalists again suck on the hind tit of authority, quoting endless (and anonymous) “security sources” without once challenging their information or the timing of Paul’s “terror plot” discoveries or the nature of the details – somehow, “fizzy drinks bottles” doesn’t quite work for me -nor the reasons why, if this whole panjandrum is correct, anyone would want to carry out such atrocities. We are told that the arrested men are Muslims. Now isn’t that interesting? Muslims. This means that many of them -or their families – originally come from south-west Asia and the Middle East, from the area that encompasses Afghanistan, Iraq, “Palestine” and Lebanon.

In the old days, chaps like Paul used to pull out a map when faced with folk of different origins or religion or indeed different names. Indeed, if Paul Stephenson takes a school atlas, he’ll notice that there are an awful lot of violent problems and injustice and suffering and – a speciality, it seems, of the Metropolitan Police – of death in the area from which the families of these “Muslims” come

Could there be a connection, I wonder? Dare we look for a motive for the crime, or rather the “alleged crime”? The Met used to be pretty good at looking for motives. But not, of course, in the “war on terror”, where – if he really searched for real motives – my favourite policeman would swiftly bebackonthebeat as Constable Paul Stephenson.

Take yesterday morning. On day 31of the Israeli version of the “war on terror” – a conflict to which Paul and the lads in blue apparently subscribe by proxy -an Israeli aircraft blewup the only remaining bridge to the Syrian frontier in northern Lebanon, in the mountainous and beautiful Akka district above the Mediterranean. With their usual sensitivity, the pilots who bombed the bridge – no terrorists they, mark you – chose to destroy the bridge when ordinary cars were crossing. So they massacred the 12 civilians who happened to be on the bridge. In the real world, we call that a war crime. Indeed, it’s a crime worthy of the attention of Paul and his lads. But alas, Stephenson’sjob is to frighten the British people, not to stop the crimes that are the real reason for the British to be frightened.

Personally, I’m all for arresting criminals, be they of the “Islamic fascist” variety or the Bin Laden variety or the Israeli variety – their warriors of the air really should be arrested next time they drop intoHeathrow – or the American variety (Abu Ghraib cum laude) and indeed of the kind that blow out the brains of Tube train passengers. But I don’t think Paul Stephenson is. I think he huffs and he puffs but I do not think he stands for law and order. He works for the Ministry of Fear which, by its very nature, is not interested in motives or injustice. And I have to say, watching his performance before the next power cut last night, I thought he was doing a pretty good job for his masters.

I would love to have the Met in Beirut to counter terror in my part of the world.


Palestinian Filmmakers, Artists and Cultural Workers Call for a Cultural Boycott of Israel

“The end of apartheid stands as one of the crowning accomplishments of the past century, but we would not have succeeded without the help of international pressure– in particular the divestment movement of the 1980s. Over the past six months, a similar movement has taken shape, this time aiming at an end to the Israeli occupation”.

Desmond Tutu

See also “Why an Economic Boycott of Israel is Justified.”



Statements in Arabic and German on pacbi.org

Ramallah, August 12, 2006

Over 100 Palestinian filmmakers, artists and cultural workers have called on filmmakers and artists worldwide to cancel art exhibitions planned in Israel, to boycott Israeli film festivals, Israeli cultural venues, and to end all cooperation with Israeli art, film and cultural organizations and institutions sponsored by the Israeli government. In order to end the apathy and silence in Israel to the war atrocities being committed. The call comes at a time when Israel has escalated its attacks on Palestine and Lebanon, with over 1000 civilians killed, more than a million forced to leave their homes, and infrastructure in both countries destroyed, a war that is supported by a majority of the Israeli population.

The statement calls for an end to the war, and an end to the root of the problem in the Middle East which is the continued military occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, that has lasted for almost 40 years.

Among those calling for the boycott are prominent Palestinian artists, writers and filmmakers Mai Masri, Michel Khleifi, Vera Tamari, Suleiman Mansour, Hany Abu Assad, Khaled Jubran, Elia Suleiman, Marwan Abado, Reem Banna, Walid Abu Baker and Emily Jacir to name a few. The call has been supported by around 300 filmmakers, artists, writers, and musicians from countries all around the world.

