www.reiner-bernstein.de 1 – Chronologie 2008

Chronologie 2008

Dezember 2008

31.12.2008: Die israelische Regierung weist eine von der französischen EU- Ratspräsidentschaft vorgeschlagene 48stündige Waffenruhe zurück, weil sie „Hamas“ die Chance der Neuformierung einräume. Am 01. Januar 2009 lehnt Israels Außenministerin Tsipi Livni in gegenüber ihrem französischen Amtskollegen Bernard Kouchner die Forderung nach einer sofortigen Waffenruhe ab. Es gehe nicht an, begründet sie die israelische Weigerung, „Hamas“ die Chance zu geben, im Rahmen einer erneuerten Waffenruhe Legitimität zu verschaffen und sich wiederzubewaffnen. Im Gazastreifen gebe es keine humanitäre Krise, will die Bevölkerung mit Gütern – vor allem mit Nahrungsmitteln und medizinischem Bedarf – versorge.

In Vorbereitung der Gipfelkonferenz der Arabischen Liga am 02. Januar 2009 in Doha verurteilen ihre Außenminister in Kairo die israelische Bombardements, verweisen jedoch gleichzeitig auf die Verantwortung von „Hamas“, über den legitimen Widerstand gegen die faktische Belagerung des Gazastreifens die Konsequenzen für die palästinensische Bevölkerung nicht aus den Augen zu verlieren. „Fatah“ und „Hamas“ werden aufgefordert, ihren Streit umgehend zu beenden. Die Außenminister verlangen die Einberufung des UN- Sicherheitsrates und fordern die Stationierung einer internationalen Truppe im Gazastreifen. Die Verabschiedung einer Resolution bleibt aus, auch weil zum Jahresende fünf der fünfzehn Ratsmitglieder ausscheiden und durch andere ersetzt werden. Ein Blick in die arabischen Zeitungen lässt erkennen, wie schwer es den Regierungen fällt, eine gemeinsame Position für die Herstellung politischer Handlungsfähigkeit zu finden. www.reiner-bernstein.de 2 – Chronologie 2008

Der in Washington, D.C., von Geoffrey Aronson redigierte „Report on Israeli Settlement in the Occupied Territories“ berichtet in seiner Januar/Februar-Ausgabe 2009, dass am Ende des Jahres 2008 in der Westbank (ohne Ost-) 285.800 Siedler lebten, dass im gesamten Jahr 1518 neue Wohneinheiten gebaut worden seien, wovon 61 Prozent westlich und 39 Prozent östlich der „Trennungsmauern“ liegen, und dass 25 Prozent der Neubauten östlich der „Trennungsmauern“ Außenlager („outposts“) von Siedlungen seien.

Am Abend demonstrieren rund zweihundert Menschen im Zentrum Haifas gegen die Militäroperation im Gazastreifen. Ari Shavit bezeichnet am 01. Januar 2009 in „Haaretz“ die Demonstranten gegen den Krieg als „Israel-hassende Israelis“ 1.

Der Direktor der US-amerikanischen Sektion der israelischen Menschenrechtsorganisation „B’tselem (Im Angesicht, Gen. 27,1)“ Mitchell Plitnick, richtet an Barack Obama einen Offenen Brief, in dem er den neuen Präsidenten zu einer grundlegenden Umkehr gegenüber der Politik Israels auffordert, um den Staat vor seiner moralischen Selbstzerstörung zu bewahren 2.

Der als „graue Eminenz“ der US-amerikanischen strategischen Denker vorgestellte Sicherheitsberater des früheren Präsidenten Jimmy Carter, Zbigniew Brzezinski, verlangt in einem Interview von der künftigen Administration ein stärkeres Engagemnt als „konstruktiver Vermittler anstelle eines passiven Beteiligten“ wie während der Amtszeit von George W. Bush. Da Israel und die Palästinenser aus eigener Kraft nicht zu einem Abkommen in der Lage seien, sollte die internationale Gemeinschaft unter Führung der USA einen Rahmenvertrag für ein Schlussabkommen mit vier Grundsätzen auf den Tisch legen: mit einem Verzicht auf die Rückkehr der palästinensischen Flüchtlinge; mit einer angemessenen Aufteilung als Hauptstadt der zwei Staaten; mit einem angemessenen Territorialarrangement auf der www.reiner-bernstein.de 3 – Chronologie 2008

Basis der Grenzen von 1967 mit der Option des Gebietsaustauschs; und mit einem demilitarisierten palästinensischen Staat unter Einsatz amerikanischer Truppen entlang dem Jordan, um für Israels Sicherheit durch die Gewährleistung strategischer Tiefe zu sorgen.

Der außenpolitische Sprecher der „LINKEN“ Wolfgang Gehrcke bezeichnet die Aussage von Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel am 29. Dezember als beschämend. Für den Außenpolitiker der SPD- Fraktion Rolf Mützenich ist ihre Einschätzung inakzeptabel. Zu den Äußerungen von Bundesaußenminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier vom Vortag äußert er sich nicht. In einer Pressemitteilung weist der Generalsekretär des Zentralrates der Juden in Deutschland, Stephan J. Kramer, Steinmeier mit den Worten zurecht, „dass es keinen sauberen und ehrenhaften Krieg“ gebe, der die Zivilbevölkerung schützt (…), wenn man Terroristen bekämpft“. Die israelische Militäroperation ziele darauf ab, „Hamas“ zu zerstören und der Palästinensern im Gazastreifen „eine selbstbestimmte demokratische Regierung wie in der zu ermögichen“.

30.12.2008: Die EU-Außenminister verlangen nach Abschluss ihrer Sitzung in Paris eine unverzügliche und dauerhafte Waffenruhe, die unverzügliche Einleitung humanitärer Hilfen für die palästinensische Bevölkerung des Gazastreifens sowie die Aufwertung des Friedensprozesses auf der Grundlage der Resolution 1850 des UN- Sicherheitsrates vom 16. Dezember. Die Europäische Union sei mehr denn je entschlossen, gemeinsam mit den Mitgliedern des Nahost-Quartetts und den Staaten der Region auf das Ende der Gewalt und die Wiederbelebung des Friedensprozesses hinzuwirken.

Bundesaußenminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier schlägt eine „humanitäre Waffenruhe“ vor. Zuvor hatte er an Israel appelliert, „das www.reiner-bernstein.de 4 – Chronologie 2008

Gebot der Verhältnismäßigkeit zu respektieren und alles zu tun, um zivile Opfer zu vermeiden“.

Die israelische Marine rammt vor der 20-Meilen-Zone und damit in internationalen Gewässern an der Küste des Gazastreifens das Boot „Dignity“ von Friedensaktivisten mit Hilfsgütern für die palästinensische Bevölkerung.

29.12.2008: Eine Petition von 1800 Israelis und Palästinensern, unter ihnen 500 Bewohner der Stadt Sderot, richten nach einer Meldung der Internetausgabe der auflagenstärksten israelischen Zeitung „Yediot Acharonot (Letzte Nachrichten)“ einen Appell an das israelische Militär, seine Operationen zu beenden und die Waffenruhe mit „Hamas“ zu verlängern. Ein Sprecher der Gruppe zeigt sich überzeugt, dass der gegenwärtige Konflikt auf friedlichem Wege gelöst werden könne. Die Militäroperation werde nur den Hass auf beiden Seiten vertiefen. Die einzige Frage sei die, wie viele Menschen bis zu einer Regelung noch sterben müssten.

Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel weist „Hamas“ „eindeutig und ausschließlich“ die Verantwortung für die Eskalation zu. Durch ihren Regierungssprecher lässt sie ausrichten, „dass bei der Beurteilung der Situation im Nahen Osten Ursache und Wirkung nicht vertauscht oder Ursache und Wirkung nicht vergessen werden“ dürften. In einem Telefon mit Israels Ministerpräsidenten habe sie darum gebeten, „dass alles getan werden muss, um zivile Opfer in dieser Situation zu vermeiden“.

27.12.2008: Das israelische Militär beginnt mit einem lang anhaltenden Bombardement im Gazastreifen die Operation „Gegossenes Blei (Cast Lead – Oferet Yetzuka)“. Auch der vierzehn Kilometer breite www.reiner-bernstein.de 5 – Chronologie 2008

Philadelphi-Korridor an der Grenze zum Sinai ist betroffen. Am 28. Dezember kündigt Verteidigungsminister einen „Krieg bis zum bittern Ende“ gegen „Hamas“ an. Israelische Kommentatoren bescheinigen Barak ein gelungenes Täuschungsmanöver, nachdem er sich lange gegen eine Militäraktion gegen den Feind ausgesprochen habe. Ägypten riegelt am selben Tag die Grenze zum Gazastreifen ab. Syrien setzt die indirekten Gespräche mit Israel aus. In vielen arabischen Städten finden Solidaritätskundgebungen für die Palästinenser statt. Der Raketenbeschuss israelischer Ortschaften aus dem Gazastreifen wird unvermindert fortgesetzt. Sein Radius reicht bis ins jeweils vierzig Kilometer entfernte Ashkelon im Norden und Beersheva im Osten 3.

23.12.2008: Unter Berufung auf die Nachrichtenagentur „Reuters” meldet „Haaretz“, dass nach Angaben des britischen Nahostgesandten Bill Rammell Einfuhren aus den jüdischen Siedlungen der Westbank nach Großbritannien künftig stärker kontrolliert und von der Zollbefreiung ausgenommen werden sollen. London habe in der Europäischen Union eine Vorreiterrolle in dieser Frage übernommen. Premierminister Gordon Brown habe die Verfügung am 9. Dezember dem palästinensischen Ministerpräsidenten mitgeteilt 4.

Der „Rat für die Siedlungen in Judäa und Samaria (Yesha)“ ruft die zentrale Wahlkommission für den 10. Februar 2009 um, um dem Tel Aviver Büro der „Genfer Initiative“ die Werbekampagne zugunsten der Arbeitspartei, der neu gegründeten Partei „“ und „“ zu untersagen. Die Kampagne unter dem Titel „Die Genfer Initiative ist gut für die Juden“ fordere die Schaffung eines palästinensischen Staates und die Auflösung der jüdischen Siedlungen. Damit fördere sie die Illusion des Friedens im Wahlvolk. www.reiner-bernstein.de 6 – Chronologie 2008

20.12.2008: Zum fünften Mal landet ein Schiff mit ausländischen Friedensaktivisten vor der Küste von Gaza-Stadt an. Eine Sprecherin fordert die internationale Öffentlichkeit dazu auf, den Druck auf Israel zu erhöhen, um die Blockade des Gazastreifens zu beenden. Am selben Tag schlagen mehrere Raketen aus dem Gazastreifen auf israelischem Territorium ein. Israelisches Militär tötet einen der dafür verantwortlich gemachten Palästinenser.

19.12.2008: Auf Betreiben von „Hamas“ läuft die im Juni vereinbarte Waffenruhe mit Israel ab. Ein Sprecher der Organisation begründet die Entscheidung mit der anhaltenden Blockade des Gazastreifens. In einem Gespräch mit „Haaretz“, das die Zeitung am 20. Dezember veröffentlicht, beklagt der Nahostgesandte des internationalen „Quartetts“, Tony Blair, dass im Gazastreifen „eine illegale Ökonomie“ entstanden sei, die sich über das Tunnelsystem Geld aus Ägypten beschaffe.

17.12.2008: Israelische Medien melden, dass sich der Rechtsberater des Verteidigungsministeriums gegen den Artilleriebeschuss zur Abwehr von Raketenangriffen aus dem Gazastreifen ausspricht, wenn sie gegen Bevölkerungszentren gerichtet sind. Artilleriefeuer sei nur auf relativ offenes Gelände hinnehmbar. Der dadurch angerichtete Schaden dürfe den erwarteten militärischen Nutzen nicht übersteigen.

Das „Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR)” protestiert gegen das Todesurteil vom 16. Dezember gegen den 34jährigen Mohammed Ali Hassan Saidam aus Rafach durch das Oberste Militärgericht in Gaza. Dem Angeklagten wird „Verrat, Spionage und www.reiner-bernstein.de 7 – Chronologie 2008

Konspiration“ gemäß dem „Revolutionären Strafgesetz“ der PLO von 1979 vorgeworfen. Gegen den Urteilsspruch kann Revision beantragt werden. PCHR macht darauf aufmerksam, dass das Strafgesetz gegen die palästinensische Verfassung verstößt, und mahnt einen fairen Prozes auf der Grundlage internationaler Standards an. Seit Anfang 2008 seien neun Todesurteile verhängt worden, davon vier im Gazastreifen und fünf in der Westbank. Keine davon sei jedoch vollzogen worden. Wer der Nutznießer der Straftaten Saidams gewesen sein soll, wird in der Stellungnahme nicht erwähnt.

Bei den parteiinternen Vorwahlen von „Kadima“ zur Erstellung der Kandidatenliste für die Knessetwahlen am 10. Februar 2009, an der sich nur 44 Prozent der Stimmberechtigten beteiligen, werden die ersten zehn Plätze wie folgt vergeben: Außenministerin Tsipi Livni (1), Transportminister Shaul Mofaz (2), Parlamentspräsidentin Dalia Itzik (3), der Vorsitzende des Außen- und Sicherheitspolitischen Ausschusses der Tsachi Hanegbi (4), Finanzminister Roni Bar-On (5), Wohnungsbauminister Zeev Boim (6), Innenminister (7), Tourismusministerin Ruhama Avraham-Balila (8), Minister für öffentliche Sicherheit Avi Dichter (9) und die Abgeordnete Marina Solodkin (10). Der stellvertretende Ministerpräsident Haim Ramon landet auf dem 17. Platz, der Vorsitzende des Verfassungs-, Rechts- und Justizausschusses der Knesset Menachem Ben-Sasson, ein an der Hebräischen Universität in Jerusalem lehrender weltweit anerkannter Spezialist für die Geschichte der Juden in arabischen Ländern, wird auf den aussichtslosen 35. Platz verwiesen.

Der auf den 28. Platz der Kandidatenliste von „“ gewählte Aleli Admasu, der 1983 aus Äthiopien eingewandert ist, wird vom parteiinternen Schiedsgericht aus formalen Gründen zugunsten des aus Russland stammenden Kandidaten Wladimir Shklar gestrichen. www.reiner-bernstein.de 8 – Chronologie 2008

Die Grüne Bewegung und die liberal-religiöse Partei „“ 5 kündigen eine gemeinsame Wahlliste an.

16.12.2008: Der UN-Sicherheitsrat verabschiedet die von den USA und Russland gemeinsam eingebrachte Resolution 1850 mit 14 Stimmen bei der Enthaltung Libyens. Darin werden die israelisch-palästinensischen und multilateralen Verhandlungen auf der Grundlage der „Road Map“ vom April 2003, der Vereinbarungen von Annapolis im November 2007 und der Arabischen Friedensinitiative von 2002/2007 mit dem Ziel der Zweistaatenregelung unterstützt 6.

Die in London erscheinende arabische Zeitung „Al-Hayat (Das Leben)“ meldet, dass Präsident Machmud Abbas die Verschiebung der Präsidentschafts- und Parlamentswahlen auf den April 2009 verkünden werde. Die bevorstehende präsidentielle Verfügung sei mit arabischen Regierungen abgesprochen, zu denen Syriens Präsident Bashar Assad gehört habe.

Das „Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN)“ meldet, dass am 15. Dezember 22 Ägypten von einem Staatsgerichtshof wegen ihrer Teilnahme an Protesten in Mahalia nördlich von Kairo zu Haftstrafen zwischen drei und fünf Jahren verurteilt worden sind. Eine unabhängige Untersuchung der Vorwürfe habe nicht stattgefunden, nach den Worten ihrer Verteidiger seien die Beschuldigten gefoltert worden.

Nach einer Meldung der iranischen Nachrichtenagentur IRNA erklärt Präsident Machmud Achmadinedjad in der Hauptstadt der Provinz Khusistan, Achvaz, dass Iran niemals das „zionistische Regime“ anerkennen werde. Wer immer mit Iran verhandle, solle wissen, dass er zu einem Volk spreche, das für „die Beendigung der israelischen Verbrechen, der Aggression, der Okkupation, der Ideologie und der Grundlage des Zionismus“ eintrete. www.reiner-bernstein.de 9 – Chronologie 2008

15.12.2008: Das Nahost-Quartett bekräftigt nach seiner Sitzung in New York in einer Erklärung seine Unterstützung für „umfassende, direkte, ununterbrochene, vertrauliche und dauerhafte israelisch- palästinensische Verhandlungen“ und lobt Israel und die Palästinenser für ihre beständigen Bemühungen um einen Friedensvertrag. Der in Annapolis begonnene Prozess sei unumkehrbar, doch die Verhandlungen sollten intensiviert werden, um den Konflikt zu beenden und so schnell wie möglich den Staat Palästina zu schaffen. Ein Schlussvertrag und ein dauerhafter Frieden sollten durch parallele und sich gegenseitig verstärkende Bemühungen auf drei Ebenen erreicht werden: Verhandlungen, Aufbau der Institutionen des palästinensischen Staates sowie Umsetzung der Verpflichtungen der Parteien gemäß der „Road Map“ vom April 2003. Eine dauerhafte Lösung der Situation im Gazastreifen könne nur durch friedliche Mittel erreicht werden. Dazu würden die Gewaltlosigkeit der Palästinenser, ihre Anerkennung Israels sowie die Achtung früherer Vereinbarungen und Verpflichtungen gehören. Das Quartett bezeichnet in seiner Erklärung die PLO als die legitime und international anerkannte Vertretung des palästinensischen Volkes und begrüßt die ägyptischen Bemühungen um die Fortsetzung der seit dem 19. Juni anhaltenden Waffenruhe. Ohne Israel zu nennen, äußert das Quartett seine „akute Sorge“ über die jüngst intensivierte Absperrung des Gazastreifens und ihre Konsequenzen für die dortige Bevölkerung.

Dem emeritierten US-amerikanisch-jüdischen Völkerrechtler Richard Falk wird in seiner Mission als UN-Sonderberichterstatter am Flughafen erstmals die Einreise verweigert. Falk, der zuletzt Albert G. Milbank Professor of International Law and Practice in Princeton war, wurde gegen israelische Proteste im März 2008 vom UN-Menschenrechtsrat in Genf für sechs Jahre als Nachfolger des www.reiner-bernstein.de 10 – Chronologie 2008 an der Universität Leiden (Niederlande) arbeitenden Südfafrikaners John Dugard 7 zur Überwachung der Menschenrechtssituation in den palästinensischen Gebieten bestellt. Seither hatte sich Falk mehrfach äußerst kritisch zur Politik Israels geäußert. So wurde ihm vorgeworfen, sie mit Holocaust-Praktiken verglichen zu haben 8.

14.12.2008: Mehr als zweihunderttausend Palästinenser begehen den 21. Gründungstag von „Hamas“ in Gaza-Stadt. Der dortige Ministerpräsident Ismail Haniyeh fordert Präsident Machmud Abbas auf, auf eine Kandidatur bei den für den 9. Januar 2009 vorgesehenen Wahlen zu verzichten. Außerdem sagt 46jährige Haniyeh zu, jene rund dreitausend Mekka-Pilger zu entschädigen, denen „Hamas“ die Ausreise aus dem Gazastreifen wegen des Konflikts mit „Fatah“ verwehrte.

Der israelische Minister ohne Geschäftsbereich Ami Ayalon tritt zurück und erklärt, dass er bei den Parlamentswahlen am 10. Februar 2009 nicht mehr kandidieren werde. Zuvor waren seine Bemühungen gescheitert, bei der liberal-religiösen Partei „Meimad“ einen prominenten Listenplatz zu erhalten 9. Ayalon war vor allem durch die Zusammenarbeit mit dem Präsidenten der palästinensischen Al-Quds University, Sari Nusseibeh, bekannt geworden, als beide im Sommer 2003 ihren 6-Punkte-Platz zur Regelung des Konflikts vorlegten. Danach trennten sich ihre Wege.

13.12.2008: Amos Oz wird für „die mutige Klarheit und Entschlossenheit, mit der er zwischen Israelis und Palästinensern Brücken zu bauen versucht“, mit dem Heinrich-Heine-Preis 2008 der Stadt Düsseldorf ausgezeichnet. Alt-Bundespräsident Richard von Weizsäcker betont in seiner Laudatio, dass für einen friedensbewegten Schriftsteller die Neugier eine wertvolle Eigenschaft sei. In seiner Dankesrede erklärt www.reiner-bernstein.de 11 – Chronologie 2008

Oz, Heine habe uns gelehrt, dass „Humor und Ironie die besten Mittel gegen Extremismus und Engstirnigkeit sind“, und fährt fort. „Wir brauchen etwas von Heines Verachtung für engstirnigen Fanatismus.“

12.12.2008: US-Außenministerin Condoleezza Rice trifft in Washington mit Yossi Beilin zusammen und bekennt sich zur Verpflichtung ihrer Regierung zur Förderung der Verhandlungen zwischen Israel und den Palästinensern. In den vergangenen Jahren habe eine bedeutsame Entwicklung stattgefunden, die die Rechtssicherheit und die Ordnung in der Westbank von Grund auf verbessert habe. Beilin erklärt, dass die amtierende israelische Regierung einen Weg gefunden habe, der sicherstelle, dass die Verhandlungen dort fortgesetzt werden könnten, wo sie aufgehört hätten. Der Prozess müsse also nicht Anfang 2009 neu einsetzen. Die hebräischsprachige Internetausgabe von „Haaretz“ lässt in ihrem Bericht Unsicherheit darüber erkennen: Es sei nicht klar, was die Absicht von Rice gewesen sei, als sie dem Gedanken Ausdruck verliehen habe, Fortschritte zu fördern.