August 4, 2006

Dear Filmmakers & Artists,

During the past few weeks we have borne witness to the escalation of Israeli aggression into open war on both Palestine and Lebanon.

With Israel’s invasion of Gaza on June 27th, 2006, ministries and educational institutions have been destroyed, as has the plant that supplies nearly 50 percent of Gaza’s electricity. Bridges, roads, dozens of homes, and hundreds of dunams of agricultural land have also been destroyed. Sixty-four elected Palestinian legislators, cabinet ministers and officials have been detained without charge.

On July 12th, Israel brought its campaign of collective punishment and military violence to Lebanon, with “Operation Just Reward”. A complete assault, via land, sea, and air, of the Lebanese population and infrastructure has led to total destruction. In just 3 weeks, almost 1 million Lebanese civilians have been displaced and the death toll has reached 900 Lebanese and 160 Palestinians, with a UN count saying one-third of the dead are children.

Additionally, in violation of international law, Israel continues to occupy Gaza, the West Bank (including East Jerusalem), and Syria’s Golan Heights. In violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, Israel continues to hold 9,600 Palestinian political prisoners in Israeli jails and detention centers without due process, among them 130 Palestinian women and 388 children, many of them taken from their homes in the middle of the night.

We, the undersigned Palestinian filmmakers and artists, appeal to all artists and filmmakers of good conscience around the world to cancel all exhibitions and other cultural events that are scheduled to occur in Israel, to mobilize immediately and not allow the continuation of the Israeli offensive to breed complacency. Like the boycott of South African art institutions during apartheid, cultural workers must speak out against the current Israeli war crimes and atrocities.

We call upon the International community to join us in the boycott of Israeli film festivals, Israeli public venues, and Israeli institutions supported by the government, and to end all cooperation with these cultural and artistic institutions that to date have refused to take a stand against the Occupation, the root cause for this colonial conflict.

We call upon you to take a stand in order to appeal to the Israeli people to give up their silence, to abandon their apathy, and to face up to their responsibility in the destruction and killing their elected government is wreaking. To the Lebanese and Palestinians terrorized by this Army’s planes, bombs and missiles, this silence, apathy and lack of action from Israelis, are regarded as complicit in the ongoing war crimes, as for those Israeli artists, academics and intellectuals who continue to serve in the Israeli army they are directly implicated in these crimes.

We call upon you to give way to action that would replace words spoken too often and forgotten too quickly. We call upon you to make your voices heard in calling for an end to this bloodshed and an end to this oppression that has lasted too long.

To endorse or answer this call for a cultural boycott of Israel please send an email with your name, position and country to pal.filmmakers@gmail.com

Signatures (Alphabetical):