11.12.2008: Nach einem Bericht des israelischen Armeesenders „Galei Tsahal” erklärt Außenministerin Tsipi Livni vor Schülern einer Tel Aviver Oberschule, dass sie nach der Errichtung eines palästinensischen Staates die israelischen Staatsbürger arabischer Volkszugehörigkeit darauf aufmerksam machen würde, dass sie Staatsbürger mit gleichen Rechten seien, dass sie jedoch die Erfüllung ihrer nationalen Ansprüche „anderswo“ suchen müssten. Der arabische Minister für Kultur, Sport und Wissenschaft Ghaleb Madjadele protestiert gegen die Äußerung Livnis und erklärt, wer für den Transfer der arabischen Bevölkerung Israels in dem Staat Palästina plädiere, sei antidemokratisch. www.reiner-bernstein.de 12 – Chronologie 2008

Bei seiner Begegnung mit 27 europäischen Botschaftern in Tel Aviv erklärt Oppositionsführer , dass er nicht an der Fortsetzung der Herrschaft über das Leben der Palästinenser interessiert sei. Sie sollten alle Bürgerrechte genießen, doch dürfe dies nicht zu Lasten der Sicherheit Israels gehen. Er kenne nicht den Stand der Verhandlungen Ehud Olmerts mit der Palästinensischen Autonomiebehörde, doch habe er den Eindruck, dass die Bemühungen um eine Schlussvereinbarung gescheitert seien. Die von ihm, Netanyahu, vorgetragene Idee der Hebung des palästinensischen Lebensstandards sei kein Ersatz für den politischen Dialog. Nach den Wahlen am 10. Februar 2009 strebe er eine Regierung der nationalen Einheit an. Auf die Frage eines Botschafters nach der Stationierung einer internationalen Truppe stellt Netanyahu die Gegenfrage: „Sie sind bereit, Soldaten zu schicken, damit sie gegen Hamas kämpfen?“ Das könne er nicht glauben.

10.12.2008: Anlässlich des 60. Jahrestages der Allgemeinen Erklärung der Menschenrechte bezeichnet Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel die Einhaltung der Menschenrechte als „Fundament deutscher Außenpolitik“. Es gehe um die Würde und die Rechte jedes einzelnen Menschen, um seine Freizügigkeit und körperliche Unversehrtheit und „natürlich um Meinungsfreiheit“. Merkel erwähnt als zwei Beispiele Ost-Kongo und Kindersklaven. Ein Hinweis auf den Nahen Osten unterbleibt.

Die Botschaft des Staates Israel in Berlin beehrt sich in ihrem jüngsten „Newsletter“ anzuzeigen, dass die neue israelische Botschafterin bei den Vereinten Nationen Gabriela Shalev – nach ihrer Karriere als Jura-Professorin an der Hebräischen Universität war sie vor ihrer Ernennung Rektorin des „Academic College“ in Kiryat Ono (zwischen Givatyim und Petach Tiqva gelegen) – aus www.reiner-bernstein.de 13 – Chronologie 2008

Anlass des 60. Jahrestages der Allgemeinen Erklärung der Menschenrechte im Namen der rund dreißig Mitgliedsstaaten „Western Europeans and Others“ – zu letzteren gehören die USA, Kanada, Australien, Neuseeland und Japan – „eine der zentralen Reden der Festveranstaltung“ hält. Der Präsident der UN- Vollversammlung, der Nicaraguer Miguel D’Escoto Brockmann, versucht, den Auftritt Shalevs zu unterbinden und auf die Rednerliste auch Vertreter arabischer Staaten zu setzen, scheitert aber. In einem Interview mit „Haaretz“ am 9. Januar 2009 berichtet die Jura- Professorin der Hebräischen Universität, dass die deutsche UN- Delegation zum Erfolg ihrer Ansprache in der 192 Staaten umfassenden Vollversammlung beigetragen habe. Nach seiner Wahl zum Präsidenten hatte es der 75jährige Theologe D’Escoto im September als eine „heilige Pflicht“ bezeichnet, einen palästinensischen Staat zu schaffen und das Versagen der Vereinten Nationen heftig kritisiert. Am 24. November verglich Brockmann Israels Politik in den palästinensischen Gebieten mit der Frühphase der südafrikanischen Apartheid.

Bei der Entgegennahme des diesjährigen Friedensnobelpreises fordert der frühere finnische Ministerpräsident Martti Ahtisaari in Oslo den designierten US-Präsidenten Barack Obama auf, dem Nahostkonflikt schon im ersten Jahr seiner Amtsführung diplomatische Priorität einzuräumen. Die Lösung des Konflikts sei eine Angelegenheit des politischen Willens, erklärt Ahtisaari.

09.12.2008: Die UN-Menschenrechtsorganisation in Genf beschließt mehrheitlich 99 Empfehlungen, in denen Israel zur Verbesserung der humanitären Lebensbedingungen der Palästinenser und zur Aufhebung der Blockade des Gazastreifens aufgefordert wird. Bis März soll Israel dazu Bericht erstatten. Westliche Staaten, darunter Australien, Großbritannien, Kanada, Frankreich und Deutschland, schließen sich der Forderung nach dem Ende der Blockade an. www.reiner-bernstein.de 14 – Chronologie 2008

08.12.2008: Von den knapp einhunderttausend Mitgliedern beteiligt sich rund die Hälfte an der parteiinternen Aufstellung der 42köpfigen Kandidatenliste des „Likud” zur Knessetwahl am 10. Februar 2009. Unter Führung von Benjamin Netanyahu, der nicht zur Abstimmung steht, gehören zu der Liste der bisherige Fraktionsvorsitzende Gideon Saar (Platz 2), der frühere Parlamentspräsident (Platz 4), der Sohn des ehemaligen Ministerpräsidenten Menachem Begin, (Platz 5), der frühere Außenminister (Platz 7), der ehemalige Generalstabschef Moshe („Bogey“) Yaalon (Platz 8), der Vorsitzende des Knessetausschusses für Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik Yuval Steinitz (Platz 9), der rechtsnationale Abgeordnete Israel Katz (Platz 11), der zur russischen Einwanderergeneration gehörige (Platz 12), die frühere Erziehungsministerin (Platz 13), der Finanzminister in der Regierung Menachem Begins, Dan Meridor (Platz 17), der rechtsnationale Abgeordnete und Netanyahu-Rebell Moshe Feiglin (Platz 20) und der frühere stellvertretende Generalstabschef Uzi Dayan (Platz 42). „Rechts, aschkenasisch, siedlungsfreundlich, Kippa tragend und staatspolitisch dogmatisch“, kommentiert „Yediot Achronot“ das Ergebnis, während „Maariv“ den „Likud“ in den Händen der rigiden Rechten sieht. Am 11. Dezember wird Feiglin auf den 36. Platz der Wahlliste mit der Begründung versetzt, dass Frauen mit regionalem Bezug eine bessere Wahlchance erhalten sollten. Feiglin kündigt juristische Schritte gegen die Entscheidung an. Einen Tag zuvor hatte „Haaretz“ einen fünf Jahre alten Text Feiglins veröffentlicht, in dem er im Falle seiner Wahl zum Ministerpräsidenten seine Regierung zum Dankgebet auf den Tempelberg einladen, Israels Austritt aus der UNO betreiben und die Botschaften „in Deutschland und anderen antisemitischen Ländern“ schließen würde. www.reiner-bernstein.de 15 – Chronologie 2008

Die EU-Außenminister ziehen auf Verlangen der israelischen Außenministerin Tsipi Livni ihre „EU Action Strategy for Peace in the Middle East: The Way Forward“, die Ende November bekannt geworden war, zurück 10 . An die Stelle des Aktionsplans soll ein „Vorschlag“ treten. Livni sieht nach offiziellen israelischen Angaben in dem Dokument „eine bedeutende Errungenschaft für die israelische Außenpolitik“. Der erweiterte Dialog soll die Bereiche „Friedensprozess“, „militärische Zusammenarbeit“, „Terrorismusbekämpfung“, „Entwicklungshilfe“, „Kampf gegen das organisierte Verbrechen“, „Antisemitismus“ und „Schutz der Menschenrechte“ einschließen. Außerdem ist an Hilfen zur Integration Israels in die UN-Institutionen, die Beteiligung israelischer Experten bei den europäischen Friedenstruppen und an den Ausbau der parlamentarischen Beziehungen gedacht. Im Zuge der Aufwertung der europäisch-israelischen Beziehungen 11 wird Israels Außenminister/in ab 2009 dreimal jährlich zu den Treffen der EU- Partner eingeladen. Die Staatschefs beider Seiten sollen mindestens ein Mal im Jahr zusammenkommen 12 .

07.12.2008: In einem Fernsehinterview kündigt der designierte US-Präsident Barack Obama eine „harte, aber direkte Diplomatie” gegenüber Iran an. Nicht nur das Atomprogramm sei unannehmbar, sondern auch die iranische Unterstützung für „Hisbollah” und „Hamas”. Die Drohungen gegen Israel seien gegen alles, woran die Vereinigten Staaten glauben würden. Zuvor hatte der Generaldirektor der Internationalen Atomenergiebehörde Mohammed al-Baradei die Verhandlungen mit und den Boykott gegen Iran als gescheitert bezeichnet. Viele Iraner, die das Regime ablehnen würden, hätten sich hinter die Regierung gestellt, weil sie ihr Land in einem Belagerungszustand sehen.

05.12.2008: www.reiner-bernstein.de 16 – Chronologie 2008

Ausgehend von den Unruhen in Hebron, die die Spannungen zwischen der Regierung und den Siedlern einem Höhepunkt zutreiben, verstärkt die israelische Armee ihre Präsenz in der gesamten Westbank. Nach Zusammenstößen zwischen Palästinensern und israelischen Soldaten in Hebron wird der Zugang moslemischer Beter zur Al-Aqza-Moschee in Jerusalem verstärkt kontrolliert, nur Männern über 45 Jahre mit gültigen israelischen Ausweispapieren wird er gestattet. US-amerikanische Diplomaten werden von ihrer Botschaft in Tel Aviv angewiesen, Jerusalem zu meiden. Das US-amerikanische Konsulat in Jerusalem empfiehlt seinen Staatsbürgern, angesichts möglicher Gefährdungen Vorsicht walten zu lassen. Am 8. Dezember bezeichnet Amnon Toledano in der hebräischen Internetausgabe von „Haaretz“ die Angriffe der Siedler gegen Soldaten und Palästinenser als „jüdischen Djihad“, der die staatliche Autorität untergrabe. Dieselbe Zeitung veröffentlicht am 15. Dezember einen Meinungsbeitrag der pensionierten Richterin und Ehrenpräsidentin der „International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists, Hadassa Ben-Itto, dass sie sich darüber schäme, geschwiegen zu haben, als junge Juden in Hebron ihre palästinensischen Nachbarn angriffen, ihr Eigentum zerstörten und ihre heiligen Stätten entweihten, während sie, Ben-Itto, in ihrem Vortrag in Bern aus Anlass des 70. Jahrestages der „Reichskristallnacht“ für die öffentliche Bewahrung der Erinnerung an die Verbrechen gegen die Juden ausgesprochen habe. Nicht nur die Welt, sondern auch wir, die Israelis, müssten die Lektion lernen. „Ich schäme mich für mein Schweigen. I sah die Entwurzelung von Olivenbäumen, das Umkippen von Marktständen, die Angriffe auf Eigentum und manchmal auf unschuldige Menschen, und ich habe geschwiegen. Ich habe die Worte der Hetze gehört, die Botschaften verstanden, und habe mich geschämt, aber ich habe geschwiegen.“ Im 20. Jahrhundert sei Hetze immer der Aktion vorausgegangen; wo man etwas sagen könne, könne man es auch tun.

Im Tel Aviver Tsavta-Theater treffen sich Wissenschaftler, Intellektuelle und Künstler, um als Nachfolgerin von „Meretz“ eine www.reiner-bernstein.de 17 – Chronologie 2008 neue linke Partei vorzubereiten, für die noch kein Name feststeht. Zu den Anwesenden zählen Amos Oz, dessen Tochter Fania Oz- Salzberger, Gila Almagor und der „Meretz“-Vorsitzende Haim („Jumes“) Oron 13 . In einem Interview mit „Haaretz“ am 8. Dezember äußert der frühere Sicherheitsberter von US-Präsident Jimmy Carter, Zbigniew Brzezinski, die Vermutung, dass die israelische und die palästinensische Öffentlichkeit in manchen Punkten weiter wären als ihre zögernden Regierungen. Der am selben Tag eingehende „War and Peace Index“ des „Tami Steinmetz Center for Peace Research“ an der Universität Tel Aviv für November 2008 weist aus, dass 59 Prozent der jüdischen Israels die Schaffung eines unabhängigen palästinensischen Staates befürworten und dass 61 Prozent diesen palästinensischen Anspruch für gerechtfertigt halten. Gleichzeitig zeigen sich 63 Prozent davon überzeugt, dass die Palästinenser den Staat Israel vernichten würden, wenn sie dazu in der Lage wären. Da die Arabische Friedensinitiative von 2002/2007 nichts Neues biete, vertrat nur ein Drittel die Auffassung, dass die israelische Regierung sie in Betracht ziehen sollte.

In einem Interview mit „Haaretz” weist der an der Columbia University lehrende US-amerikanische Historiker Rashid Khalidi, dessen Familie in Jerusalem gebürtig ist, nach Gesprächen mit Palästinensern und Israelis auf die enorme Frustration und den Widerwillen in der palästinensischen Öffentlichkeit gegen die Konfrontation zwischen „Fatah“ und „Hamas“ hin, der eine unverstehliche Dynamik und Vitalität der palästinensischen Gesellschaft in der Westbank, in Ost-Jerusalem und in der Westbank sowie in Israel gegenüberstehe. Sie seien die unterschwellige Stärke, gegen die keine Dämme ankommen würden. Für Khalidi, Autor des Buches „The Iron Cage“ 14 , vertritt die Führung der PLO nicht hinreichend das gesamte palästinensische Volk, solange es keinen historischen Kompromiss mit dem anderen Flügel der Nationalbewegung erreicht habe und bis sich eine erneuerte, vereinigte Führung nicht auf einen minimalen Nationalkonsens und eine Strategie verständigt habe. Jede Vereinbarung mit Israel müsse www.reiner-bernstein.de 18 – Chronologie 2008 von einem Referendum bestätigt werden, an dem die Palästinenser auch außerhalb Palästinas zu beteiligen seien. Nach den Erwartungen an den künftigen US-Präsidenten Barack Obama befragt, mahnt Khalidi zur Zurückhaltung und Vorsicht. Obama werde zwar den israelisch-palästinensischen Konflikt ernsthaft angehen, doch sollten die Palästinenser die Tatsache nicht verkennen, dass er die größte amerikanische und globale Wirtschaftskrise seit 1929 meistern und ihr Vorrang einräumen müsse. Vielen israelischen Intellektuellen und dem Friedenslager in Israel zollt Khalidi Respekt, bedauert aber, dass sie der Okkupation zu geringe Aufmerksamkeit schenken würden. Die Lage laufe faktisch auf einen Staat hinaus, wenn Israel seine Herrschaft über das gesamte ehemalige Mandatspalästina mit mehr als fünf Millionen Palästinensern fortsetze 15 .

04.12.2008: Das israelische Oberste Gericht weist einen Antrag aus den Reihen des „Likud“ zurück, der dem amtierenden Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert die Fortführung der Verhandlungen mit den Palästinensern und Syrien untersagen sollte.

Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert beauftragt die Minister Ehud Barak (Verteidigung), Avi Dichter (Innere Sicherheit) und Generalstabschef Gaby Ashkenazi – geboren 1954 als Kind bulgarischer Shoah- Überlebender in Israel geboren –, die Räumung des vom Obersten Gericht vor drei Wochen angeordneten und von Siedlern besetzten viergeschossigen Hauses in Hebron vorzunehmen; die Eigentumsrechte an dem Haus sind umstritten. Nach Gewaltausbrüchen der Siedler, die sich auch gegen die palästinensische Bevölkerung richten, wobei palästinensische Häuser und Autos angezündet werden, erklärt die Regierung am 5. Dezember über die Stadt den Ausnahmezustand. Die jordanische Regierung protestiert scharf gegen die Verletzung des internationalen Rechts, weil siebzig Juden nicht daran gehindert www.reiner-bernstein.de 19 – Chronologie 2008 worden seien, den „Haram al-Sharif“ (= Nobles Heiligtum, „Tempelberg“) zu betreten.

Bei der Kandidatenaufstellung der „Arbeitspartei”, an deren Wahl 58 Prozent der Mitglieder teilnehmen, gewinnen Yitzhak Herzog, Ophir Pines-Paz, Avishai Braverman, Shelly Yachimovich, , Benjamin Ben-Eliezer, Amir Peretz, Yuli Tamir, Daniel Ben-Simon und Einat Wilf die Plätze 2 bis 11. Ehud Barak als Spitzenkandidat muss sich nicht zur Wahl stellen. Weitere Sitze sind für Avi Shaked, Colette Avital und Eitan Cabel sicher. Der 15. Platz (ohne Barak) ist für einen arabischen und der 16. Platz für einen drusischen Bewerber vorgesehen. Der 17. Platz ist einem kommunalen Kandidaten vorbehalten, der 18. Platz einem Neueinwanderer sowie der 19. und 20. Platz einem Kandidaten aus „Judäa und Samaria“. Nach den gegenwärtigen Meinungsumfragen sind bei der Parlamentswahl am 10. Februar 2009 nur die ersten zehn Plätze sicher.

Das Europäische Parlament verschiebt eine Entscheidung über die Aufwertung der europäisch-israelischen Beziehungen. Der Antrag, der Europäischen Kommission und vom Europäischen Rat eingebracht und von Israels Außenministerin Tsipi Livni begründet wurde, sollte dem Assoziierungsabkommen ein Protokoll beifügen, das Israel die Beteiligung an EU-Programmen einräumt. Die italienische Abgeordnete Luisa Morgantini, eine der Vizepräsidenten des Parlaments, die sich für die Verschiebung einsetzte, begründet ihre Haltung damit, dass die israelische Regierung zunächst die Prinzipien des demokratischen Rechtsstaates einhalten sowie die Siedlungspolitik beenden und die Blockade des Gazastreifens aufheben müsse.

03.12.2008: In Brüssel unterzeichnen die Nato und Israel das „Individuelle Kooperationsprogramm (ICP)“, das der Verstärkung der www.reiner-bernstein.de 20 – Chronologie 2008

Arbeitsbeziehungen zwischen beiden Seiten in der Sicherheits- und Außenpolitik dienen soll. Dazu gerechnet werden der Kampf gegen den Terrorismus, das Verbot der Weitergabe von Nuklearkomponenten, gemeinsame Militärmanöver und der Austausch von Geheimdienstinformationen.

In einer von ihr einberufenen Krisensitzung des Kabinetts verlangt Außenministerin Tsipi Livni, dass sich Ehud Olmert von seinem Amt als Ministerpräsident beurlauben lässt. In der vergangenen Woche hatte Generalstaatsanwalt Menachem Mazouz angekündigt, dass er gegen Olmert eine Anklageerhebung wegen Korruption prüfe.

Der Knesset-Abgeordnete der „United Arab List (Ta’al)“ Abbas Zkur stellt laut „Yediot Acharonot“ in Akko eine neue Partei vor. Sie soll sich vorrangig um die Belange der arabischen Staatsbürger Israels kümmern und nicht um die Palästinenser in der Westbank, in Ost- Jerusalem und im Gazastreifen sowie um die Beziehungen zur arabischen Welt. Seit dem 8. Oktober war es in Akko zu Zusammenstößen zwischen Arabern und Juden gekommen.

In Berlin unterzeichnen Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel und Libanons Präsident Michael Suleiman ein Abkommen über die verstärkte Zusammenarbeit beider Staaten.

02.12.2008: Unter Berufung auf israelische Diplomaten berichtet „Haaretz”, dass die neue US-amerikanische Administration erwäge, den früheren Botschafter in Kairo und Tel Aviv, Daniel C. Kurtzer, zum Nahost- Gesandten des Präsidenten zu ernennen 16 . Während seiner Zeit in Israel bis 2005 habe er, so „Haaretz“, regelmäßig gegen die Siedlungspolitik protestiert, so dass die Beziehungen zu Ministerpräsident unterkühlt gewesen seien. Am 14. Dezember berichtet „Haaretz“ unter Berufung auf Jerusalmer Quellen, dass Barack Obama in Absprache mit Hillary Clinton ein www.reiner-bernstein.de 21 – Chronologie 2008

Expertenteam für den Nahen und Mittleren Osten zusammenstellen werde, zu dem außer Kurtzer noch Colin Powell, Dennis Ross und Martin Indyk (Botschafter in Israel zwischen 1995 und 2001) gehören würden.

01.12.2008: In Chicago stellt der künftige US-Präsident Barack Obama der Öffentlichkeit seine einstige innerparteiliche Rivalin Hillary Clinton als neue Außenministerin vor. Dafür muss Clinton ihren Sitz als Senatorin der Demokratischen Partei in New York aufgeben. Als neuer Nationaler Sicherheitsberater nominiert Obama den früheren Nato-Oberbefehlshaber James Jones und als UN-Botschafterin seine außenpolitische Beraterin Susan Rice mit Kabinettrang, während der republikanische Verteidigungsminister Robert Gates zumindest vorerst im Amt bleibt. Justizminister soll Eric Holder werden. In ihrer Dankesrede kündigt Clinton zur Sicherheit von Frieden und Freiheit verstärkte diplomatische Konsultationen mit ihren Verbündeten und Freunden sowie den Versuch an, in Krisenzonen die Mittel des politischen Dialogs zu erweitern. Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert gratuliert Clinton zu ihrer Ernennung und drückt die Hoffnung auf die weitere Förderung der israelisch- amerikanischen Sonderbeziehungen aus.

November 2008

30.11.2008: Das israelische Kabinett entscheidet mehrheitlich die Freilassung von 250 palästinensischen Gefangenen, die vor allem zu „Fatah“ gehören, zu den moslemischen Feiertagen als Zeichen des guten Willens. Eine Woche später, am 7. Dezember, kürzt das Kabinett die Liste auf 230 Personen, die „kein Blut an den Händen“ haben. Durch die Veröffentlichung der Namen der zu Entlassenden soll Israelis die www.reiner-bernstein.de 22 – Chronologie 2008

Möglichkeit des Einspruchs gegeben werden. Am 15. Dezember werden dann lediglich 209 Gefangene in die Westbank und 18 in den Gazastreifen abgeschoben.

Die israelische Regierung zeigt sich besorgt über ein von der gegenwärtigen französischen Ratspräsidentschaft verfasstes EU- Dokument, das unter dem Titel „The EU Action Strategy for Peace in the Middle East: The Way Forward“ gegenwärtig den Regierungen zur Abstimmung vorliegt. Danach wird die Wiedereröffnung der palästinensischen Einrichtungen wie des im August 2001 von den israelischen Behörden geschlossenen „Orient House“ in Ost- Jerusalem befürwortet. Zum Thema „Jerusalem“ heißt es in dem Dokument, über das die Außenminister auf ihrer Sitzung in der kommenden Woche entscheiden sollen, dass der Wiederherstellung Jerusalems als künftiger Hauptstadt zweier Staaten eine Schlüsselrolle zukomme. Außerdem würden die Staaten Europas ein vollständiges Einfrieren sämtlicher Siedlungsaktivitäten Israels auch in Ost-Jerusalem verlangen.

28.11.2008: Nach einer Absprache mit der niederländischen Gruppe „United Civilians for Peace“ zieht sich der niederländische Konzern Unilever von der Produktionsstätte „Beigel & Beigel“ aus der Industriezone Barkan nahe der Siedlungsstadt Ariel in der Westbank zurück. Die Entscheidung ist die dritte dieser Art innerhalb der vergangenen vier Monate 17 .

21.11.2008: In der Wochenendbeilage von „Yediot Acharanot (Letzte Nachrichten)“ erläutert Amos Oz seine Unterstützung für die Neugründung einer linken Partei als Nachfolgerin von „Meretz“ 18 . Im Interview mit Nachum Barnea drückt Oz seine Hoffnung aus, dass sie bei den Parlamentswahlen am 10. Februar 2009 der Arbeitspartei www.reiner-bernstein.de 23 – Chronologie 2008 viele Stimmen abnehmen werde. Ehud Barak als Vorsitzender dieser Partei habe einen Fehler nach dem anderen begangen; bei einer aktuellen Meinungsumfrage des Forschungsinstituts „Dachaf“ unter Leitung von Mina Tsemach erwarten nur fünf Prozent der israelischen Juden, dass er der nächste Ministerpräsident wird, die Arbeitspartei könne gemäß der sogenannten Sonntagsfrage mit nur acht Mandaten rechnen. Er, Oz, habe trotz seiner Freundschaft mit – Peres war bis zur Gründung von „Kadima“ einer der führenden Repräsentanten der Arbeitspartei – diese Partei nie gewählt. „Kadima“ bestehe heute zur Hälfte aus „Tauben“ und „Falken“. Benjamin Netanyahus „Likud“ sei die große Herausforderung. Er hoffe, dass die Nachfolgerin von „Meretz“ einen neuen politischen Horizont vor allem für Tausende junger Menschen bieten werde, die politisch bislang aus Apathie oder Verzweiflung beiseite gestanden hätten. Wie das Barack Obama in den USA gelungen sei, müsse die linke Partei sie in Israel ansprechen. Die kommenden Wahlen seien in der Tat Schicksalswahlen, nicht im Sinne einer Lösung des Konflikts mit den Palästinensern, sondern zunächst im Sinne eines grundlegenden Wandels, nimmt Oz Obamas Leitbegriff „Change“ auf. In den vergangenen hundert Jahren seien beide Seiten noch nie der Beendigung des Konflikts so nahe gewesen 19 . Selbst die Siedler wüssten, was am Ende des Friedensprozesses stehen werde. Wenn es eine Vereinbarung gebe, werde Jordanien eine Rolle spielen und Ägypten möglicherweise im Gazastreifen 20 .

20.11.2008: Die PLO wirbt in vier israelischen und drei palästinensischen Zeitungen mit einer Anzeige für die Arabische Friedensinitiative von 2002/2007. Sie sagt die Anerkennung Israels durch die arabischen Staaten zu – die auch weitere 35 moslemische Staaten ankündigten –, wenn sich Israel aus den palästinensischen Gebieten zurückzieht und einer „vereinbarten Lösung“ des palästinensischen Flüchtlingsproblems zustimmt 21 . Akiva Eldar erinnert am 21. www.reiner-bernstein.de 24 – Chronologie 2008

November in „Haaretz“ daran, dass Außenministerin Tsipi Livni den Plan im Juli gegenüber ihren ägyptischen und jordanischen Amtskollegen „eine historische Chance, die nicht verpasst werden darf“, bezeichnet hat. Vor zwei Wochen habe der Generalsekretär der Arabischen Liga, Amr Moussa, in Brüssel erklärt, dass Israel nach seiner grundsätzlichen Zustimmung das Recht habe, mit seinen Nachbarn über den genauen Grenzverlauf und über Sicherheitsarrangements zu verhandeln.

Israels Oppositionsführer Benjamin Netanyahu kündigt vor den rund dreitausend Delegierten auf der Generalversammlung der „United Jewish Communities” in Jerusalem an, dass er im Falle seines Wahlsieges am 10. Februar 2009 das Steuer gegenüber den Palästinensern herumreißen werde. Die bisherigen Verhandlungen mit ihnen hätten nichts erbracht, weil sie sich um einen Endstatus- Vertrag gedreht hätten, statt sich um die Hebung des palästinensischen Lebensstandards zu kümmern. Die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung würde Probleme zwar nicht lösen, doch sie erleichtern.

18.11.2008: Nach israelischen und arabischen Medienberichten trifft Jordaniens König Abdullah II. mit Ehud Olmert und Ehud Barak zu Geheimgesprächen in zusammen. Beide sollen ihm versichert haben, dass Israel keine militärische Invasion nach Gaza plant.

14.11.2008: „Haaretz” berichtet, dass in den kommenden drei Wochen eine neue Linkspartei unter Führung von „Meretz“ gegründet werden soll, die bei den für den 10. Februar 2009 vorgesehenen Knessetwahlen anzutreten beabsichtige. Auf Initiative des „Meretz“-Vorsitzenden Haim Oron sollen ihr angehören Avraham Burg, Gilad Sher (Chefberater des damaligen Ministerpräsidenten Ehud Barak), der www.reiner-bernstein.de 25 – Chronologie 2008

Jerusalemer Straf- und Verfassungsrechtler Mordechai Kremnitzer sowie die Autoren David Grossman, A.B. Yehoshua, Amos Oz, Ronit Matalon und Dorit Rabinyan. Die Gründung ist für den 5. Dezember vorgesehen. Nach Auffassung von Oz hat die Arbeitspartei ihre historische Rolle verloren. Der frühere Außenminister Shlomo Ben- Ami soll gegenwärtig dem Übertritt von der Arbeitspartei ebenso eine Absage erteilt haben wie Erziehungsministerin Yuli Tamir. Ami Ayalon, Minister ohne Geschäftsbereich und ehemaliger Marine- Kommandeur und Chef des Inlandsgeheimdienstes („Shin Beth“), erklärt am 16. November sein Ausscheiden aus der Arbeitspartei, ohne sich auf eine neue Formation festzulegen. Ein Sprecher der Arbeitspartei begrüßt das Ausscheiden Ayalons, weil er ein Opportunist sei und einen Zickzackkurs verfolge. „Kadima“ erteilt Ayalon einem möglichen Übertritt eine Absage, weil er die „Genfer Initiative“ unterstütze 22 . Am selben 16. November verlässt Zeev Elkin „Kadima“. Der 37jährige Abgeordnete, der vor achtzehn Jahren aus Russland einwanderte, bezeichnet die Partei als zu „linkslastig“ und vergleicht sie mit den „radikalen Ideen der Genfer Initiative“. Der Austritt Elkins löst bei den Spitzen der Partei kein Bedauern aus. Einen Tag später gibt der frühere Generalstabschef Moshe („Bogey“) Yaalon seine Kandidatur für „Likud“ bekannt. Der ehemalige Kommunikationsdirektor der „Genfer Initiative“ Dror Sternschuss wird die Öffentlichkeitsarbeit der neuen Partei lenken. Am 20. November beschließt die mit der Arbeitspartei in der Knesset verbündete liberal-religiöse Partei „Meimad“ – Akronym für „Jüdische Partei – Demokratische Partei“ –, sich von ihr zu trennen und bei den bevorstehenden Parlamentswahlen mit Ayalon an der Spitze selbständig anzutreten.

11.11.2008: Bei der Kommunalwahl in Jerusalem setzt sich überraschend Nir Barkat mit 52,4 Prozent der Stimmen als neuer Bürgermeister der Stadt durch. Die Wahlbeteiligung liegt bei 43,3 Prozent. Die palästinensische Bevölkerung Jerusalems befolgt weitgehend den www.reiner-bernstein.de 26 – Chronologie 2008

Boykottaufruf der Palästinenischen Autonomiebehörde. In Tel Aviv gewinnt erwartungsgemäß der amtierende Bürgermeister Ron Huldai gegen seinen Konkurrenten Dov Khenin mit 50,7 gegen 34,3 Prozent 23 .

10.11.2008: Aus Anlas des 13. Jahrestages der Ermordung Yitzhak Rabins hält Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert auf dem Herzl-Berg-Friedhof in Jerusalem erneut 24 eine politisch höchst beachtenswerte Rede, in der er sich zu den „schmerzhaften Fragen“ äußert, vor denen Israel stehe: Je näher wir dem Moment der Wahrheit kommen, führt er aus, desto mehr neigen wir dazu, der Realität nicht ins Auge sehen zu wollen, und je mehr wir dazu neigen, unseren Kopf abzuwenden und Entscheidungen zu treffen, desto schmerzhafter und quälender werden sie. Rabin habe seinen politschen Weg ohne Illusionen und falsche Hoffnungen eingeschlagen. Er habe verstanden, was mehr und mehr Menschen heute bereit sind, mit der notwendigen Vorsicht und dem Berwusstsein für Risiken und Schwierigkeiten zu akzeptieren: Wenn der Staat Israel seinen jüdischen und demokratischen Charakter bewahren wolle, müsse er bereit sein, Teile der Heimat aufzugeben, von denen seine Menschen geträumt, nach denen sie sich gesehnt und seit Generationen gebetet hätten. Israel müsse die arabischen Stadtviertel in Jerusalem aufgeben und in jenes Gebiet zurückkehren, das unter Berücksichtigung der Realitäten – Olmert spielt auf den von der „Genfer Initiative“ vorgelegten Gebietsaustausch an – den Staat bis 1967 ausmachte. Israel müsse in die ihm vertrauten Orte in Galiläa und im Negev zurückkehren, dort Aufbauarbeit leisten und das gewaltige Potential seines Volkes nutzen – also eine neue Form des Zionismus entwickeln, die realistisch, nüchtern, verantwortlich und kühn sei. Wenn es dazu nicht fähig sei, werde in den palästinensischen Gebiete ein radikales Regime die Kontrolle übernehmen, das den politischen Prozess ablehne, und der Staat Israel werde die Chance verspielen, die Welt von der Idee von zwei Staaten zu überzeugen 25 . www.reiner-bernstein.de 27 – Chronologie 2008

Die Ansprache Olmerts löst bei der politischen Rechten und bei Ehud Barak, dem Vorsitzenden der Arbeitspartei, heftige Reaktionen.

09.11.2008: Das „Nahost-Quartett“ aus USA, EU, Russland und UN (Condoleezza Rice, Bernard Kouchner, Javier Solana, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, Sergej Lawrow, Ban Ki-moon) und dem „Quartett“- Sonderbotschafter Tony Blair trifft sich im ägyptischen Badeort Sharm el-Sheikh, um die Ergebnisse der Vereinbarungen in Annapolis vor einem Jahr Revue passieren zu lassen 26 . Im Anschluss an ihr Treffen mit den Anwesenden erklärt Israels Außenministerin Tsipi Livni, dass in den Gesprächen mit den Palästinensern Fortschritte erzielt worden seien und dass Israel die Schaffung eines palästinensischen Staates anerkenne, wenn er den Terrorismus nicht begünstige.

In der wöchentlichen Kabinettssitzung gedenkt Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert des 13. Jahrestages der Ermordung Yitzhak Rabins am Abend des 4. November 1995 und drückt seine Sorge aus, dass sich die hetzerische Stimmung, die für die Ermordung maßgeblich war, sich in der Zwischenzeit nicht geändert habe.

In einem Gastbeitrag für „Haaretz” hält Ari Shavit ein Plädoyer für den Juristen und Politikwissenschaftler Dov Khenin, der sich bei den bevorstehenden Kommunalwahlen um das Amt des Bürgermeisters in Tel Aviv bewirbt. Sein Gegenspieler ist der seit 1998 als Bürgermeister amtierende Historiker Ron Huldai, der sich als Vertreter der Liste „Ein Tel Aviv bewirbt. Khenin, der für die kommunistische „Demokratische Front für Frieden und Gleichberechtigung („Chadash)““ in der Knesset sitzt, tritt für die Liste „Eine Stadt für uns alle“ an, die ein Anlass zu nationalem Stolz sei, so Shavit. Er sei ein außergewöhnlicher Parlamentarier, der eine authentische politische Bewegung unter Beteiligung von www.reiner-bernstein.de 28 – Chronologie 2008

Umweltaktivisten, jungen Leuten und Bürgerinitiativen mit linken und rechten politischen Überzeugungen repräsentiere. Die gegen Khenin gerichtete Schmutzkampagne erinnere an die Gesinnungsverfolgungen der McCarthy-Arä in Amerika. Doch was mit der Wahl von Barack Obama in den USA geschehen sei, müsse auch in Israel möglich sein. „Wir verdienen ein Tel Aviv als Stadt für uns alle“, schließt Shavit seinen Beitrag. – Bei den Kommunalwahlen in Jerusalem kandidieren Meir Porush („United Torah Judaism“, 57 Jahre)), der parteipolitisch unabhängige Nir Barkat (49 Jahre), der aus Russland eingewanderte Geschäftsmann Arkadi Gaydamek (56 Jahre) und der für die „Grünen“ antretene Journalist Dan Biron (68 Jahre). Für die Wahlen am 11. November haben die Arbeitspartei und der „Likud“ keinen eigenen Kandidaten nominiert.

08.11.2008: Der Chef der palästinensischen Administration im Gazastreifen, Ismail Haniyeh, erklärt gegenüber elf europäischen Parlamentariern aus Großbritannien, Irland, der Schweiz und Italien unter Leitung von Baron Nazir Achmed, einen Mitglied des britischen Oberhauses, seine Bereitschaft zur Gründung des palästinensischen Staates in den Grenzen von 1967 27 . Nach einem Bericht von Amira Hass in „Haaretz“ am 9. November bietet er Israel gleichzeitig einen langfristigen Waffenstillstand an.

06.11.2008: Die „Jerusalem Post” meldet, dass der Generalsekretär von „”, Yariv Oppenheimer, sich bei der Arbeitspartei um einen Parlamentssitz bemühen will und sich von seiner Tätigkeit bei der Friedensbewegung beurlauben lässt 28 . Beim „Likud“ bewirbt sich nach eigenen Worten der frühere Finanzminister Dan Meridor um einen Listenplatz. Die parteiinternen Wahlen um die Litenplätze sollen am 8. Dezember stattfinden. www.reiner-bernstein.de 29 – Chronologie 2008

05.11.2008: Israel und die Palästinenser begrüßen die Wahl des demokratischen Bewerbers Barack Hussein Obama zum 44. Präsidenten der USA. Israels Präsident Shimon Peres bezeichnet ihn in einer Erklärung als „jung, frisch, vielversprechend [und] einen Wandel repräsentierend und dafür eintretend.“ Kein weißer Mann könne künftig Überlegenheit beanspruchen, kein schwarzer Mann mehr Diskriminierung spüren. Peres erinnert daran, dass er Obama bei dessen Besuch in Jerusalem im Juli 2007 auf Befragen geraten habe, ein „hervorragender Präsident der Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika“ zu werden 29 . Außenministerin Tsipi Livni erwartet „die enge strategische Kooperation mit der neuen Administration, mit dem Präsidenten und dem Kongress“. Der palästinensische Chefdiplomat Saeb Erakat bringt die Hoffnung zum Ausdruck, dass der neue Präsident die USA ohne Verzug in die Friedensgespräche einbinden werde.

04.11.2008: Die seit Juni andauernde Waffenruhe zwischen Israel und „Hamas“ geht zu Ende. Beide Seiten beschuldigen sich, dafür die Verantwortung zu tragen.

Während einer Besichtigungstour durch den Norden Israels betont Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert, dass seine Regierung nicht auf den neuen US-Präsidenten und und seine Nahost-Politik warten könne. Israels Probleme bedürften „einer schnellen Lösung, einer dringenden Antwort, und jeder Tag, der ohne eine Lösung verstreicht, wird nicht wiederkehren [und] ist verloren“. Die Regierung habe jedes Recht, sich der offenen Probleme anzunehmen. In der arabisch bewohnten Stadt Shfaram betont Olmert, dass auch die nichtjüdische Bevölkerung Opfer des zweiten Libanon-Krieges im Sommer 2006 gewesen und Teil der Rehabilitation sei. www.reiner-bernstein.de 30 – Chronologie 2008

„Haaretz“ berichtet, dass nach einer Intervention der israelischen „Association for Civil Rights“ viele tausend palästinensische Stadtbürger Jerusalems, die ohne Genehmigung gebaut haben, offiziell an das Wasserversorgungsnetz angeschlossen werden sollen. Bisher seien das unter den rund 250.000 Palästinensern lediglich 85.00 Personen in 16.000 Wohneinheiten.

In den USA siegt der demokratische Präsidentschaftskandidat Barack Obama über seinen republikanischen Konkurrenten John McCain. Obama erhält von seiten der jüdischen Wähler 78 Prozent der Stimmen.

03./04.11.2008: Unter Beteiligung von Staatssekretär Günter Gloser rufen die Außenminister der 27 EU-Mitglieder und der 16 Anrainer im östlichen, südlichen und westlichen Mittelmeer – einschließlich der Arabischen Liga (ohne Stimmrecht), aber ohne Libyen – auf ihre Tagung zur euro-mediterranen Zusammenarbeit in Marseille den künftigen US-Präsidenten in einem 5-Punkte-Programm zur gemeinsamen Lösung der großen weltpolitischen Probleme auf, zu denen sie den Nahostkonflikt rechnen. Der Zusammenschluss führt künftig den Namen „Mittelmeerunion“. Für die kommenden zwei Jahre liegt der Vorsitz bei Ägypten. Sitz des Sekretariats soll Barcelona sein. Ihr Leiter ist noch nicht bestimmt worden, doch sollen zu den fünf stellvertretenden Generalsekretären ein Israeli und ein Palästinenser gehören.

02.11.2008: Zu Beginn der wöchentlichen Kabinettssitzung erklärt Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert, „dass die überwältigende Mehrheit der Bewohner in Judäa und Samaria dort rechtmäßig lebt“. Der Angriff auf Soldaten und ihre Offiziere sei nicht hinnehmbar, heißt es im Protokoll der Kabinettssitzung. Das Kabinett beschließt, bei ihren www.reiner-bernstein.de 31 – Chronologie 2008

Bauanträgen für „angemessene und wirkungsvolle Rückmeldungen“ im Rahmen der internationalen Verpflichtungen Israels zu sorgen 30 .

Der Sohn des früheren Ministerpräsidenten Menachem Begin, der Geologe Benjamin Begin, kündigt die Rückkehr in den „Likud“ an. Nach dem Hebron-Protokoll vom Januar 1997, das der damalige Ministerpräsident Benjamin Netanyahu unterschrieb, war Begin aus Protest 1999 aus der Politik ausgeschieden. Netanyahu begrüßt seine jetzige Entscheidung. In einem langen Interview mit Ari Shavit, das „Haaretz“ am 2. Januar 2009 veröffentlicht und noch vor dem Beginn der Operation „Gegossenes Blei (Cast Lead)“ am 27. Dezember aufgenommen worden ist, erkennt Begin die Führungsrolle von Netayahu in der Partei an („der Erste unter Gleichen“) und übt scharfe Kritik an der politisch „würdelosen Gruppe“ unter dem Namen „Kadima“ mit Tsipi Livni an der Spitze. Eine Außenministerin, die öffentlich das Ausscheiden des amtierenden Ministerpräsidenten (Ehud Olmert) gefordert habe und dennoch unter ihm weiter im Amt verbleibe, widerspreche allen demokratischen Normen. Der Rückzug aus dem Gazastreifen 2005 sei ein „Irrsinn“ und verantwortungslos gewesen. Jeder aufgegebene Teil des Landes Israel werde zur Terroristenbasis gegen Israels Bürger. Außerdem gebe es eine Bindung der Juden an ihr Land, an die Quellen ihrer Kultur und an die Orte, an denen die menschlichen Werte in der prophetischen Vision entstanden seien. Deshalb stimme er der Evakuierung weiterer Siedlungen nicht zu. Die Zweistaatenlösung sei ein Slogan. Israel müsse so weit wie möglich für das Wohlergehen seiner Nachbarn sorgen, und die Araber in Samaria, Judäa und Gaza müssten innerhalb einer Autonomie für ihre eigenen Angelegenheiten die Zuständigkeit erhalten, doch die Sicherheitsbelange müssten bei Israel liegen. Mit Syrien befürwort Begin direkte Verhandlungen, bei denen sich zeigen werde, wie sehr die Führung in Damaskus zu Kompromissen bereit sei.

Nach israelischen Medienberichten naht das Ende des organisatorischen und parlamentarischen Zusammenschlusses der www.reiner-bernstein.de 32 – Chronologie 2008

Parteien „Nationale Union“ und „Nationalreligiöse Patei (NRP)“. Am 3. November kündigen die an der Auflösung der „Nationalen Union“ und der NRP Beteiligten die Gründung einer neuen Partei an, ohne sich auf ihren Namen festzulegen. Sie werde sich programmatisch nicht länger auf die Schaffung eines „Groß-Israel“ festlegen. Der Kampf gelte künftig der religiösen Erziehung und der jüdischen Identität, also „der Seele des Staates“. Für einen ihrer Repräsentanten, den Abgeordneten Zvi Hendel, der innerhalb der bisherigen Fraktionsgemeinschaft die Liste „Tekuma (Wiedergeburt)“ vertrat, werde sich die neue Partei „die Extremisten vom Hals halten“: „Wir wollen keine Leute, die sich freuen, wenn arabisches Blut vergossen wird, oder die tanzen, wenn eine jüdische Siedlung aufgelöst wird“, erklärt Hendel. Für den für die Liste „Moledet (Heimat)“ in der Knesset sitzenden Benjamin Elon ist „Israels Hauptproblem nicht das der Grenzen oder der Siedlungen, sondern das der Erziehung, der Werte und der jüdischen Identität“.