1.AbdelFattah Abu-Srour, Al-Rowwad Cultural Center
2.Abdelsalam Shehadeh, Filmmaker
3.Adila Laidi, Lecturer
4.Ala’ Abu Ghoush, Graphic Designer
5.Alexandra Handal, Artist
6.Ali Nassar, Filmmaker
7.Amer Hlehel, Actor/ director
8.Amer Shomali, Artist
9.Anan Brakat, Filmmaker, Arab Cinema School
10.Annemarie Jacir, Filmmaker
11.Azza El-Hassan, Filmmaker
12.Bahia Munem, Filmmaker
13.Bashar Ibrahem, Film critic
14.Benaz Batrawi, Filmmaker
15.Betty Shamieh, Writer
16.Buthina Canaan Khoury, Filmmaker
17.Carol Michel, International Center of Bethlehem
18.Cherien Dabis, Filmmaker
19.Dahna Abourahme, Filmmaker
20.Dima Abu Ghoush, Filmmaker
21.Elia Suleiman, Filmmaker
22.Emily Jacir, Artist
23.Enas Muthaffar, Filmmaker
24.Fadi Zmorrod, Artist
25.Faten Farhat, Khalil Sakakini Cultural Center
26.Faten Nastas, Artist
27.Firas Abdelrahman, Filmmaker
28.George Azar, Photojournalist / Cinematographer
29.Ghada Terawi, Filmmaker
30.Hadeel Karkar, Writer
31.Hala Al-Yamani, Drama Teacher
32.Hanna Atallah, Filmmaker
33.Hanna Elias, Filmmaker
34.Hanna Musleh, Filmmaker
35.Hany Abu-Assad, Filmmaker
36.Haya Al-Jareedy, Filmmaker
37.Hayan Charara, Writer
38.Hazim Bitar, Filmmaker
39.Iman Aoun, Ishtar Theatre
40.Iman Hammouri, Popular Art Centre
41.In’am El-Obeidi, Media Department, Birzeit University.
42.Ismail Habbash, Filmmaker
43.Jamil Daraghmeh, Photographer
44.Jibril Awad, Filmmaker
45.John Halaka, Artist
46.Juliano Mer Khamis, Actor & Director
47.Kamal Boullata, Artist
48.Karma Abu-Sharif, Writer
49.Khadijeh.H.Abu-Ali, Filmmaker
50.Khaled Hourani, Artist
51.Khaled Jubran, Musician
52.Khaled Katamish, Dancer
53.Lana Zreik, Movement Director and Actress
54.Larissa Sansour, Artist
55.Leila Sansour, Filmmaker
56.Liana Badr, Filmmaker
57.Liana Saleh, Filmmaker
58.Lina Bokhary, Artist
59.Lois Nakhleh, Artist
60.Mahmoud Massad, Filmmaker
61.Mai Masri, Filmmaker
62.Manal Issa, A.M.Qattan Foundation
63.Marwan Abado, Musician
64.Mazen Saade, Filmmaker & Writer
65.Michel Khleifi, Filmmaker
66.Miguel Littin, Filmmaker
67.Nabila Irshaid, Artist
68.Nada El-Yassir, Filmmaker
69.Nader Jalal, Palestinian Institute for Cultural Development (nawa)
70.Nahed Awwad, Filmmaker
71.Najwa Najjar, Filmmaker
72.Nida Sinnokrot, Artist
73.Nizar Hassan, Filmmaker
74.Noora Baker, Dancer
75.Omar Barghouti, Dance choreographer
76.Omar Qattan, Filmmaker
77.Osama Al-Zain, Filmmaker
78.Radi Shehadeh, Theatre director
79.Rana Bishara, Artist
80.Rania Elias- Khoury, Yabous Productions
81.Rashid Masharawi, Filmmaker
82.Rawda Atallah, Arab Cultural Association- Nazareth
83.Reem Fadda, Palestinian Association of Contemporary Art
84.Rim Banna, Singer/ Song writer
85.Riyad Deis, Filmmaker
86.Rowan Al Faqih, Filmmaker
87.Rula Halawani, Artist/photographer
88.Rula Khoury, Curator/ Art coordinator
89.Saed Andoni, Filmmaker
90.Saleh Bakri, Actor
91.Salim Abu Jabal, Writer
92.Salwa Mikdadi, Curator
93.Sama Alshaibi, Artist/ Professor, Palestine/USA
94.Sameh Zoabi, Filmmaker
95.Sami Bukhari, Artist
96.Samia A. Halaby, Artist
97.Samieh Jabbarin, Film/Theatre director
98.Shadi Zmorrod, The First Palestinian Circus School
99.Sherine Salama, Filmmaker, Palestine/Australia
100.Sobhi al-Zobaidi, Filmmaker
101.Suha Barghouti, Popular Art Centre
102.Suleiman Mansour, Artist
103.Suzy Salamy, Filmmaker
104.Taghreed Mishael, Filmmaker
105.Tarek Bishara, Actor/Screenwriter
106.Ula Tabari, Filmmaker
107.Vera Tamari, Artist
108.Vladimir Tamari, Artist
109.Wafa Jamil, Filmmaker
110.Walid Abu Bakr, Writer
111.Yahya Barakat, Filmmaker