Oktober 2008

29.10.2008: Der Vorsitzende der Partei „Israel Beiteinu (Unser Haus Israel)“ kritisiert den ägyptischen Präsidenten Hosni Mubarak mit den Worten, er solle zur Hölle fahren, wenn er Israel nicht besuchen wolle. Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert entschuldigt sich in einem Telefonat bei Mubarak für die Beleidigung. AuchPräsident Shimon Peres gibt eine Erklärung fes Bedauerns ab.

Bundesaußenminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier protestiert gegen die Verurteilung von zwölf Mitgliedern der syrischen Bürgerrechtsbewegung „Nationalversammlung der Damaskus- Erklärung“ zu zweieinhalb Jahren Gefängnis. Aus humanitären Gründen habe sich die Bundesregierung in der Vergangenheit www.reiner-bernstein.de 33 – Chronologie 2008 mehrfach für die Inhaftierten eingesetzt und werde dies auch in Zukunft tun.

Mehrere Teile des Gazastreifens werden durch schwere Regenstürme heimgesucht. Sie unterbrechen Verkehrswege und beeinträchtigen nachhaltig die Versorgung der Bevölkerung. Der Wasserspiegel des Sees Genzareth steigt leicht an.

28.10.2008: Unter Berufung auf Regierungskreise meldet die „Jerusalem Post”, dass das Schiff „Befreit Gaza“, das am 27. Oktober in Zypern abgelegt hat, diesmal nicht die Erlaubnis erhalten soll, vor Gaza- Stadt zu ankern. Das Verbot wird damit begründet, dass „Hamas“ die erste Fahrt im August für ihre Propagandazwecke missbraucht habe. Zu den 26 Passagieren des Schiffes gehören auch diesmal die irische Trägerin des Friedensnobelpreises von 1976, Mairead Maguire, der Knesset-Abgeordnete Jamal Zahalka und der Abgeordnete des „Palestinian Legislative Council“ Mustafa Barghouti. Bei einer Protestaktion in der Westbank war Maguire, die zur „Community of Peace People“ gehörte und sich um die Beendigung des Konflikts in Ulster bemühte, im April 2007 von israelischen Soldaten durch Schüsse am Bein verletzt worden. Als das Schiff entgegen der israelischen Ankündigung dennoch am 29. Oktober vor Gaza ankert, befindet sich Zahalka nicht unter den amerikanischen und italienischen Passagieen sowie Vertretern der internationalen Presse. Die israelische Kriegsmarine interveniert nicht, nach Medienberichten soll sich Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert eingeschaltet haben.

Der US-amerikanische Generalkonsul in Jerusalem, Jacob Wallace 31 , bezeichnet die Angriffe jüdischer Siedler auf palästinensische Bauern als nicht hinnehmbar. Die Administration in Washington habe bei der israelischen Regierung entsprechend interveniert. www.reiner-bernstein.de 34 – Chronologie 2008

In der Nacht zum 29. Oktober kündigt Yossi Beilin seinen Rückzug aus der Politik an, um künftig im Privatsektor zu arbeiten. Ohne künftig der Knesset anzugehören, wolle er sich weiterhin für die Ideen der „Genfer Initiative“ einsetzen. Die Botschaft des Staates Israel in Berlin würdigt Beilin in ihrer Homepage mit einem eigenen redaktionellen Beitrag und bezeichnet ihn als Mitinitiator der „’Genfer’ Friedensinitiative“, wofür er sich viele Feinde auf der politischen Rechten eingehandelt habe. Beilins Nachfolgerin im Parlament wird die renommierte Zvia Greenfield. Greenfield, selbst orthodox, bemüht sich seit langem darum, dass nicht orthodox vorgenommene Konversionen in Israel anerkannt werden. Deshalb sorgte sie dafür, dass im Wahlprogramm 2006 von „Meretz/Yachad“ die Formulierung aufgenommen wurde: „Das Kind eines jüdischen Vaters oder einer jüdischen Mutter wird als Jude anerkannt. Außerdem wird ein Konvertit, der sich dem jüdischen Volk durch ein orthodoxes oder nicht-orthodoxes Verfahren angeschlossen hat, als Jude anerkannt.“ – Beilin habe wie wenige andere zum Friedensprozess und seiner öffentlichen Verankerung beigetragen, schreibt „Haaretz“ am 3. November in einem Kommentar. In einer Sondersitzung der Knesset zu Ehren Beilins am selben Tag beklagt sich Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert darüber, dass es in der israelischen Politik keine „Kultur des Müßiggangs“ gebe. „Ich werde Ihnen folgen“, fährt Ehud an Beilin gewandt, ironisch fort. Wer einmal wie er die Politik aufgegeben habe, erklärt Verteidigungsminister Ehud Barak, könne es ohne sie draußen nicht aushalten. Der Abgeordnete Achmed Tibi rühmt in seiner Ansprache, dass Beilin die Wandlung vom „Pudel des Shimon Peres“ zum „wahren Rottweiler“ geschafft habe. Dagegen spricht der zur extremen Siedlerszene gehörende Israel Harel in einem Gastbeitrag für „Haaretz“ Beilin die intellektuelle Integrität ab und wirft ihm vor, mit seinen zahlreichen Friedensplänen Peres und an der kurzen Leine geführt zu haben, nicht umgekehrt. Selbst Ariel Sharon habe zuletzt den Pfad Beilins eingeschlagen. Alle Israelis seien seine Pudel geworden. www.reiner-bernstein.de 35 – Chronologie 2008

27.10.2008: Vor der Knesset begründet Präsident Shimon Peres nach Konsultationen mit den Parteien seine Entscheidung, dem Antrag von „Kadima“ zur Ausschreibung von Neuwahlen zu entsprechen, bevor er sich mit der allgemeinen politischen Lage in Israel und seinem Umfeld widmet. Dabei begrüßt er ausdrücklich die Arabische Friedensinitiative von 2002/2008. Im Widersprucb dazu bedrohe die „fanatische Führung im Iran“ die ganze Welt. Im Hinblick auf die Innenpolitik beklagt Peres, dass die Hälfte der jungen Generation keine ausreichende Bildung habe, dass ein Drittel der Bevölkerung einer schlechtbezahlten Arbeit nachgehen müsse und dass zwei Drittel des Landes unangemessen entwickelt seien. Die religiöse jüdische Bevölkerung müsse dazu ermutigt werden, außer zu beten auch zu arbeiten. Die Staatsbürger würden sich in Abscheu von der Gewalt einer kleinen Gruppe aus der Siedlerstadt Kiryat Arba (bei Hebron) – Anfang 2006 lebten dort 6.600 Menschen – gegen israelische Soldaten abwenden. Abschließend kommt Peres auf seine „Friedenstal-Vision“ entlang der Afrkanischen Senke zwischen dem Katzrin-Fluss im Norden und Sharm el-Sheikh im Süden zurück, die viele Millionen neuer Arbeitsplätze im Tourismus, der Solarindustrie und in Entsalzungsanlagen schaffen werde. Auf die Lage der palästinensischen Bevölkerung in der Westbank, in Ost- Jerusalem und im Gazastreifen geht der Präsident nicht ein 32 . Anschließend trägt Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert einen knappen Rechenschaftsbericht für seine Amtszeit vor, weist aber darauf hin, dass seine Regierung bis zur Bildung eines neuen Kabinetts politisch handlungsfähig sei 33 . Am 28. Oktober erklärt Peres beim Festakt zum zehnjährigen Bestehen des nach ihm benannten „Shimon Peres Center for Peace“, das von Ron Pundak geleitet wird, dass Israel – womit er die vorstaatliche Phase einschließt – iin den vergangenen hundert Jahren dem Frieden nie so nahe gewesen sei. Am 30. Oktober wirft der Jerusalemer Soziologe Meron Benvenisti in „Haaretz“ die Frage auf, welche politischen Ergebnisse Einrichtungen wie das „Center“ für den Frieden erbracht haben, und www.reiner-bernstein.de 36 – Chronologie 2008 kommt zum Ergebnis, dass die von Peres initiierten Osloer Vereinbarungen auf die rechtsförmige Institutionalisierung des Status quo, der Besatzung, und auf die Etablierung einer virtuellen Palästinensische Behörde hinausgelaufen seien. Die Arbeit des „Center“ diene praktisch dem Training, die palästinensische Bevölkerung pädagogisch dauerhaft auf das Überleben unter Bedingungen der Willkür vorzubereiten; Benvenisti bezeichnet diesen Ansatz als „Patronatskolonialismus“. Dementsprechend verzichte das „Center“ auf die Veröffentlichung von Berichten zur katrastrophalen ökonomischen Lage der Palästinenser und warnt nicht vor der Verantwortung Israels für diese Situation. Das für fünfzehn Millionen US-Dollar errichtete neue „Peres Peace House“ in Jaffa stehe in krassem Widerspruch zur Armut der dort wohnenden arabischen Bevölkerung, und seine Fassade blicke auf das Meer nach Westen, als ob von dort der Frieden komme 34 .

26.10.2008: Nachdem auch die kleinen Parteien „United Thora Judaism“ und die „Pensionistenpartei“ ihr eine Absage erteilt haben, informiert Tsipi Livni Präsident Shimon Peres über das bisherige Scheitern ihrer Bemühungen, eine Koalitionsregierung zu bilden, und schlägt die Ausschreibung von Neuwahlen vor. In einem Gespräch mit „Haaretz“ erklärt sie, dass sie nicht gewillt sei, sich diplomatisch oder in Haushaltsfragen – gemeint sind die finanziellen Forderungen der Partei der „Sefardischen Thorawächter (Shas)“ – erpressen zu lassen. Seit 1992 ist es die sechste Neuwahl in sechzehn Jahren (1992: Shamir / Rabin; 1996: Peres / Netanyahu; 1999: Netanyahu / Barak; 2001: Sharon / Barak; 2006: Sharon / Peretz; 2009: Livni / Netanyahu). Die Wahlen könnten im Februar oder März 2009 stattfinden 35 . Bis dahin bleibt Ehud Olmert geschäftsführend im Amt. Israelische Kommentatoren vermuten, dass der Ministerpräsident bis zum Frühjahr 2009 – also bis zur Bildung einer neuen Regierung – die Zeit nutzen werde, sich politisch unentbehrlich zu machen. www.reiner-bernstein.de 37 – Chronologie 2008

Im Leitartikel „Neuwahl, aber welche?“ der Tageszeitung „Die Welt“ wirft Michael Borgstede der gescheiterten Außenministerin am 28. Oktober vor, die Koalitionsverhandlungen naiv und fahrlässig geführt zu haben, weil sie wochenlang nur mit der Arbeitspartei verhandelt und die anderen Parteien links liegen gelassen und statt dessen dem geistlichen Oberhaupt von „Shas“, Rabbiner Ovadia Josef, einen Besuch abgestattet habe. Tsipi Livni, so Borgstede, habe wohl nicht so recht verstanden, wie Politik in Israel funktioniert. „Das aber ist keine gute Voraussetzung für den Aufstieg an die Regierungsspitze. Seit noch nicht einmal zehn Jahren ist Livni in der Politik, sie hat einen atemberaubenden Aufstieg hinter sich, und selbst ihre Feinde erkennen ihr politisches Talent an. Sie hat es aber auch geschafft, in nicht weniger als sieben Ministerämtern so gut wie keine Spuren zu hinterlassen. Daran ist das rastlose politische System Israels nur zum Teil schuld. Denn in Wahrheit hat bisher wenig politisches Profil bewiesen, ja, vielleicht ist gerade diese Undefinierbarkeit für ihre Beliebtheit verantwortlich. Es gehört – nicht nur in Israel – zum Alltag der Politik, dem Wähler nicht ganz reinen Wein einzuschenken. Doch Livni hat die programmatische Unschärfe zum Prinzip erhoben. Entweder, so fragt man sich, hat sie gar keinen Plan, oder sie hat Angst, dass eine klare Positionierung ihr schaden könnte. Im ersten Fall ist ihr nun Recht widerfahren. Im zweiten Fall bleibt ihr noch eine Chance.“

Der israelische Generalstaatsanwalt Menachem Mazouz kündigt eine Untersuchung gegen Siedler an, die in der Nähe von Hebron einen moslemischen Friedhof geschändet haben, über achtzig palästinensische Autos beschädigten und israelische Soldaten angriffen, die das Außenlager („outpost“) „Gestüt Federman“ einer nahe gelegenen Siedlung räumen wollten.

US-amerikanische Soldaten einer Eliteeinheit rücken mit Hubschraubern auf ein syrisches Dorf in der Nähe der Grenze zu Irak vor, wobei acht Zivilisten ums Leben kommen. Der Angriff habe einem Führer von „al-Quaida“ gegolten, der für das Einschleusen www.reiner-bernstein.de 38 – Chronologie 2008 ausländischer Kämpfer von Syrien aus verantwortlich sei, heißt es zur Begründung. Seit langem wirft Washington Syrien vor, seine Grenze zu Irak nicht hinreichend zu sichern. Hans-Christian Rößler zitiert am 28. Oktober in der „Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung“ den Sprecher des in Damaskus tätigen unabhängigen Zentrums für Orient-Studien mit den Worten, dass es unmöglich sei, die sechshundert Kilometer lange Grenze vollständig abzuriegeln. Der syrische Außenminister Walid Muallem bezeichnet von London aus den Angriff als eine „terroristische Aggression“ und weist die amerikanische Begründung als unzutreffend zurück. Frankreich und Russland distanzieren sich von den USA. Am 28. Oktober schließt Syrien die amerikanische Schule und das amerikanische Kulturzentrum in Damaskus. Vermutungen werden laut, dass – entgegen den Bemühungen von Außenministerin Condoleezza Rice um Entspannung der Beziehungen zu Damaskus – das Weiße Haus daran interessiert sein könnte, dem voraussichtlichen Gewinner der Präsidentschaftswahlen am 4. November, dem Demokraten Barack Obama, ein schweres Erbe zu hinterlassen. Am 03. November meldet die in Riyadh erscheinende englischsprachige „Saudi Gazette“, dass die irakische Regierung an der Grenze zu Syrien die Polizeikräfte verstärkt habe, um die Infiltration von unerwünschten Personen zu verhindern.

25.10.2008: Präsident Machmud Abbas sagt das für den 27. Oktober mit dem amtierenden Ministerpräsidenten Ehud Olmert geplante Treffen mit der Begründung ab, angesichts der schwierigen Regierungsbildung in Israel wolle er nicht den Verdacht erregen, sich in dessen innere Angelegenheiten einzumischen.

Nachdem die Palästinensische Autonomiebehörde im September die palästinensischen Stadtbürger Jerusalem zum Boykott der Kommunalwahlen im November aufgerufen hat, wiederholen der von der Autonomiebehörde ernannte religiöse Richter („Sheikh“) Taysir www.reiner-bernstein.de 39 – Chronologie 2008

Tamimi und der Vorsitzende des Obersten Islamischen Gerichts in Jerusalem, Sheikh Ikrima Sabri, aus religiösen und nationalen Gründen das Verbot der Teilnahme an den Wahlen und des Verkaufs von Grundstücken an Juden. Zwei „Fatah“-Abgeordnete aus Jerusalem schließen sich dem Aufruf an. Im Gegensatz dazu wird innerhalb der Autonomiebehörde über den politischen Nutzen des Boykotts gestritten. Außerdem ermutigt Hanna Siniora, gemeinsam mit Gershon Baskin Vorsitzender des „Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information (IPCRI)“, die palästinensische Bevölkerung zur Teilnahme, um die jüdische Besiedlung und die Zerstörung arabischer Häuser in der Stadt zu beenden.

24.10.2008: Die „Sefardischen Thorawächter (Shas)“ entscheiden, dass gemäß dem Votum des „Rates der Thora-Weisen“ die Partei nicht in die Regierung von Tsipi Livni eintreten wird. Ein Vertrauter Livnis erklärt am 25. September, „Shas“ habe die Verhandlungen abgebrochen, nachdem der „Likud“-Vorsitzende Benjamin Netanyahu der Partei angeboten habe, die verlangten Mittel um das Doppelte zu erhöhen. Der frühere Vorsitzende von „Meretz“, , mockiert sich am 27. Oktober in „Haaretz“ darüber, dass einem 88jährigen „Ayatollah“ – gemeint ist der Mentor der „Sefardischen Thorawächter (Shas)“, Rav Ovadia Josef – die Entscheidung über das Schicksal einer Regierung eingeräumt werde. Der Wirtschaftsredakteur von „Haaretz“, Nehemia Strasler, weist am 28. Oktober darauf hin, dass Livni der Partei 600 Millionen Neue Shekel (~ 123 Millionen Euro) als Kinderzulagen und 350 Millionen Neue Shekel (für ~ 72 Millionen Euro) für religiöse Hochschulen zugesagt habe; die Partei brauche das Geld dringend, weil die großzügigen Spenden aus den USA zusammengeschmolzen seien. Ihr Vorsitzenden Eli Yishai hätte Livni davon überzeugen können, dass das Geld gut angelegt sei, wenn er ihr versprochen hätte, es für die die Anhebung der Qualität des naturwissenschaftlichen und des Fremdsprachen-Unterrichts im religiösen Schulsystem einzusetzen. www.reiner-bernstein.de 40 – Chronologie 2008

23.10.2008: Im Hauptkommentar vermutet „Haaretz“, dass Tsipi Livni im Zuge ihrer Bemühungen um die Regierungsbildung vermutlich zunächst nur auf sechzig der 120 Mandate in der Knesset zurückgreifen könne, wenn die „Sefardischen Thorawächter (Shas)“ weiter auf ihren Bedingungen bestehen, für ihre Klientel finanzielle Zusagen zu erhalten 36 . Der Kommentator vermutet, dass „Meretz“ die neue Regierung von außen unterstützen würde, wenn Livni den Friedensprozess mit dem Ziel eines Vertrages vorantreibt, sie jedoch aus der Opposition angreifen wolle, wenn sich die Ministerpräsidentin lediglich auf die Fortsetzung des Verhandlungsprozesses (mit der Absicht einer Prinzipienerklärung) konzentriere. Außerdem könne „Meretz“ als Teil der Koalition im Falle von Neuwahlen nicht vor ihre Wähler treten, wenn Daniel Friedmann weiter im Amt verbleibt, weil der Justizminister in den vergangenen zwei Jahren das Rechtssystem und vor allem den Status des Obersten Gerichts durch den Versuch ihrer Politisierung erheblich beschädigt habe, so dass die Rechtsfindung und die Demokratie in den Augen der Öffentlichkeit schweren Schaden genommen hätten. Nur wenn „Meretz“ das Justizministerium erhalte – unter Ministerpräsident Ehud Barak (1999 – 2001) lag es in den Händen von Yossi Beilin –, sei der Regierungseintritt der Partei aus eigenem Interesse gerechtfertigt.

Nach den „Barkan Wineries” 37 verlegt nach einer Meldung des israelischen Armeerundfunks auch eine schwedische Metallverarbeitungsfirma ihren Betrieb aus der Westbank nach Israel.

Im Interview mit „Haaretz“ führt Dennis Ross aus, dass der US- demokratische Präsidentschaftskandidat Barack Obama das Verhältnis zu Israel unter zwei Aspekten bewerte: die gemeinsamen Werte zwischen beiden Staaten und die Bedrohung Israels durch www.reiner-bernstein.de 41 – Chronologie 2008

Iran, die auch eine Bedrohung der USA sei. In die Befassung mit dem israelisch-palästinensischen Konflikt werde Obama ohne Illusionen gehen: Je länger die USA beim Konflikt an der Seitenlinie bleiben, desto stärker dürfte „Hamas“ werden. Nur wenn „Hamas“ Israel anerkenne, werde Obama zu Gesprächen bereit sein. Ross, der von der Zeitung als möglicher nächster US-Außenminister vorgestellt wird, zeigt sich „vorsichtig optimistisch“, dass Obama am 04. November die Wahl gewinnen wird.

22.10.2008: Nach einem Bericht des rechtspolitischen Redakteurs von „Haaretz” Yoav Stern zitiert eine irakische Website diplomatische Kreise in Beirut, dass in der vergangenen Woche auf den Generalsekretär von „Hisbollah“ Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah ein Giftanschlag verübt worden sei. Nasrallahs Leben sei von iranischen Ärzten gerettet worden. „Hisbollah“-Quellen dementieren den Anschlag. Am 24. August bezeichnet Nasrallah die Attentatsmeldung in der TV-Station „Al- Manar (Der Leuchtturm)“ der „Hisbollah“ als Teil der „psychologischen Kriegsführung“.

20.10.2008: Nach einem Bericht der hebräischen Internet-Ausgabe von „Yediot Acharonot“ bestätigt der palästinensische Präsident Machmud Abbas gegenüber Autoren in , dass ihm Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert die Rückgabe „fast“ aller palästinensischer Gebiete einschließlich Ost-Jerusalem zugesagt habe, ohne „fast“ zu definieren. Beide wollen sich am 27. Oktober voraussichtlich zum letzten Mal in der Amtszeit Olmerts treffen.

19.10.2008: Nach einem Bericht der Palästinensischen Nachrichtenagentur „Ma’an“ hat die ägyptische Regierung die rivalisierenden www.reiner-bernstein.de 42 – Chronologie 2008 palästinensischen Fraktionen für den 9. November zu Versöhnungsgesprächen nach Kairo eingeladen. In der Präambel der Einladung werden die Prinzipien der „nationalen Versöhnung“ gemäß der Vereinbarung vom März 2005 38 , die „nationale, geographische und politische Einheit“ der palästinensischen Gebiete, die Schaffung von demokratischen Verfahrensweisen in der neu zu bildenden Regierung sowie die „Heiligkeit des palästinensischen Blutes und des Widerstandes“ beschworen. In dem 4-Punkte-Programm wird die nächste Regierung aufgefordert, die Blockade des Gazastreifens mit dem Ziel der Normalisierung des Lebens zu beenden, gleichzeitig Parlaments- und Präsidentschaftswahlen abzuhalten, die PLO zu reformieren sowie die PLO in die Lage zu versetzen, die Endstatus-Verhandlungen mit Israel gemäß den nationalen Zielen zu führen.

Der ehemalige Sicherheitschef Saudi-Arabiens, Turki al-Saud, bestätigt bei einer Konferenz der Londoner „Oxford Research Group“ die Gültigkeit des arabischen Friedensplans von 2002/2008. Israels amtierender Verteidigungsminister Ehud Barak zeigt sich in einem Interview interessiert und plädiert für ein umfassendes Friedensabkommen in der Region. Die politischen Korrespondenten von „Haaretz“, Aluf Benn und Barak Ravid, erinnern am 29. Oktober daran, dass in Israel bisher nur die Leute der „Genfer Initiative“ und die Linke den arabischen Friedensplan unterstützt hätten. Beim Treffen mit dem ägyptischen Präsidenten Hosni Mubarak in Sharm el-Sheikh am 23. August lobt Israels Präsident Shimon Peres die von Saudi-Arabien ausgegangene Friedensinitiative.

18./19.10.2008: Der an der George Washington University in Washington, D.C., lehrende Politologe Francis Fukuyama, Autor des unter dem Eindruck der Implosion der Sowjetunion geschriebenen und vielbeachteten Buches „Das Ende der Geschichte“ warnt im Interview mit der „Süddeutschen Zeitung“ vor der IIlusion, dass www.reiner-bernstein.de 43 – Chronologie 2008

Barack Obama im Falle seiner Wahl zum US-Präsidenten die internationalen Organisationen in die Regelung des israelisch- palästinensischen Konfliktes stärker einbeziehen werde.

15.10.2008: Der syrische Außenminister Walid Muallem und sein libanesischer Amtskollege Fawzi Salukh unterzeichnen in Damaskus eine gemeinsame Erklärung, mit der sie die erstmalige Aufnahme diplomatischer Beziehungen bekanntgeben. Der Leiter der Nahostabteilung im US-State Department Robert Welch erklärt am 22. Oktober, dass Washington nach wie vor keinen Anlass habe, die Isolierung Syriens zu beenden.

Im Vorfeld der Sitzung des europäisch-israelischen Unterausschusses zum politischen Dialog und zur Zusammenarbeit am 28. Oktober appellieren die Präsidenten des „Euro- Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN)“ und der „International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)“ Kamel Jendoubi und Souhayr Belhassen in einem Brief an den französischen Außenminister Bernard Kouchner (als gegenwärtigen EU- Ratspräsidenten) und an die EU-Kommission, die Verbesserung der Menschenrechte in den Mittelpunkt ihrer Gespräche zu rücken: „We call upon the EU to condition any further upgrading of bilateral relations with Israel on Israel’s respect for international human rights and humanitarian law and concrete improvement of the human right situation in Israel and the OPT [Occupied Palestinian Territories]“, heißt es in dem Brief. Die Schaffung eines Unterausschusses für Menschenrechte mit einer ersten Sitzung vor Jahresende 2008 solle eine Vorbedingung für die Aufwertung der Beziehungen zu Israel sein. Die Europäische Union solle klarmachen, dass jede gegenwärtige und künftige Zusammenarbeit und alle Maßnahmen im Rahmen der Europäischen Nachbarschaftspolitik (ENP) – so Bekämpfung des Terrorismus, Wanderungsbewegungen, wirtschaftliche Kooperation und Handel – auf beiden Seiten in www.reiner-bernstein.de 44 – Chronologie 2008

Übereinstimmung mit den Geboten der internationalen Menschenrechte stehen müssten. Gleiches gelte für die Menschenrechtslage im Gazastreifen und den fortwährenden Ausbau der israelischen Siedlungen in der Westbank.

13.10.2008: „Kadima” und Arbeitspartei verständigen sich im Grundsatz auf die Zusammenarbeit in der künftigen Koalitionsregierung. Eine entsprechende Vereinbarung unterzeichnen Tsipi Livni und Ehud Barak nach achtzehnstündigen Verhandlungen. Sollte der Koalitionsvertrag zustande kommen, würden beide Parteien nach gegenwärtigem Stand über 48 der 120 Mandate in der Knesset verfügen. Livni umwirbt außerdem die Partei der „Sefardischen Thorawächter (Shas)“ mit ihren zwölf Abgeordneten.

12.10.2008: Auf der dritten Jahreskonferenz der „American Task Force on Palestine (ATFP)“, einer Gesellschaft vorwiegend palästinensischer und arabischer US-Staatsbürger mit der Unterstützung Saudi- Arabiens, Jordaniens und Ägyptens, erklärt der palästinensische Minsiterpräsident Salam Fayyad, dass die Verhandlungen mit Israel „eine kritische Masse des positiven Wandels“ erreicht hätten, beklagt aber, dass sich die israelische Siedlungsaktivität seit der Konferenz in Annapolis Ende November 2007 beschleunigt habe. Gleichzeitig verwahrt er sich gegen eine Haltung „nichts zu tun“, die er als Defätismus bezeichnet. „When [the occupation is] viewed this way, it becomes clear that the greatest obstacle that has prevented us, , from achieving our national goals was not occupation per se or factionalism, not poverty or separation, but that deadly erosion of self-esteem and consequent loss of faith in our capacity to get things done 39 .” James Glassman, stellvertretender Staatssekretär im State Department, überbringt die schriftlichen Grüße und Wünsche von Präsident George W. Bush und rühmt die www.reiner-bernstein.de 45 – Chronologie 2008

„enorme Arbeit“ von ATFP, den Frieden durch die Schaffung eines unabhängigen und lebensfähigen palästinensischen Staates an der Seite Israels zu erreichen.

10.10.2008: „Gush Shalom (Friedensblock)” unter Leitung von Uri Avnery veröffentlicht in „Haaretz“ unter dem Eindruck der weltweiten, von den USA ausgehenden schweren Finanzmarktkrise ein Gedicht unter dem Titel „Die Zeichen an der Wand in der Wall Street“. Darin heißt es: „Alle unsere Regierungen gingen davon aus, / dass, solange die Amerikaner uns unterstützen, / wir die ganze Welt nicht beachten müssen / und die Palästinenser unterdrücken können. / Aber kein Weltreich währt ewig, / und die Botschaft steht an der Wand von Wall Street. / Der einzige Weg, / um die Sicherheit Israels zu garantieren, / ist Frieden mit den Palästinensern zu schließen und / von der ganzen arabischen Welt akzeptiert zu werden. / Dies muss so schnell getan werden, / solange wir dazu noch in der Lage sind.“

08.10.2008: Am Abend, nach Anbruch des jüdischen Versöhnungstages („Yom Kippur“), brechen in Akko schwere Unruhen zwischen arabischen und jüdischen Einwohnern aus, die auch in den folgenden Tagen andauern. Auslöser ist ein arabischer Bewohner der Altstadt gewesen, heißt es in Berichten, der um Mitternacht mit dem Auto in ein vorwiegend jüdisch bewohntes Viertel gefahren sei und dort großen Lärm verursacht habe. In der Haupteinkaufsstraße der Neustadt werden Dutzende Läden und Autos zertrümmert, während im Gegenzug jüdische Randalierer „Tod den Arabern“ rufen, während auf der Gegenseite Rufe laut werden, „die moslemische Stadt vor der Judaisierung zu retten“. Zahlreiche Personen werden verletzt. Arabische Knessetabgeordnete verurteilen das harte Vorgehen der Polizei gegen arabische Randalierer. Das für kommende Woche geplante Theaterfestival wird abgesagt. Yossi www.reiner-bernstein.de 46 – Chronologie 2008

Beilin („Meretz/Yachad“) beklagt in einer Stellungnahme, dass seit dem Gewaltausbruch zu Beginn der zweiten Intifada Ende September 2000, der innerhalb weniger Tage dreizehn Arabern – darunter einem Palästinenser aus dem Gazastreifen – das Leben kostete, der Staat nichts unternommen habe, um die Ergebnisse der damaligen Untersuchungskommission unter Vorsitz von Richter Theodor Orr umzusetzen. Der an der Universität Tel Aviv lehrende Politologe Eli Rekhess hält den jüdisch-arabischen Konflikt in Israel für schwerwiegender als den zwischen Israel und den palästinensischen Gebieten, weil für den letzteren immerhin die Möglichkeit der Trennung voneinander bestehe. Am 27. Oktober weist Yossi Alpher in dem Internet-Portal „bitterlemons“ die Behauptung zurück, dass die Unruhen in Akko allein auf das ungebührliche Verhalten des arabischen Autofahrers am „Yom Kippur“ zurückzuführen seien, denn klar sei, dass die jüdisch- arabischen Beziehungen in der Stadt seit langem „extrem problematisch“ seien. Hinzu komme, dass der israelisch- palästinensische Konflikt auf die arabischen Staatsbürger Israels radikalisierend gewirkt habe, so auch durch den Bau der „Trennungsmauern“, die beide palästinensischen Bevölkerungsteile mehr denn je voneinander trenne. Im Gegenzug würden sich jüdische Israelis, die von Grund auf die Koexistenz ablehnen, darum bemühen, in arabischen Ortschaften Fuß zu fassen und die dortige palästinensische Bevölkerung zu vertreiben. Der Vorsitzende der Partei „Die arabische Liste/Arabische Bewegung für einen Wandel“, der Knesset-Abgeordnete Achmed Tibi, weist in derselben Ausgabe darauf hin, dass die Unruhen das direkte Ergebnis der Ansiedlung von Siedler aus Hebron und anderswoher zur „Judaisierung“ Akkos sowie die damit einhergehende Vertreibung von Arabern aus der Stadt gewesen seien. Tibi fordert den Staat Israel auf, die arabische Bevölkerung als nationale Minderheit anzuerkennen.

„Human Rights Watch“ legt in Amman den Bericht „Torture and Impunity in Jordan’s Prisons: Reform Fail to Tackle Widespread Abuse” vor, in dem die internationale Menschenrechtsorganisation www.reiner-bernstein.de 47 – Chronologie 2008 auf der Basis von Interviews mit Häftlingen in den zehn jordanischen Gefängnissen die Regierung in Amman aufruft, die zur Routine gewordenen und weitverbreiteten Formen der Folter und des Missbrauchs von Gefangenen zu beenden. Bislang hätten daran auch die Reformen von König Abdullah II. vor zwei Jahren wenig geändert. Die Untersuchung von angezeigten Fällen durch die Polizei und die Gefängnisbehörden, heißt es in dem Bericht weiter, litten darunter, dass diese selbst auf die Anklagebank gehörten.

Shlomo Shamir berichtet in „Haaretz” aus einem Interview mit Edgar Bronfman, dem früheren Präsidenten des „American Jewish Congress”, dass dieser die volle jüdische Akzeptanz einer Familie verlange, auch wenn nur ein Ehepartner jüdisch ist. Geschehe dies nicht, werde in den USA die Zahl der Juden sinken, ihr Einfluss werde geringer, und die Unterstützung für Israel sei in Gefahr. Shamir fügt hinzu, dass der Statistik zufolge 48 Prozent der Juden in „Mischehen“ leben. Rund die Hälfte der US-amerikanischen Studenten, die sich selbst als Juden bezeichneten, stammten aus solchen Verbindungen, erzählt Bronfman und bekennt, dass er am 4. November Barack Obama wählen werde. In den jüdischen Gemeinden und Organisationen solle man die Haushaltsmittel besser in die Erziehung als in den Kampf gegen den Antisemitismus investieren.

06.10.2008: Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert bricht zu einem Besuch nach Moskau auf. Vor den Kabinettsmitgliedern begründet er ihn am 5. Oktober mit einer seit langem vorliegenden Einladung, der er erst jetzt Folge leisten könne. Im Mittelpunkt stehen beabsichtigte russische Waffenverkäufe an Iran.

05.10.2008: www.reiner-bernstein.de 48 – Chronologie 2008

Außenministerin Tsipi Livni hält in Anwesenheit des palästinensischen Außenministers Riyad al-Malki, der französischen und US-amerikanischen Außenminister Bernard Kouchner und James Cunningham sowie von Joschka Fischer zu Beginn einer dreitägigen Konferenz in Jerusalem ihre erste außenpolitische Grundsatzrede seit ihrer Wahl zur Vorsitzenden der „Kadima“-Partei. Darin bekennt sie sich zur Umsetzung der Verabredungen von Annapolis, ohne einen Zeitplan vorzugeben, und verwahrt sich indirekt gegen die Äußerungen von Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert in seinem Interview mit „Yediot Acharonot“ am 29. September, weil er ihre künftige Verhandlungsposition schwäche. Während in politischen Kreisen Israels und in der Öffentlichkeit des Landes der Anschlag gegen Zeev Sternhell als Anschlag des politischen Extremismus gegen die Demokratie verurteilt wird 40 , beklagt sich Livni bei der palästinensischen Politik, dass sie „den Friedensprozess nicht hinreichend in die palästinensische Gesellschaft übersetzt“41 . Mitte Oktober 2009 wird der 37jährige Yaacov Teitel aus der Siedlung „Shvut Rachel“ nördlich von Ramallah als Täter gefasst. Teitel, ein gebürtiger US-Amerikaner, hatte sich im Jahr 2000 endgültig in Israel niedergelassen. Ihm werden auch Anschläge auf Palästinenser mit Todesfolge vorgeworfen.

02.10.2008: In der ersten Umfrage nach der Kandidatennominierung teilt das „American Jewish Committee” mit, dass 57 Prozent der US- amerikanischen Juden den Demokraten Barack Obama favorisieren, während 30 Prozent dem Republikaner John McCain den Zuschlag geben. Dreizehn Prozent würden sich nicht festlegen.

In der Anfang Oktober erscheinenden Monatsausgabe des „Arab Reform Bulletin“ macht Shadi Hamid darauf aufmerksam, dass sich die jordanische Moslembruderschaft und die Regierung in Amman nach drei schwierigen Jahren politisch angenähert hätten. Außerdem www.reiner-bernstein.de 49 – Chronologie 2008 habe die Regierung einen Dialog mit „Hamas“ begonnen, weil sie deren wachsenden Einfluss und starke Position im Gazastreifen eingesehen habe.

September 2008

29.09.2008: Im „Vermächtnis-Interview“ mit der auflagenstärksten Tageszeitung „Yediot Achronot (Letzte Nachrichten)“42 aus Anlass des neuen jüdischen Jahres 5769 erklärt Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert, dass sich Israel aus fast allen Teilen der Westbank und Ost-Jerusalems zurückziehen müsse, wenn es Frieden mit den Palästinensern wolle. Gleichzeitig bezeichnet er Überlegungen, den Iran anzugreifen, als „Megalomanie“ und „Verlust der eigenen Proportionen“; Olmerts Angebote gehen als „Konvergenzplan“ in die politische Literatur ein. Der Rückzug von den Golanhöhen könne gefährlich sein, doch wer die Gefahr scheue, solle in die Schweiz oder in Island umziehen. Die israelische Sicherheitsdoktrin sei wertlos, wenn sie allein auf Panzer, auf die Beherrschung von Gebieten und auf diesen und jenen Hügel gründe. Er frage sich, was geschehen solle, wenn Israel auch den nächsten Krieg gewinne, und antwortet: „Wir werden den Preis bezahlen und sie [Israels Feinde] werden leiden.“ Olmert fährt fort: „Wenn du auf diesem Stuhl sitzt, musst du dich fragen, ob du keine Kraft darauf verwendest, Frieden zu schließen, oder immer stärker und stärker werden willst, um den Krieg zu gewinnen.“ Die Zeit sei nicht auf Seiten Israels, auch wenn der Staat heute noch so stark wie kein anderer in der Region sei. „Vor wem haben wir Angst?“ Olmert räumt ein, er sei der erste israelische Politiker gewesen, der die israelische Souveränität auf ganz Jerusalem habe ausdehnen wollen, und www.reiner-bernstein.de 50 – Chronologie 2008 bekennt selbstkritisch, dass er „die Realität in ihrem ganzen Ausmaß“ nicht habe erkennen wollen. Wer 270.000 Palästinenser eingemeinden wolle, riskiere die Fortsetzung von Terrorakten gegen Zivilisten. Deshalb müsse eine Entscheidung fallen: „Diese Entscheidung ist schwer, schrecklich, eine Entscheidung, die unseren natürlichen Instinkten zuwiderläuft, unseren innersten Sehnsüchten, unserem kollektiven Gedächtnis, den Gebeten des jüdischen Volkes in 2000 Jahren.“ Für die Heiligen Stätten schlägt Olmert „besondere Lösungen“ vor. Außerdem plädiert er im Gegenzug zu Annexionen im Umfang von fünf Prozent für einen Gebietsaustausch „etwa im Maßstab eins zu eins“. Israelis und Palästinenser seien einem Vertrag nahe. Ariel Sharon habe von einem schweren Preis gesprochen, den Israel bezahlen müsse, sich aber geweigert, ihn näher auszuführen, doch dazu gebe es keine Alternative 43 . In dem zweimonatlich erscheinenden „Report on Israeli Settlement in the Occupied Territories“ (November-December 2008), der von der „Foundation for Middle East Peace“ in Washington, D.C., herausgegeben wird, wird in einer Projektion erklärt, dass Israel für die zu annektierenden Gebiete in einer Größenordnung von 6,8 Prozent (palästinensische Angaben: 8,8 Prozent) 5,5 Prozent (palästinensische Angaben: 5,4 Prozent) unbewohnten landwirtschatlich genutzten Geländes entlang dem Gazastreifen, westlich von Hebron („Hebron Hills“) und in der Gegend um Bet Shean abgeben würde. Die unterschiedlichen Messzahlen, so der Bericht, würden daher rühren, dass Israel die Gegend um Latrun nicht in die Kalkulation einrechne. Nach Angaben des heutigen spanischen Außenministers (und früheren EU-Nahostbeauftragten) Miguel Moratinos würde das israelische Angebot siebzig Quadratkilomter kleiner sein als die zu annektierenden Landstriche. In einem palästinensischen Bericht aus dem jahr 2012 wird angegeben, dass die palästinensische Seite den Austausch von 1,9 Prozent vorgeschlagen habe, während www.reiner-bernstein.de 51 – Chronologie 2008

Olmert die Annexion von 6,5 Prozent der Westbank im Austausch für 5,8 Prozent israelischen Territoriums und 0,7 Prozent als Korridor zwischen der Westbank und dem Gazastreifen angeboten habe. Zu Jerusalem habe Olmert auf die „Clinton-Parameter“ vom Dezember 2000 zurückgegriffen und den Verzicht beider Seiten auf das „Holy Basin“ (Altstadt, Zionsberg, Jüdischer Friedhof auf dem Ölberg, Garten Gethsemane) vorgeschlagen. Den Flüchtlingen solle nach paästinensischer Auffassung die Alternative zwischen ihrer Rückkehr nach Israel, die Einwanderung in den neuen Staat Palästina oder die Chance der Eingliederung in den Staaten, in denen sie gegenwärtig leben, gegeben werden. Unabhängig von diesen Optionen sollten alle Flüchtlinge eine Entschädigung erhalten. Die israelische Seite habe sich bereit erklärt, über fünf Jahr jeweils 1.000 Flüchtlinge aufzunehmen und für die Schaffung eines internationalen Kompensationsfonds zu werben 44 .

Der Chef der Partei „Unser Haus Israel (Israel Beiteinu)“ Avigdor Lieberman verurteilt die Aussagen Olmerts als „Gefährdung der Existenz des Staates Israel“. Yasser Abed Rabbo, enger Berater von Präsident Machmud Abbas und vormals palästinensischer Architekt der „Genfer Initiative“ , beklagt, dass Olmert zu diesen Einsichten erst so spät gefunden habe. Dagegen betont das Tel Aviver Büro der „Genfer Initiative“ , dass Olmert auf die Linie dieses Friedensvertragsentwurfs von 2003 eingeschwenkt sei. Aber auch für Yossi Beilin, den früheren Vorsitzenden von „Meretz/Yachad“ und damaligen Gesprächspartner Abed Rabbos, kommen die Eingeständnisse Olmerts zu spät. Am 5. Oktober stellt Akiva Eldar in einem „Haaretz“-Kommentar fest, dass nach dem Interview Olmerts für ihn und für Tsipi Livni klar sei, dass „das alte Spiel des endlosen Friedensprozesses“ vorbei sei, denn beide hätten erkannt, dass sich Israel auf die Grenzen von 1967 zurückziehen müsse 45 . Im Gegensatz zu Oppositionsführer Benjamin Netanyahu wüssten sie, www.reiner-bernstein.de 52 – Chronologie 2008 dass Israel auf dem Balkan lande, wenn Israel darauf verzichte, ein jüdischer Staat sein. Bis sich diese Einsicht durchsetze, würden die Europäer die Gehälter für die palästinensischen Lehrer und Ärzte bezahlen, und Machmud Abbas sei ein Subunternehmer Israels. In derselben Ausgabe verkündet Gideon Levy das Ende der israelischen Rechten – „geboren in der Sünde der Arroganz, des Messianismus, des Militarismus und des Nationalismus im Gefolge des 6-Tage-Krieges“. Ihr habe Olmert zum Gnadentod verholfen. Yossi Alpher, Mitherausgeber des Internet-Portals „bitterlemons“ und früherer Chef des „Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies“ an der Universität Tel Aviv, bezeichnet in der Oktober-Ausgabe des „Arab Reform Bulletin“ Olmerts Initiative als Schritt in die richtige Richtung, auch wenn sie unvollkommen und einseitig in Gang gesetzt worden sei.

Im Interview mit „Haaretz“ widerspricht der frühere Vorsitzende der Partei „Sefardische Thorawächter (Shas)“, Aryeh Deri, der Behauptung, Jerusalem sei nicht geteilt. Deri, der sich um die Kandidatur als Bürgermeister der Stadt bemüht, erklärt, dass das Gegenteil der Fall sei: Der Ostteil der Stadt habe keine Infrastruktur und sei heruntergekommen. Am 2. Oktober entscheidet das Jerusalemer Verwaltungsgericht, dass Deri aufgrund seiner zehnmonatigen Haftstrafe 2001/2002 wegen Korruption und Betrug von der Kandidatur ausgeschlossen sei.

Im Ende September veröffentlichten Barometer über die israelische Stimmung ermittelt das „Tami Steinmetz Center for Peace Research“ an der Universität Tel Aviv, dass in der Skala der negativen Einschätzungen die wachsende Gewalt (83 Prozent), die wachsende Kluft zwischen Arm und Reich (73 Prozent) und der Niedergang des politischen Systems (68 Prozent) an vorderster Stelle stehen. Für 48 Prozent hat sich die internationale Lage für Israel nicht verschlechtert, und für die Mehrheit haben sich die Beziehungen zu den Palästinensern weder verschlechtert noch verbessert. Für 39 Prozent hat sich ihr Bild durch die Wahl von Tsipi Livni zur www.reiner-bernstein.de 53 – Chronologie 2008

Vorsitzenden von „Kadima“ nicht verändert, während 35 Prozent danach positiver in die Zukunft schauen. Nur für 18 Prozent sind durch ihre Wahl die Aussichten auf einen Vertrag mit den Palästinensern schlechter geworden. Dagegen beurteilen 58 Prozent der „Meretz“-Wähler und 47,5 Prozent der Wähler der Arbeitspartei die Chancen günstiger. Für 73 Prozent der ultraorthodoxen Partei „Torah Judaism“ und für 53 Prozent des Zusammenschlusses „National Religious Party/National Union“ hat sich durch Livnis Wahl nichts geändert.

Die „US Defense Security Cooporation Agency“ berichtet, dass dem Kongress am 26. September der Verkauf eines Frühwarn- Radarsystems an Israel mit Begleitausrüstung und einem 120köpfigen US-Bedienungspersonal im Gesamtwert von maximal 15,2 Milliarden US-Dollar mitgeteilt worden ist 46 . Mit ihrer Anwesenheit, so heißt es in Kommentaren, werde ein israelischer Angriff auf Iran verhindert 47 .

Bei der Explosion einer Autobombe werden in der nordlibanesischen Hafenstadt Tripoli fünf Soldaten getötet und 17 verletzt.

27.09.2008: Bei der Explosion einer 200 Kilogramm schweren Autobombe in der Damaszener Innenstadt werden nach syrischen Medienberichten 18 Personen getötet und 14 verletzt. Innenminister Bassam Abdul-Majid macht für den Anschlag Terroristen verantwortlich. Im Exil lebende syrische Politiker machen dagegen Machtkämpfe zwischen Sicherheitsdiensten aus. Nach einer libanesischen Meldung vom Tage hat die „Hisbollah“ ihre Angehörigen angewiesen, gegenwärtig nicht nach Syrien zu reisen.

26.09.2008: www.reiner-bernstein.de 54 – Chronologie 2008

Nach einer Sitzung anlässlich der Tagung der UN-Vollversammlung in New York erinnern die teilnehmenden Repräsentanten des Nahost-„Quartetts“ – ergänzt durch ihren Nahost-Beauftragten Tony Blair – an die „anhaltenden Fortschritte seit der Annapolis- Konferenz“ Ende November 2007. Die israelische Regierung und die Palästinensische Autonomiebehörde sollten alles daran setzen, bis Ende 2008 eine Vereinbarung über die Schaffung eines unabhängigen, demokratischen und lebensfähigen Staates Palästina zu erreichen, der die palästinensische Gewalt und die israelische Siedlungsaktivität entgegenstünden. Das „Quartett“ ruft zur schnellen Umsetzung der Ergebnisse der Berliner „Konferenz zur Unterstützung der palästinensischen zivilen Sicherheit und Rechtsstaatlichkeit“ am 24. Juni. Es dankt der ägyptischen Regierung für ihre Vermittlung zwischen „Fatah“ und „Hamas“ und der Regierung in Anakara für die Erleichterung der indirekten israelisch-syrischen Gespräche 48 .

In seiner Ansprache vor der UN-Vollversammlung appelliert Außenminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier an die Konfliktparteien, in ihren Anstrengungen nicht nachzulassen. Die Erfahrung zeige, dass „Stillstand“ oft „Rückschritt“ bedeutet habe. In einem Beitrag für „Al- Ahram Weekly“ am selben Tag erinnert der unabhängige palästinensische Abgeordnete Mustafa Barghouti daran, dass Verhandlungen gut seien, doch nicht, wenn sie die Basis internationaler Resolutionen und Normen unterminieren würden.

25.09.2008: Kurz nach Mitternacht explodiert vor dem Haus des Jerusalemer Politologen und „Israel Prize“-Trägers und Faschismus-Theoretikers Zeev Sternhell eine Paketbombe, die ihn leicht verletzt 49 . Sternhell, der sich „im nationalen als auch im sozialen Sinne“ als einen zionistischen Linken bezeichnet, wurde 1935 in Galiziern geboren, überlebte die Shoah und wanderte 1951 von Frankreich aus in Israel ein. Er sei weder hierhergekommen, um in einem binationalen Staat www.reiner-bernstein.de 55 – Chronologie 2008 noch als „Kolonialherr“ zu leben, hat Sternhell in einem Interview mit Haaretz“ bekannt 50 . Die Polizei findet bei der Suche nach den Attentätern Aufrufe, in denen demjenigen eine Million Neue Israelische Pfund versprochen werden, der Angehörige von „Peace Now“ ermordet. Ihr Generalsekretär Yariv Oppenheimer wird unter Polizeischutz gestellt. Am 5. Oktober macht sich der Kommentator von „Haaretz“ darüber lustig, dass alle Mitglieder der Regierung sich in der Verurteilung des Anschlags auf Sternhell mit Vorschlägen überbieten, gegen die extremistische Rechte vorzugehen und Maßnahmen gegen Attentäter zu ergreifen.

Achtzehn internationale Hilfsorganisationen unter Beteiligung von „medico international“ und „Care International“ legen den Bericht „The Middle East Quartet: A Progress Report“ vor. Darin werfen sie der Europäischen Union, den USA, Russland und der UNO politisches Versagen vor. Insbesondere seien sie gescheitert mit der Forderung nach dem Stopp des israelischen Siedlungsbaus, nach der Erweiterung der Bewegungsfreiheit für die palästinensische Bevölkerung und bei der Verbesserung der humanitären Lage im Gazastreifen. In einem fünf Punkte umfassenden Katalog rufen die Hilfsorganisationen das „Nahost-Quartett“ auf – die beschlossenen Abkommen durchzusetzen und sicherzustellen, dass alle Parteien dafür verantwortlich gemacht werden, wenn sie ihre Verpflichtungen im Friedensprozess nicht einhalten oder gegen das Humanitäre Völkerrecht sowie die Menschenrechte verstoßen; – den UN-Sicherheitsrat dabei zu unterstützen, eine Resolution zu verabschieden, die die humanitären und wirtschaftlichen Folgen der Siedlungsaktivitäten für die palästinensischen Gemeinden und den weiteren Friedensprozess behandelt; – einen neuen Lösungsvorschlag anzuwenden, mit welchem der Zugang und die Bewegungsfreiheit in den besetzen palästinensischen Gebieten verbessert wird. Das Geflecht von Beschränkungen solle aufgehoben werden; www.reiner-bernstein.de 56 – Chronologie 2008

– die Blockade des Gazastreifens und die Politik der kollektiven Bestrafung schnellstmöglich zu beenden, sowie – den Gewaltverzicht zwischen „Hamas“ und Israel zu festigen und mit regionalen Regierungen zusammenzuarbeiten, um die palästinensische Aussöhnung zu fördern. Bisland sei das „Quartett“ nicht in der Lage gewesen, die Konfliktparteien auf ihre Verantwortlichkeiten zu verpflichten, heißt es bedauernd. Desto dringlicher sei es, die Versäumnisse rasch aufzuarbeiten.

Der Londoner „Guardian“ berichtet exklusiv, dass US-Präsident George W. Bush bei seinem Jerusalem-Besuch im Mai die israelische Regierung darüber unterrichtet habe, dass er einen israelischen Angriff auf Iran nicht unterstützen und die Entscheidung während der ihm verbliebenen Amtszeit auch nicht revidieren werde. Der „Guardian“ zitiert Beobachter, die für die Weigerung zwei Gründe nennen würden: die amerikanische Sorge vor iranischen Vergeltungsschlägen im Libanon (via „Hisbollah“), im Irak, im Persischen Golf und in Afghanistan gegen amerikanische Einrichtugnen sowie die Sorge, dass es Israel nicht gelingen werde, die iranischen Atomanlagen in Natanz rund 160 Kilometer nördlich von Isfahan vollständig zu zerstören.

24.09.2008: Das „Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PHCR)“ berichtet, dass der „Palestinian General Intelligence Service” zwei Tage zuvor in das Büro von Samira al-Halaiqa, Mitglied des „Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC)“für den „Block für Wandel und Reform“ von „Hamas“, in Hebron eingedrungen sei und ohne Durchsuchungsbefehl Veröffentlichungen, Dokumente und Filmmaterialien konfisziert habe, die gegen die Autonomiebehörde gerichtet seien.

Die israelische Menschenrechtsorganisation „B’tselem (Im Angesicht, Gen. 1,27)“ eröffnet ein Verbindungsbüro in Washington, www.reiner-bernstein.de 57 – Chronologie 2008

D.C, um nach eigenen Angaben den US-amerikanischen Kongress, das State Department und andere politische Entscheidungsträger regelmäßig über die Menschenrechtsbedingungen in der Westbank, in Ost-Jerusalem und im Gazastreifen zu informieren.

18.-20.09.2008: Gemäß einer Meinungsumfrage der Al-Najah University in sprechen sind 67,1 Prozent der Palästinenser für und 26,9 Prozent gegen die Zweistaatentregelung in den Grenzen von 1967 aus. 36 Prozent beurteilen die Verhandlungen von Machmud Abbas mit Israel zur Schaffung des palästinensischen Staates positiv und 53,7 Prozent negativ. Doch sind 61,2 Prozent mit der Amtsführung des Präsidenten einverstanden, 31,8 Prozent sind dies dagegen nicht. 58,6 Prozent stimmen der Amtsführung von Ministerpräsident Salam Fayyad zu, 30,4 Prozent tun dies nicht. 29,4 Prozent sind mit der Amtsführung von Ismail Haniyeh im Gazastreifen zufrieden, während 58,1 Prozent dieser Einschätzung widersprechen.

17.-23.09.2008: In seiner Wochenübersicht berichtet das „U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA)“ mit Sitz in Ost- Jerusalem, dass zwischen dem 17. und 13. September elf Palästinenser durch Unfälle in den Tunneln zwischem dem Gazastreifen und der ägyptischen Sinai-Halbinsel ums Leben gekommen seien.

22.09.2008: Tsipi Livni wird von Staatspräsident Shimon Peres mit der Regierungsbildung beauftragt 51 . Livni hat vierzig Tage für die Regierungsbildung Zeit, ansonsten stehen in spätestens drei Monaten Neuwahlen an. Der Fraktionsvorsitzende des „Likud“, Gideon Saar, weist Livnis Angebot an die Partei zurück, in ihre Regierung einzutreten. Da die Arbeitspartei bei Neuwahlen www.reiner-bernstein.de 58 – Chronologie 2008

Mandatsverluste befürchtet, besteht ihr Vorsitzender Ehud Barak auf einer stabilen und auf Dauer angelegten Regierung. Würde Livni neue Regierungschefin werden, wären drei der vier höchsten Staatsämter in weiblicher Hand: außer Dalia Itzik als Präsidentin der Knesset und Dorit Beinish als Präsidentin des Obersten Gerichts. Mit 15 Prozent weiblicher Parlamentarier liegt Israel weltweit an 82. Stelle. Die Partei der „Sefardischen Thorawächter (Shas)“ verlangt für den Eintritt in die neue Regierung die Erhöhung der Kinderzuschüsse für ihre Klientel. Am 25. September berichtet „Haaretz“, dass der Vorsitzende der Arbeitspartei und gegenwärtige Verteidigungsminister, Ehud Barak, den Eintritt in das Kabinett mit der vollen Einbeziehung in dieVerhandlungen mit der Autonomiebehörde und Syrien verbindet. Der Livni bei den parteiinternen Wahlen am 17. September unterlegene Shaul Mofaz soll als Stillhalte-Bedingung seine Ernennung zum Außenminister und stellvertretenden Ministerpräsidenten verlangt haben.

Der palästinensische Verhandlungsführer Achmed Qureia („Abu Ala“) kündigt im Sprachrohr der Palästinensischen Autonomiebehörde, der Jerusalemer Zeitschrift „Al-Hayat al-Jedida (Das neue Leben)“ den „Widerstand in all seinen Formen als legitimes Recht“ an – wozu auch die Akzeptanz der Zweistaatenregelung gehöre –, wenn die Gespräche mit Israel über einen „detaillierten, umfassenden Vertrag“ scheitern sollten. Am Rande der Sitzung der UN-Vollversammlung in New York äußert Staatspräsient Shimon Peres am 23. September Zweifel daran, dass ein Vertrag noch in diesem Jahr zustande kommt52 . Tsipi Livni verwahrt sich in einem Telefonat mit Qureia gegen seine Drohungen. Ebenfalls von New York aus ermahnt Bundesaußenminister Frank- Walter Steinmeier Israelis und Palästinenser, alles zu unterlassen, was künftige Verhandlungserfolge erschweren könnte: hier den weiteren Ausbau der Siedlungen, dort den Einsatz von Gewalt.

Der Generaldirektor des Auswärtigen Amtes in Jerusalem, Aaron Abramovich, bekennt sich vor einem Ausschuss der Vereinten www.reiner-bernstein.de 59 – Chronologie 2008

Nationen, an dem auch der palästinensche Ministerpräsident Salam Fayyad und der Nahost-Beauftragte des „Quartetts“ Tony Blair teilzunehmen, zur „Schaffung eines verantwortlichen, funktionierenden und lebensfähigen palästinenischen Staat als Heimat des palästinenischen Volkes“ 53 .

Ein 19jähriger Palästinenser verwundet in Jerusalem mit seinem Auto siebzehn israelische Soldaten, bevor er erschossen wird. Die Mutter des jungen Mannes wehrt sich gegen die Beschuldigung, ihr Sohn sei ein Attentäter gewesen. Seine Tat sei ein Verzweiflungsakt aus Liebeskummer gewesen.

21.09.2008: Am Abend reicht Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert sein Rücktrittsgesuch bei Staatspräsident Shimon Peres ein. Peres beauftragt ihn, bis zur Bildung der neuen Regierung geschäftsführend im Amt zu bleiben, und lädt alle Fraktionen der Knesset zu Konsultationen ein.

17.09.2008: Entgegen ersten Hochrechnungen gewinnt Tsipi Livni die parteiinternen „Kadima“-Wahlen mit einem Vorsprung von 1,1 Prozent gegen ihren schärfsten Rivalen Verkehrsminister Shaul Mofaz. Bei einer Wahlbeteiligung von 53,7 Prozent entfallen auf Livni 16.936 Stimmen (43,1 Prozent) und auf Mofaz 16.505 Stimmen (42,0 Prozent). Innenminister Meir Sheetrit erreicht 3.327 Stimmen (8,5 Prozent) und der Minister für Öffentliche Sicherheit Avi Dichter 2.563 Stimmen (6,5 Prozent). Am 18. September kündigt Mofaz seinen „vorläufigen Rückzug“ aus der Politik an. Nach Medienberichten vom 2. Oktober hat Mofaz die Absicht seiner „Auszeit“ geändert. „Flieg, Tsipora, flieg!“ überschreibt Uri Avnery seinen Kommentar am 20. September, in dem er vor allem hervorhebt, dass der Sieg von einer Person errungen worden sei, die www.reiner-bernstein.de 60 – Chronologie 2008

über keine militärischen Erfahrungen verfüge, während ihr Hauptgegenspieler Mofaz genau auf sie verwiesen habe. Die neue Vorsitzende habe sich als die Personifikation der Friedensbemühungen und als eine Frau präsentiert, die die Diplomatie über den Krieg stelle und darin von der, wenn auch knappen Mehrheit der „Kadima“-Mitglieder unterstützt worden sei. Gleichwohl könne niemand genau voraussagen, was für eine Ministerpräsidentin Livni sein werde. Doch auch ihr Vater Eitan, Angehöriger des jüdischen Untergrunds vor 1948, habe sich mit seinem Namen „stark“, „standhaft“ durch seine Loyalität, Solidität und Zuverlässigkeit ausgezeichnet – wie sein Vorbild Zeev Jabotinsky, den Avnery einen „wahren Liberalen und wahren Demokraten“ nennt, obwohl er für einen jüdischen Staat auf beiden Ufern des Jordans plädiert habe, gleichzeitig jedoch die nationalen Rechte der Minderheiten im zaristischen Russland betont habe. „Verliere keine Zeit und bilde eine Regierung mit den Friedenskräften, nutze die ersten wenigen Monate Deiner Amtszeit, um mit den Palästinensern Frieden zu schließen, rufe Neuwahlen aus und lege Dich und den Friedensvertrag der öffentlichen Prüfung vor“, ruft Avneri sie auf 54 . Livni werde nicht fliegen, befürchtet dagegen Reuven Kaminer am 23. September und begründet seinen Pessimismus mit ihrer ideologischen Nähe zum „Likud“ sowie der politischen Instabilität des Staates 55 .

15.09.2008: Ehud Olmert bedauert vor Beginn der Sitzung des Außen- und Sicherheitspolitischen Ausschusses der Knesset das Unglück der palästinensischen Flüchtlinge im Zuge der Gründung des Staates Israel und stellt einen Vergleich zu den damaligen jüdischen Flüchtlingen aus den arabischen Staaten an. Israel werde unter keinen Umständen einem Recht auf Rückkehr der palästinensischen Flüchtlinge zustimmen, doch bereit sein, sich an einem internationalen Mechanismus zu beteiligen, der sich an die Arbeit zur Lösung des Problems mache. www.reiner-bernstein.de 61 – Chronologie 2008

14.09.2008: In einem politischen Kraftakt verurteilt Ehud Olmert in der von ihm voraussichtlich letzten Kabinettssitzung „Pogrome gegen Nichtjuden“. Hintergrund ist der Vergeltungsüberfall von Bewohnern der nicht genehmigten Siedlung Yitzhar auf das in der Nähe von Nablus gelegene palästinensische Dorf Assira al-Kabaliya, nachdem ein neunjähriger jüdischer Junge verletzt wurde. Der Ministerpräsident fordert das Militär, die Sicherheitsdienste und die Justizbehören auf, mit allen zu Gebote stehenden Mitteln gegen das „Phänomen der jüdischen Brutalität in der Westbank“ vorzugehen 56 . Gleichzeitig bezeichnet er die Idee eines Groß-Israel als „erledigt“ 57 . Die Zeit sei nicht auf der Seite Israels. Olmert räumt ein, dass er Ehud Barak wegen seiner „überzogenen Konzessionen“ in Camp David (Juli 2000) heftig kritisiert habe. Doch in der Zwischenzeit sei er zu der Auffassung gelangt, dass „wir das Land mit denen teilen müssen, mit denen wir hier leben, wenn wir kein binationaler Staat werden wollen“, und fuhr fort: „Wir sind so stark wie kein anderes Land in der Region, keiner kann uns besiegen. Die strategischen Bedrohungen rühren nicht daher, wo die Grenzen liegen. Wir können über jedes kleine Detail streiten, doch dann haben wir keinen Partner für den Frieden und keine internationale Absicherung. Wir werden uns so fühlen, dass wir immer recht hatten, wie wir das in den vergangenen vierzig Jahren getan haben.“ In der Sitzung bringt Olmerts Stellvertreter Haim Ramon einen Entwurf zur Entschädigung jener Siedler ein, die aus der Westbank östlich der „Trennungsmauern“ nach Galiläa und in den Negev umziehen wollen; nach Ramons Angaben handelt es sich um mehr als elftausend Personen 58 .

Der Mediensprecher von „Hamas“ verwahrt sich in der von der Bewegung gelenkten Nachrichtenagentur „Al-Qassam“ gegen die Kompromissbereitschaft von Machmud Abbas in der Flüchtlingsfrage und bezeichnet sie als Teil der „amerikanisch-zionistischen Agenda“. www.reiner-bernstein.de 62 – Chronologie 2008

In seinem wöchentlichen Rundbrief kündigt aus Ramallah Abdallah Frangi an, dass der sechste Kongress von „Fatah“ Ende 2008 stattfinden werde. Der frühere Leiter der Generaldirektion Palästina in Bonn und Berlin und heutige Leiter der Außenpolitischen Kommission von „Fatah“ verweist darauf, dass der letzte Kongress 1989 stattgefunden habe und die Wahl einer neuen Parteiführung überfällig sei. Mit ihr solle die Rivalität zwischen der „alten Garde“, die nach der Prinzipienerklärung vom September 1993 in die palästinensischen Gebiete zurückkehrte, und der „jungen Garde“ aus dem Weg geräumt werdenl, die gegen die israelische Besatzung vor Ort gekämpft habe 59 .

Nach einem Bericht der „Jerusalem Post“ am 15. September hat das zweite Programm des iraelischen Fernsehens am Abend des Vortages eine Nachricht ausgestrahlt, wonach Ehud Olmert zur Rückgabe von 98,1 Prozent der Westbank und zur Aufnahme von jeweils tausend palästinensischen Flüchtlingen in den kommenden fünf Jahren bereit sei. Machmud Abbas habe in Jerusalem den Verzicht auf Maale Adumim und Giv’at Ze’ev verlangt, sei aber zu Konzessionen in Gilo und French Hill bereit.

Gideon Levy richtet einen dramatischen Appell an die Mitglieder der „Kadima“-Partei, am 17. September nicht für den früheren Generalstabschef und Verteidigungsminister Shaul Mofaz zu stimmen. Der Weg dieses Mannes sei durch Härte und Gewalt geprägt. Die Araber habe er immer nur durch das Sichtgerät eines Gewehrs, eines Helikopters, eines Panzers und eines Flugzeugs gesehen. Während seiner Amtszeit als Verteidigungsminister habe er 1705 Palästinenser töten lassen, darunter 372 Kinder und Jugendliche 60 .

In derselben Ausgabe referiert Uzi Benziman ein Dokument unter dem Titel „Vision für Jerusalem“, in dem unter Mitwirkung namhafter Wissenschaftler und Einrichtungen auf die wachsende www.reiner-bernstein.de 63 – Chronologie 2008 ultraorthodoxe jüdische Bevölkerung und die Neigung von säkularen Israelis hingewiesen wird, die Stadt zu verlassen. Die Studie empfiehlt Maßnahmen, um diese Trends im Westteil der Stadt grundlegend umzukehren, und erwartet ohnehin, dass der Ostteil Jerusalems an die Palästinenser übergeht.

13.09.2008: Ehud Olmert tritt vom Amt des israelischen Ministerpräsidenten zurück und amtiert bis zu den angekündigten Neuwahlen geschäftsführend. Nach einem späteren Bericht von Aluf Benn in „Haaretz“ habe er am selben Tag bei der Begegnung mit dem palästinensischen Präsidenten Machmud Abbas eine Karte vorgelegt, wonach Israel auf 93,5 Prozent der Westbank verzichten wolle und für die Siedlungsblöcke Gush Etzion, Maale Adumim und Ariel zu einem Gebietsaustausch in den südlichen Hebron-Bergen, im Judäischen Bergland und im Tal von Beit Shean in der Größenordnung von 5,8 Prozent bereit sei. Der Rest von 1,7 Prozent solle für den Korridor zwischen der Westbank und dem Gazastreifen Verwendung finden. Für Jerusalem schlage er – Olmert – vor, dass die Souveränität über die jüdischen und palästinensischen Stadtviertel geteilt werde und die Altstadt und ihr Umfeld (das „Holy Basin“) keiner Souveränität unterstellt werden, sondern unter die Verwaltung einer internationalen Behörde bei Beteiligung Israels, Palästinas, der USA, Jordaniens und Saudi-Arabiens gestellt werde. In Bezug auf die Flüchtlingsfrage habe Olmert das Recht auf Rückkehr abgelehnt, sei aber bereit gewesen, eine Anzahl von Flüchtlingen in den kommenden fünf Jahren aufzunehmen, und zwar zwischen 2000 und 3000 – „so viel, wie in die Muqata [Sitz der Palästinensischen Autonomiebehörde in Ramallah] hineinpassen“. Olmert es abgelehnt, Abbas die Karte mitzugeben, es sei denn der Präsident unterzeichne sie zuvor. Daraufhin habe Abbas angekündigt, am kommenden Tag, den 14. September, gemeinsam mit seinem Chefunterhändler Saeb Erakat die Details zu studieren, sei aber nicht gekommen noch habe er sich telefonisch abgemeldet. www.reiner-bernstein.de 64 – Chronologie 2008

In einem Interview mit der „Washington Post“ habe Abbas vielmehr Olmerts Angebote als unzureichend abgelehnt, während Erakat auf der vollen palästinensischen Souveränität über den „Haram al- Sharif“ (= Nobles Heiligtum, „Tempelberg“) beharrt habe 61 .

12.09.2008: Aus Anlass der 15. Wiederkehr der Unterzeichnung der Prinzipienerklärung zwischen Israel und der PLO am 13. September 1993 in Washington, D.C., zweifelt Machmud Abbas im Gespräch mit „Haaretz“ daran, dass der Abschluss eines Prinzipienvertrages bis Endes des Jahres möglich sei. Im Hinblick auf das palästinensische Flüchtlingsproblem betont er, dass er Israels Ablehnung der Rückkehr aller heute fünf Millionen zählenden Flüchtlinge verstehe, fordert aber die Regierung in Jerusalem auf, die Verantwortung für die Entstehung des Problems zu übernehmen und Vorschläge für ein „praktikables Recht auf Rückkehr“ in die Verhandlungen einzubringen. Abbas wiederholt, dass ein interimistischer Vertrag für ihn nicht in Frage komme, vielmehr müsse er Regelungen für alle strittigen Komponenten enthalten, zu denen er „Jerusalem“, „Grenzen“, „Flüchtlinge“, „Sicherheit“, „Siedlungen“ und „Wasser“ zählt. Dazu gehöre auch die Freilassung aller palästinensischen Gefangenen. Die von palästinensischer oppositioneller Seite favorisierte Regelung eines gemeinsamen israelisch-palästinensischen Staates lehnt Abbas noch einmal ab, auch wenn die Siedlungspolitik, die Straßensperren und die militärischen Interventionen in Städten der Westbank die Zweistaatenregelung in weite Ferne rücke.

In Fortschreibung des Berichts über das überwiegend in Englisch geführte Gespräch, das am 10. September in Ramallah unter Beteiligung des arabisch-palästinensischen Knesset-Abgeordneten Achmed Tibi („Vereinigte Arabische Liste / Arabische Bewegung für den Wandel“ [Ra’am / Ta’al]) stattfand, präzisiert „Haaretz“ die Abbas’schen Aussagen. So verweist der palästinensische Präsident www.reiner-bernstein.de 65 – Chronologie 2008 auf die Fortschritte bei der Verbesserung der Sicherheitslage in der Westbank und der wirtschaftlichen Lebensbedingungen, macht aber ihren Bestand von den diplomatischen Erfolgen abhängig, ohne die „Hamas“ den Sieg davontragen werde. Abbas demonstriert große persönliche Bewunderung für Ehud Olmert und zeigt sich besorgt über die Nachfolgeregelung. Den USA weist er eine „zentrale Rolle“ zu. Auf die Gespräche in Taba im Januar 2001 angesprochen, referiert Abbas den israelischen Hinweis, dass damals Yossi Beilin – und nicht Repräsentanten der heutigen Regierung – die Leitung innegehabt habe. Auf die palästinensischen Flüchtlinge angesprochen, verlangt Abbas eine Diskussion des „Rechts auf Rückkehr in der Praxis“, wobei er auf der „Rückkehr einer vernünftigen Anzahl von Flüchtlingen“ besteht. Jene, die nicht nach Israel zurückkehren wollten, könnten ihren Wohnort in Palästina nehmen. Wenn sie sich entschließen würden, in den Ländern zu bleiben, in denen sie heute leben, würden sie Entschädigungsleistungen erhalten. Eine wichtige Frage – „fast die Grundlage des Problems“ – sei die Klärung des in Israel lagernden Eigentums der Flüchtlinge. Der Nachfrage, ob er im Januar 2009 noch einmal kandidieren werde, weicht Abbas aus. Abschließend betont er, dass er dem Frieden sein Leben gewidmet habe. Wenn er dafür bezahlen müsse, sei dies ein zu vernachlässigender Preis 62 .

Nach Gesprächen in Jerusalem und Ramallah am 12. und 13. September erklärt Europas Außenkommissar Javier Solana, dass er „immer weniger optimistisch“ sei, dass noch in diesem Jahr eine israelisch-palästinensische Verständigung erreichbar sei. Der Verhandlungsprozess sei wahrscheinlich zu langsam in Gang gekommen. Der palästinensische Chefdiplomat Saeb Erakat kündigt an, dass Machmud Abbas am 26. September US-Präsident George W. Bush treffen werde.

In einem Kommentar in „Haaretz“ sieht Ari Shavit für 2009 oder 2010 schwere Zeiten auf Israel heraufziehen. Die drei Voraussetzungen der bisherigen Überlegenheit seien zusammengebrochen: eine den www.reiner-bernstein.de 66 – Chronologie 2008

Problemen angemessene Führung, eine nüchterne Einschätzung der Realität und die eindrucksvollen Fähigkeiten zu vorbeugenden Militärschlägen. Nach dem Abtritt von Ehud Olmert als Parteiführer in der kommenden Woche sehe sich Israel einer Führung gegenüber, die entweder ungeeignet – Shaul Mofaz – oder unfertig – Tsipi Livni – sei. Die wahre Frage werde die sein, ob die vergeudete Zeit („garbage-time“) der Olmert-Jahre vorbei sei 63 .

Der Hauptkommentar von „Haaretz“ prognostiziert, dass jede israelische Regierung letztendlich einer Teilung Jerusalems zustimmen müsse. Die einzig ungeklärte Frage beziehe sich auf die Zukunft der Altstadt und den jüdischen Friedhof auf dem Ölberg („Holy Basin“). Eines Tages jedoch werde Jerusalem die Hauptstadt zweier Staaten sein.

11.09.2008: In einem Gastbeitrag für „Haaretz“ will Yossi Beilin („Meretz/Yachad“) noch nicht alle Hoffnung fahren lassen, dass Tsipi Livni als Nachfolgerin von Ehud Olmert im Amt des Ministerpräsidenten im Herbst einen Prinzipienvertrag zu den strittigen Themen (Grenzen, Flüchtlinge, Jerusalem) mit der Palästinensischen Autonomiebehörde auszuhandeln in der Lage sei. In der Knesset könne sich Livni dabei auf siebzig der 120 Abgeordneten stützen. Auch Präsident Machmud Abbas, dessen vierjährige Amtszeit am 9. Januar 2009 endet, könne kein Interesse daran haben, als gescheiterter Staatsmann in die palästinensische Geschichte einzugehen 64 .

Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert kündigt an, dass er sofort nach den parteiinternen Wahlen um den Vorsitz in „Kadima“ am 17. September zurücktreten werde. Olmert selbst steht nicht zur Verfügung, muss aber gemäß dem Grundgesetz („Basic Law“ 65 ) über die Arbeit der Regierung so lange geschäftsführend im Amt bleiben, bis die neue Regierung bestellt ist. Die aussichtsreichste www.reiner-bernstein.de 67 – Chronologie 2008

Bewerbung um den Parteivorsitz ist die von Außenministerin Tsipi Livni. Sollte keiner der Bewerber – neben Livni Verkehrsminister Shaul Mofaz, der Minister für Öffentliche Sicherheit Avi Dichter und Innenminister Meir Sheetrit – im ersten Durchgang weniger als vierzig Prozent der abgegebenen gültigen Stimmen erhalten, muss in der darauffolgenden Woche ein weiterer Wahlgang stattfinden. Olmerts Nachfolger müssen innerhalb von sechs Wochen nach seinem Rückzug eine neue Regierung bilden.

Nach Mitteilung des „Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN)“ werden vier palästinensische Menschenrechtler ohne Begründung von den israelischen Sicherheitsbehörden an der Ausreise aus dem Gazastreifen gehindert, um an Veranstaltungen in Brüssel teilzunehmen.

10.09.2008: Uri Avnery begeht in Tel Aviv seinen 85. Geburtstag. Der unermüdliche Kämpfer für die nationale Koexistenz von Israelis und Palästinensern erhält aus aller Welt zahlreiche Glückwünsche. Auch von dieser Stelle aus begleiten den in Hannover Geborenen und heutigen Chef von „Gush Shalom (Friedensblock)“ unsere besten Wünsche. Eine ausführliche Würdigung seiner politischen Arbeit hat Roland Kaufhold (Köln) im Internetportal „hagalil“ geschrieben 66 .

Nachdem Daniel Barenboim von rechtsextremistischen Israelis bedroht worden ist, wird seine Residenz in Jerusalem unter Polizeischutz gestellt.

Südöstlich von Beirut wird der 55jährige Salah al-Aridi bei einem Sprengstoffanschlag ermordet. Der pro-syrische Politiker war der Vertraute von Sportminister Talal Arslan, der sich vor kurzem mit dem Drusen-Führer Walid Dhumblat ausgesöhnt hatte. www.reiner-bernstein.de 68 – Chronologie 2008

08.09.2008: In einem Internetportal „bitterlemons“ macht der Jerusalem-Experte der „Genfer Initiative“ , der an der Bar Ilan University lehrende Historiker Menachem Klein, darauf aufmerksam, dass die israelische Politik durch den Neubau und die Erweiterung der Siedlungen die einstige Annexion des arabischen Ostteils der Stadt vom Sommer 1980 hinfällig gemacht habe und dass vier Prozent jener neun Prozent des Gebiets, die durch die „Trennungsmauern“ unter israelische Souveränität fallen sollen, zum Großraum Jerusalem („Greater Jerusalem“) zu rechnen seien. Israel-Korrespondent Jörg Bremer berichtet am 11. September in der „Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung“ ausführlich über die „Israelisierung Ostjerusalems“ 67 . Am selben Tag berichtet „Haaretz“, dass der US-amerikansiche Generalkonsul in Jerusalem, Jacob Wallace, in einem Interview mit der palästinensischen Zeitung „Al-Ayyam (Die Tage)“ die israelische Regierung im Auftrag seiner Chefin Condoleezza Rice aufgefordert habe, sich auch in Jerusalem auf die Grenzen von 1967 zurückzuziehen 68 .

05.09.2008: Europas Außenminister verständigen sich bei ihrem informellen Treffen im südfranzösischen Avignon darauf, im Nahen Osten auf eine Partnerschaft mit den USA hinzuarbeiten.

04.09.2008: Yossi Melman veröffentlicht in „Haaretz“ den Fall eines Palästinensers aus Rafach (südlicher Gazastreifen), der – obwohl kanadischer Staatsbürger – vom israelischen Sicherheitsdienst „Shin Bet“ festnommen und der Verbindung zu „feindlichen Agenten“ beschuldigt worden sei. Seine israelische Anwältin berichtet, ihr Mandant sei anschließend unter Druck zur „Zusammenarbeit“ mit www.reiner-bernstein.de 69 – Chronologie 2008 dem Dienst aufgefordert worden. Erst nach einem Monat sei der zweifache Familienvater freigelassen worden.

Der Kommentator von „Haaretz“ kritisiert die Mehrheitsentscheidung des Obersten Gerichts, das in der vergangenen Woche das Verbot der Rundfunkbehörde Israels bestätigt hat, wonach die bezahlte Werbesendung der israelisch-palästinensischen Initiative „People’s Voice“ von Amy Ayalon und Sari Nusseibeh 69 aus dem Programm genommen wird. Der Vorsitzende der Rundfunkbehörde begründete die Ablehnung damit, dass es sich bei der Initiative um eine öffentlich kontrovers verhandelte politische Angelegenheit handele. Der „Haaretz“-Kommentator verweist darauf, dass alle in den gegenwärtigen Gesprächsrunden zwischen Israel und der Palästinensischen Autonomiebehörde zur Diskussion stehenden Gegenstände kontrovers seien, so auch die politische Zukunft Jerusalems.

Der US-amerikanische Präsidentschaftskandidat der Republikaner John McCain kündigt nach seiner Nominierung auf dem Parteitag seiner Partei in St. Paul (Minnesota) einen Kurswechsel in der Innen- und Außenpolitik an und richtet eine Warnung an den „alten Klüngel in Washington“. Der 72 Jahre alte Senator sitzt allerdings schon seit 26 Jahren im Kongress. In der Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik werde er alle diplomatischen und militärischen Mittel zum Schutz der USA einsetzen.

Der Korrespondent der „Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung“ in Israel, Jörg Bremer, zitiert aus einem Gespräch mit dem Vorsitzenden der Bundestagsfraktion „Die Linke“, Gregor Gysi, der sich gegenwärtig in Israel aufhält. Darin fordert Gysi die internationale Staatengemeinschaft auf, die Zweistaatenregelung „vehement zu fördern“. Zur parteiinternen Diskussion um den Zionismus fragt Gysi, ob man die Solidarität mit Israel etwa den Rechten überlassen solle. So wie gegenüber Israel dürfe auch die Solidarität mit den Palästinensern nicht unkritisch ausfallen. Während seiner Reise trifft www.reiner-bernstein.de 70 – Chronologie 2008

Gysi, der vom früheren deutschen Botschafter in Israel, Rudolf Dressler (SPD), begleitet wird, auch mit dem Kommissar für auswärtige Beziehungen der PLO und früheen Leiter der Generaldirektion Palästina in Bonn und Berlin, Abdallah Frangi, in Ramallah zusammen.

Nach Presseberichten hat Verteidigungsminister Ehud Barak in einem Interview mit dem arabischen TV-Sender „Al-Djazeera (Die Halbinsel)“ für eine Formel plädiert, wonach bestimmte Stadtteile Jerusalems mit einer hohen palästinensischen Bevölkerung im Zuge eines Friedensvertrages zur Hauptstadt Palästinas werden könnten. Der Berater von Präsident Machmud Abbas, Yasser Abed Rabbo, habe den Vorschlag mit der Begründung abgelehnt, dass alle palästinensischen Gebiete von Israel geräumt werden müssten.

Eine israelische Gruppe, die im Namen des jüdischen Jerusalem sprechen will, verwahrt sich in einem Schreiben an Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert dagegen, dass die Stadt von der UNESCO zur „arabischen Kulturhauptstadt 2009“ erklärt worden ist. Der Titel „arabische Kulturhauptstadt“ ist seit 1996 unter anderen Kairo, Tunis, Amman, Beirut, Algier und Damaskus verliehen worden.

In Tel Aviv stirbt der israelische Psychologe Dan Bar-On. Seine Familie floh 1933 vor den Nazis aus Hamburg und ließ sich in Haifa nieder. In den 1970er und 1980er Jahren beschäftigte sich Bar-On, der an der Universität Beersheva lehrte, mit der Biographie von Kindern jüdischer Überlebender und deutscher Täter. Gemeinam mit dem palästinensischen Soziologen Sami Adwan gründete er 1998 das „Peace Research Center“. Die Publizistin Alexandra Senfft hat für die „Jüdische Allgemeine“ einen ausführlichen Nachruf auf Bar- On geschrieben 70 . Auch die Hessische Stiftung für Friedens- und Konfliktforschung (HSFK) veröffentlicht in ihrem Oktober-Rundbrief einen nachruf auf Bar-On 71 .

www.reiner-bernstein.de 71 – Chronologie 2008

03.09.2008: Die palästinensische Menschenrechtsorganisation „Al-Haq („Das Gesetz“) ermahnt die Palästinensische Autonomiebehörde, gemäß einer Bestätigung des Obersten Gerichts vom 28. August, die sich auf Artikel 97 der Verfassung („Basic Law“) bezieht, die Trennung zwischen der Zivil- und der Militärgerichtsbarkeit zu beachten. Anlass des Schreibens ist „eine alarmierende Zunahme“ von Festnahmen, die von Militärgerichten vorgenommen worden seien. „Al-Haq“ verweist auf den Fall eines Mannes aus Salfit, der vom militärischen Abschirmdienst festgenommen und vor das Militärgericht gebracht worden sei, womit seine Rechte verletzt würden, die in der Verfassung verbürgt sind.

Das palästinensische „Al-Mezan Center for Human Rights“ verwahrt sich dagegen, dass Mitarbeiter des Bildungssektors, der Gesundheitsfürsorge und des öffentlichen Dienst dazu angehalten werden, sich an Streiks zu beteiligen, die in Ramallah beschlossen worden sind. Wenn sie Streikaufrufen folgen, würden sie mit der Einstellung ihrer Gehaltsauszahlung rechnen müssen. Dazu berichtet das „UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs“ mit Sitz in Ost-Jersualem in seiner Übersicht für die Zeit vom 27. August bis 02. September, dass am 29. August die Gewerkschaft der im Gesundheitswesen Tätigen in Ramallah zu einem viertägigen Streik im Gazastreifen aus Protest gegen die Entscheidung des Gesundheitsministeriums aufgerufen habe, vierzig Angestellte zu entlassen. In acht Krankenhäusern würde knapp die Hälfte der dort Tätigen dem Streikaufruf Folge leisten, darunter 31 Prozent der Ärzte und 25 Prozent der Krankenschwestern. Zwölf der 56 Gesundheitszentren hätten ihre Dienstleistungen eingestellt, während die übrigen sie einschränkten.

Die israelische Menschenrechtsorganisation „B’tselem (Im Angesicht, Gen. 1,27)“ protestiert gegen das „rücksichtslose Abfeuern“ von Gummigeschossen durch die israelische Armee in der Westbank. Dabei seien seit Jahresbeginn zwei Palästinenser getötet www.reiner-bernstein.de 72 – Chronologie 2008 und zahlreiche andere verletzt worden. Das „Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN)“ schließt sich dem Protest an.

Das „Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR)“ protestiert scharf gegen die brutale Ermordung einer 24 Jahre alten Frau in Khan Yunis (südlicher Gazastreifen) am 30. August, die von ihrem Vater der „Verletzung der Familienehre” beschuldigt wurde. Seit 2006 sind nach Angaben von PCHR 29 Frauen – davon 22 im Gazastreifen – ermordet worden.

Der Sprecher des State Department kündigt den „wahrlich bedeutsamen historischen Besuch“ von US-Außenministerin Condoleezza Rice kommende Woche in Libyen an. Nachdem das Land 2004 von der Liste der „Schurkenstaaten“ gestrichen worden war, ist es die erste Reise eines Spitzenrepräsentanten Washingtons in Tripolis nach mehrals fünfzig Jahren – 1957 hatte Vizepräsident Richard Nixon das Land besucht. In einer Erklärung der „Carnegie Endowment für International Peace“ fordert Michelle Dunne die US- Administration jetzt auf, ihren begrenzten, aber wachsenden Einfluss in Libyen zur Stärkung des zivilen Sektors (Menschenrechte, Presse- , Meinungs- und Versammlungsfreiheit, Bildungreformen, Verabschiedung einer Verfassung) zu nutzen, statt im Zuge der „Business as usual“-Beziehungen implizit das Regime von Muammar Ghaddafi zu stützen. Am 05. August unterzeichnen Rice und ihr Amtskollege Abderrachman Shalgam in Tripolis Kooperationsabkommen in den Bereichen der wirtschaftlichen Infrastruktur und der Investitionen. Die Frage von Entschädigungen für die Opfer des Terroranschlags auf eine PanAm-Maschine im schottischen Lockerbie Ende Dezember 1988, für den der libysische Geheimdienst verantwortlich gemacht worden ist, bleibt offen. Damals waren 270 Passagiere getötet worden.

Als erster westlicher Staatschef nach der Ermordung des früheren libanesischen Ministerpräsidenten Rafik Hariri am 14. Februar 2055 besucht Frankreichs Präsident Nicolas Sarkozy Syrien. Besonders www.reiner-bernstein.de 73 – Chronologie 2008

Sarkozys Amtsvorgänger Jacques Chirac hatte den syrischen Geheimdienst beschuldigt, für den Tod Hariris verantwortlich zu sein 72 .

02.09.2008: Eine kuwaitische Zeitung berichtet, dass auf Anordnung von Staatspräsident Bashar Assad der 52jährige Leiter des Politischen Büros von „Hamas“ in Damaskus, Khaled Meshal, das Land in Richtung Sudan verlassen habe.

01.09.2008: Roni Hammermann (Jerusalem) und Pfarrer Mitri Raheb (Bethlehem) wird der diesjährige Aachener Friedenspreis überreicht. Mít Hammermann wird die seit sieben Jahren tätige Frauengruppe „Machsom Watch“ geehrt, die an den Checkspoints Menschenrechtsverletzungen des israelischen Militärs verhindern will. Hammermann bezeichnet die Auszeichnung als eine „unerhört wichtige moralische Unterstützung“ der Arbeit der rund 450 Frauen, die bei „Machsom Watch“ mitarbeiten. Raheb leitet in Bethlehem eine ökumenische Begegnungsstätte. Die Laudatio hält der Vorsitzende von „Verdi“, Frank Bsirske. An Hammermann gewandt, führt Bsirske aus: „Mut gehört auch dazu, die Sache des Friedens in Israel zu vertreten, den täglichen Unfrieden an den Kontrollpunkten zu dokumentieren und ihn öffentlich zu machen, eine weitere Aufgaben von Machsom Watch. ‚Frieden pur’, Peace Now; ist leider zum spöttischen Schimpfwort verkommen in Israel. Wer dafür eintritt, riskiert als ‚Warmduscher’ diffamiert zu werden. Für viele Israelis wollen die Begriffe ‚Frieden’ und ‚Sicherheit’ spätestens seit der Zweiten Intifada nicht mehr zusammenpassen, sie werden als Gegensatz begriffen. Die einen meinen, wer „Peace Now“ fordere, gefährde die Sicherheit, und die von der anderen Seite halten dem entgegen, dass die bloße Option militärischer Sicherheitspolitik den www.reiner-bernstein.de 74 – Chronologie 2008

Frieden in weite Ferne rücke. Im Ergebnis ist ‚Frieden’ ein seltenes Wort geworden 73 .“

Nach einer Meinungsumfrage unter 1270 Palästinensern zwischen dem 28. und 30. August, deren Ergebnisse das „Palestinian Center für Policy and Survey Research (PSR)“ in Ramallah unter Leitung von Khalil Shikaki vorlegt, beträgt der politische Sympathievorsprung von Präsident Machmud Abbas gegenüber dem Chef von „Hamas“ im Gazastreifen, Ismail Haniyeh, vierzehn Prozent (53./. 39 Prozent). Würden heute Wahlen stattfinden, erhielten „Fatah“ 43 und „Hamas“ 29 Prozent der abgegebenen Stimmen. Mit der Arbeit von Ministerpräsident Salam Fayyad sind jeweils 34 Prozent zufrieden beziehungsweise unzufrieden. 69 Prozent der Palästinenser würden den Gewaltausbruch von „Hamas“ Anfang August im Gazastreifen ablehnen 74 .

Nach Mitteilung des „Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics“ belief sich die palästinensische Bevölkerung in der Westbank, Ost- Jerusalem also nicht eingerechnet, im Jahr 2007 auf 2,35 Millionen Personen. Seit 1997 sei ein Zuwachs von 477.000 Personen zu verzeichnen. Die Geburtsrate sank von 5,6 auf 4,7 und die Zahl der Analphabeten über zehn Jahre von 11,8 auf 5,8 Prozent. Gegenüber 1997 machte die Zahl der Flüchtlinge in der Westbank 28,1 Prozent aus, ein Anstieg um 1,5 Prozent.

Das von Gershon Baskin und Hanna Siniora gemeinsam geleitete „Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information (IPCRI)“ mit Sitz im Kloster Tantur südlich von Jerusalem legt eine Studie unter dem Titel „The Day after Annapolis“ vor. Darin beschreibt der Autor Joe DeVoir sechs politische Optionen und deren Kombinationsmöglichkeiten in der Hoffnung, dass die Palästinensische Autonomiebehörde sie angesichts der politischen und geographischen Trennung zwischen beiden Territorien, der eingeschränkten Handlungsmöglichkeiten der Notstandsregierung in Ramallah, der israelisch-palästinensischen und der www.reiner-bernstein.de 75 – Chronologie 2008 innerpalästinensischen Gewaltausbrüche sowie der Notwendigkeit zur Vertrauensbildung – anstelle eines umfassenden Friedensplans mit politischem Endstatusziel – als relevante Handlungsrahmen bedenkt: 1. Neuwahlen mit dem Ziel einer Regierung der nationalen Einheit. 2. Organisierte Auflösung der Autonomiebehörde in der Westbank und im Gazastreifen. 3. Bürgerrechtsinitiativen mit dem Aufruf zur Einstaatregelung. 4. Einseitige Unabhängigkeitserklärung nach dem Vorbild des Kosovo und Erarbeitung einer detaillierten Strategie mit dem Ziel der Souveränität und der Kontrolle über den palästinensischen Staat. 5. Organisation des gewaltsamen Widerstandes gegen die israelische Besatzung. 6. Organisation einer wirksamen gewaltlosen Widerstandsbewegung mit dem Ziel der Beendigung der israelischen Besatzung und der Schaffung eines palästinensischen Staates. Der Autor räumt ein, dass eine dramatische Esklation der Gewalt mit zahlreichen Toten die genannten Optionen zunichte machen könne. Nachdem ihr Für und Wider aus der „Perspektive von außen“ – das heißt nicht in unmittelbarer politischer Verantwortung stehend – durchgespielt worden ist, bekennt sich IPCRI zur Option einer straff koordinierten Kampagne der Gewaltlosigkeit.

Am 2. September verweist Hanna Siniora in einem Rundbrief auf die unermüdliche Friedensarbeit von IPCRI und bittet um finanzielle Unterstützung. Anträge in Washington und in Brüssel seien gestellt, aber bislang nicht bewilligt worden. Nur die kanadische Regierung habe positiv reagiert. Dagegen sei die international Geberkonferenz im Dezember 2007 in Paris eine riesige Enttäuschung gewesen, weil sie keine Mittel zur Verfügung gestellt habe 75 .

In seinem monatlichen Rundbrief für den Monat September beklagt Dan Wischnitzer (Moshaw Avigdor bei Ashkelon), dass sich in Israel eine Minderheit aus Siedlern, Miitär und Politikern „die Kontrolle über das Schicksal der ganzen Gesellschaft“ angeiegnet habe und „sie www.reiner-bernstein.de 76 – Chronologie 2008 als Geisel (hält), wegen der ideologischen Impotenz der Linken und den Mangel an Charakter, Entschlossenheit und Führung. Wenn die Gesellschaft nicht die emotionale Stärke findet, die uns um den Hals gelegte Schlinge der Siedler zu entfernen, wird nichts außer einer traurigen Erinnerung an den jüdischen Staat bleibe, wie er noch existiert 76 .“

August 2008

31.08.2008: „Haaretz“ berichtet 77 von der Vorbereitung einer prinzipiellen Rahmenvereinbarung („shelf-agreement“) mit Präsident Machmud Abbas, die Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert der von ihm heute wahrscheinlich zum letzten Mal geleiteten Kabinettssitzung vorlegt; nach den parteiinternen Vorwahlen am 17. September, zu der die 72.000 „Kadima“-Mitglieder aufgerufen sind, hat Olmert seinen Rücktritt angekündigt. Darin würden alle Kernprobleme einer Zweistaatenregelung angesprochen, auch wenn die Verhandlungen darüber den kommenden fünf Jahren vorbehalten bleiben sollen. Neu in den israelischen Überlegungen zur Zukunft Jerusalems sei die Einbeziehung des internationalen „Quartetts“, des Vatikans und arabischer Staaten. Im Vorlauf einer solchen Vereinbarung habe Olmert in den vergangenen Wochen seinen Stellvertreter Haim Ramon sowie Yossi Beilin („Meretz/Yachad“) und den US- amerikanischen Geschäftsmann Daniel Abraham 78 nach Ramallah geschickt. Nach der heutigen Kabinetssitzung trifft sich Olmert, der von Außenministerin Tsipi Livni – seiner voraussichtlichen Amtsnachfolgerin – begleitet wird, mit Abbas. Nach dem Gespräch erklärt Olmerts Sprecher Mark Regev, dass es „beachtliche Fortschritte“ gebracht habe, ohne die „beträchtlich große Kluft“ zu überwinden. Es fällt auf, dass das veröffentlichte Sitzungsprotokoll vermutlich aufgrund des heftigen Streits im Kabinett – besonders über die internationale Komponente für Jerusalem – keinen Hinweis www.reiner-bernstein.de 77 – Chronologie 2008 auf Olmerts Vorschlag für eine Rahmenvereinbarung enthält. Die palästinensische Delegation weist die Idee einer Zwischenregelung zurück. „Entweder wir schaffen eine Vereinbarung zu allen Problemen, oder es gibt keine Vereinbarung“, erklärt Chefdiplomat Saeb Erakat.

Nach Angaben eines Repräsentanten der Palästinensischen Autonomiebehörde, auf die sich die „Jerusalem Post“ beruft, hat die israelische Regierung angekündigt, den seit 2002 in Israel einsitzenden Marwan Barghouti und mehrere andere palästinensische Gefangene – darunter den Sprecher von „Hamas“ im Parlament, den kranken Abdel Aziz Dweik – in den kommenden Tagen freizulassen. Ein Sprecher der Regierung in Jerusalem dementiert den Bericht, kündigt aber an, dass die Freilassung der 198 palästinensischen Gefangenen am 25. August nicht die letzte Maßnahme dieser Art gewesen sei. Am 30. September beschuldigt „Hamas“ nach einem Bericht der ihr nahestehenden Agentur „Al Qassem“ die Palästinensische Autonomiebehörde, durch ihre Bemühungen um Freilassung Dweiks einen Keil in die Islamische Widerstandsbewegung treiben zu wollen.

„Gush Shalom“ unter Leitung von Uri Avnery begrüßt die Entscheidung der „Barkan Wineries“, ihre Produktionsstätte aus der nördlichen Westbank in die Nähe des Hulda (Zentral-Israel) zu verlagern. In einer Stellungnahme der Firma heißt es, dass der Ortswechsel aufgrund des schlechten Images, das verkaufshemmend wirke, vorgenommen werde. Da das Unternehmen weiterhin eine Filiale auf den Golanhöhen unterhält, verzichtet „Gush Shalom“ vorerst darauf, sie von ihrer Boykottliste zu nehmen.

30.08.2008: Der ägyptische Außenminister Achmad Abu al-Gheit bietet die Stationierung arabischer Truppen im Gazastreifen an. „Hamas“ weist www.reiner-bernstein.de 78 – Chronologie 2008 den Vorschlag als „ungerechtfertigt“ und „unbalanciert“ zurück. Die arabischen Staaten sollten besser Truppen zur Befreiung der Ak- Aqza-Moschee nach Jerusalem entsenden, erklärt „Hamas“- Sprecher Ismail Radwan.

29.08.2008: Die palästinensische Nachrichtenagentur „Maan“ meldet, dass Präsident Machmud Abbas die Überarbeitung zahlreicher Gesetze und Verordnungen veranlasst habe, um das politische und wirtschaftliche Rechtssystem von Grund auf zu erneuern, ausländische Investitionen zu erleichtern sowie die Wiederherstellung der politischen Einheit zwischen der Westbank und dem Gazastreifen zu fördern. Die Neufassungen sollen für die Zeit gelten, in der das Parlament aufgrund der Trennung zwischen beiden Territorien, dem Konflikt zwischen „Hamas“ und „Fatah“ sowie der Festsetzung von vierzig Abgeordneten in Israel seine Aufgaben nicht erfüllen könne.

28.08.2008: Die palästinensische Nachrichtenagentur „Maan“ meldet, dass der Innenminister der Palästinensischen Autonomiebehörde und der Leiter der deutschen Vertretung in Ramallah eine Vereinbarung unterschrieben haben, wonach die Bundesrepublik gemäß der Absprachen auf der internationalen „Konferenz zur Unterstützung der palästinensischen zivilen Sicherheit und Rechtsstaatlichkeit“ am 24. Juni in Berlin die Finanzierung von 55 neuen Polizeistationen in der Westbank übernimmt.

27.08.2008: Der Begründer des legendären israelischen Radiosenders „Voice of Peace“, Abie Nathan, stirbt nach langer Krankheit im Alter von 81 Jahren 79 . Die Station strahlte ihre Sendungen bis 1993 vom www.reiner-bernstein.de 79 – Chronologie 2008

Mittelmeer in englischer Sprache aus. Staatspräsident Shimon Peres würdigt den im Iran geborenen Nathan bei der Trauerfeier in Tel Aviv zum Erstaunen mancher Beobachter als den „größten Freiheitskämpfer“.

26.08.2008: Nach Angaben „Peace Now“ werden 55 Prozent der rund 2.600 Wohneinheiten, die Israel gegenwärtig in den palästinensischen Gebieten baut, östlich der „Trennungsmauern“ errichtet.

US-Außenministerin Condoleezza Rice betont in der gemeinsamen Pressekonferenz mit dem palästinensischen Präsidenten Machmud Abbas in Rammalah, dass die Administration in Washington weiterhin mit der Umsetzung der Ergebnisse der Annapolis- Konferenz Ende November vergangenen Jahres rechne. Die Siedlungspolitik Israels sei für den Verhandlungsprozess nicht förderlich 80 .

23.08.2008: Zwei in Zypern gestartete Schiffe unter den Namen „Free Gaza“ und „Liberty“ mit 48 – andere Angaben sprechen von 44 – internationalen Friedensaktivisten und Hörgeräten für schwerhörige Kinder an Bord werden am Strand von Gaza-Stadt von Tausenden Palästinensern mit Jubel empfangen. Zuvor beschloss die israelische Regierung, die den gesamten Küstenstreifen kontrolliert, den „professionellen Provokateuren“ die Landung zu erlauben, um zu verhindern, dass „die internationale Presse eine Woche lang davon besessen“ sei, wenn Israel ein Verbot ausspreche. Der einzige Passagier mit israelischer Staatsbürgerschaft (neben der US-amerikanischen), Jeff Halper, wird bei seiner Rückkehr nach Israel vorübergehend festgenommen. Auf dem Rückweg fahren sieben Palästinenser mit, darunter ein 16jähriger beinamputierter Junge. Lauren Booth, die Schwägerin des „Quartett“-Sonderbeauftragen Tony Blair, beklagt www.reiner-bernstein.de 80 – Chronologie 2008 sich am 2. September, dass Israel und Ägypten ihr die Ausreise aus dem Gazastreifen verwehren würden. Booth gehörte zur „Free Gaza“-Gruppe. Am 20. September darf Booth über den Grenzübergang Rafach nach Ägypten einreisen.

Auf Anweisung von Verteidigungsminister Ehud Barak stürmt die israelische Polizei ein Gebäude in Um el-Fahm – im ausschließlich arabisch bewohnten „Kleinen Dreieck“ zwischen Hadera und Afula gelegen – und beschlagnahmt Computer, Schriftstücke, Agitationsmaterial und Geld einer „Al-Aqza“-Einrichtung mit der Begründung, damit würde die Islamische Bewegung gegen den Staat aufwiegeln.

21.08.2008: Gegenüber ausländischen Journalisten erklärt Israels Außenministerin Tsipi Livni, dass sie im Falle ihres Sieges bei den parteiinternen „Kadima“-Wahlen am 17. September eine Koalition aus gemäßigten Parteien anstrebe, um die Zweistaatenregelung durchzusetzen. Was links und rechts genannt worden sei, gehöre heute der Vergangenheit an. Die Israelis sollten verstehen lernen, dass das Ziel zweier Staaten im nationalen israelischen Interesse liege. Andernfalls laufe ihm die Zeit davon. Yossi Verter berichtet in „Haaretz“ am selben Tag, dass nach den Worten von Innenminister Meir Shitreet, der sich ebenfalls um den „Kadima“-Vorsitz bewirbt, die Partei von dem dritten Bewerber, Verkehrsminister Shaul Mofaz – wenn dieser sich durchsetzen sollte – in die dunkelsten Tage des „Likud“ zurückgeführt werden würde. Israel dürfe, so Shitreet, Iran keinesfalls angreifen, ein solches Vorgehen wäre eine megalomanisch-abenteuerliche Idee. Iran stelle keine so große Bedrohung dar. Aber Israel müsse wachsam bleiben und verfüge für den Fall der Fälle über ein ausgezeichnetes Antiraketen- Verteidigungssystem. Man dürfe die Bevölkerung nicht jeden Morgen mit dem iranischen Nuklearpotential erschrecken, von dem nicht sicher sei, ob es sofort gegen Israel eingesetzt würde. In seiner www.reiner-bernstein.de 81 – Chronologie 2008

Kolumne in „Haaretz“ bemängelt Ari Shavit am 28. August, dass Livni es versäumt habe, ein Team um sich zu bilden. Darin sei sie Benjamin Netanyahu und Ehud Barak ähnlich.

Nach einem Bericht der „Jerusalem Post“ verständigen sich Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert und Verteidigungsminister Ehud Barak darauf, den Verlauf des Trennungszauns unter der Bezeichnung E-1 („East-1“) in der Nähe von Maale Adumim so zu ändern, dass rund viertausend Dunam (vier Quadratkilometer) westlich der geplanten Route an die palästinensischen Eigentümer in Abu Dis und El-Azariyeh zurückfallen. Damit kommt die Regierung Anträgen der Kläger beim Obersten Gericht in Jerusalem nach. Das „U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA)“ mit Sitz in Ost-Jerusalem berichtet, dass im Zeitraum zwischen dem 13. und 19. August sechzehn Palästinenser, darunter elf Kinder, durch die Zerstörung ihres Hauses obdachlos geworden seien. Am 21. August weist das Oberste Gericht eine Beschwerde des Bürgermeisters von Maale Adumim, Benny Kashriel, zurück, der Regierung die Verlegung des Trennungszauns zu untersagen.

In einem Komentar erklärt der Jerusalemer Soziologe Meron Benvenisti in sieben Punkten, warum der „explosive Status quo“ zwischen Israel und den Palästinensern überlebt: 1) die Fragmentierung der palästinensischen Gesellschaft und der Aufruhr ihrer Einzelteile gegeneinander; 2) die Unterstützung der jüdischen Gesellschaft für das Besatzungsregime, die als Schutz ihrer Existenz verstanden wird; 3) die Finanzierung des Status quo durch die Gebernationen, die unter der palästinensischen Führung Korruption auslöst; 4) die Priorität bilateraler und globaler Interessen seitens der Nachbarstaaten über die arabische ethnische Solidarität; 5) der Erfolg der Propagandakampagne, die als Verhandlungen mit den Palästinensern bekannt ist und die viele davon überzeugt, dass der Status quo temporär ist und sie sich deshalb in www.reiner-bernstein.de 82 – Chronologie 2008 theoretischen Alternativen zu einem Endstatus-Arrangement tummeln können; 6) die Niederhaltung aller Kritik als Ausdruck des Hasses und des Antisemitismus; 7) eine psychologische Abwehr der Schlussfolgerung, dass der Status quo dauerhaft und nicht leicht zu ändern ist 81 .

20.08.2008: In Ergänzung zu den zugesagten 440 Millionen Euro auf der Pariser Geberkonferenz im Dezember 2007 stellt die Europäische Union der Palästinensischen Autonomiebehörde weitere vierzig Millionen Euro für Gehälter, Pensionen und Sozialleistungen sowie für die Treibstoffversorgung im Gazastreifen zur Verfügung.

17.08.2008: Das israelische Kabinett beschließt auf seiner wöchentlichen Sitzung mit Mehrheit die Freilassung von 198 der mehr als zehntausend palästinensischen Häftlinge als eine humanitäre Geste zum bevorstehenden moslemischen Ramadan-Fest. Zu den Freigelassenen, die am 25. August erfolgt, gehören zwei Palästinenser, die Ende der 1970er Jahre wegen Mord und Anstiftung zum Terror verurteilt wurden. Marwan Barghouti, der seit 2002 festgehalten wird, wird nicht in der von der Regierung veröffentlichten Liste geführt. „Hamas“ verurteilt die Freilassungen als ein Zeichen Israels, Präsident Machmud Abbas im innerpalästinensischen Kampf stärken zu wollen, zumal da Gefangene ihrer Bewegung nicht zu den Freigelassenen gehören. Bei der Begrüßung der aus israelischer Haft Entlassenen betont Abbas am 25. August, dass alle palästinensischen Gefangenen freikommen müssten, wenn es Frieden zwischen beiden Völkern geben solle. Am 28. August erklärt Abbas während seines Besuchs in Beirut, dass allen Flüchtlingen das Recht auf Rückkehr eingeräumt werden müsse, wenn es zum Frieden mit Israel kommen solle. Gleichzeitig bestätigt er die libanesische Politik, dass die www.reiner-bernstein.de 83 – Chronologie 2008 dauerhafte Integration der rund 400.000 Flüchtlinge im Lande nicht erwünscht sei. Für Gershon Baskin vom „Israel Palestine Center for Research and Information“ könnte eine umfängliche Freilassung von palästinensischen Gefangenen, die die „Hamas“-Abgeordneten einschließt, dazu führen, dass im „Palestinian Legislative Council“ die Regierung von Salam Fayyad gestürzt wird. Eine solche Gefahr werde, so Baskin am 19. August in der „Jerusalem Post”, auch in Ägypten mit Sorge beobachtet.

16.08.2008: Im Interview mit „Haaretz“ schließt der Präsident der palästinensischen Al-Quds University Sari Nusseibeh die Möglichkeit nicht aus, dass er bei den nächsten Kommunalwahlen im Namen aller Palästinenser für das Amt des Jerusalemer Bürgermeisters kandidieren wird. „Alles ist möglich“, erklärt Nusseibeh auf Nachfrage, ohne mit der Wimper zu zucken. „Wir beginnen mit Jerusalem nicht als separaten Teil, sondern als Speerspitze der gesamten palästinensischen Gesellschaft.“ Denn ohne eine Einigung zu Jerusalem und zur Flüchtlingsfrage werde es keinen Endstatus geben. Wenn die Zweistaatenregelung passé sei, müsse die Regelung für den einen Staat für Israelis und Palästinenser nach dem Vorbild anderer unterdrückter Ethnien in einem langen, gewaltlosen Kampf errungen werden. Mit der Zweistaatenregelung sei der Niedergang von „Fatah“ verbunden, die das einzige Gegengewicht gegen Extremisten von links und rechts gewesen sei. Deshalb sei es an der Zeit, dass „Fatah“ neue Ideen entwickele. Wenn es bis Ende 2008 keinen Durchbruch gebe, sollte um die Gleichberechtigung gerungen werden. Die Europäer würden durch ihre Millionenhilfe für die Palästinenser zur Bezahlung des öffentlichen Dienstes und durch die Unterhaltung von NGO’s die Okkupation finanzieren. Sie fühlten sich dabei glücklich, weil sie damit ihr Gewissen beruhigen würden, während die Israelis glücklich darüber seien, dass sie für die Okkupation nichts bezahlen müssten. Dem britischen Premier Gordon Brown habe er neulich geraten, die www.reiner-bernstein.de 84 – Chronologie 2008 künftige Finanzhilfe von greifbaren politischen Fortschritten abhängig zu machen. Warum verschwndet ihr euer Geld für einen palästinensischen Hafen, wenn ihr euch nicht für einen unabhängigen palästinensischen Staat einsetzt, habe er in Brüssel gefragt. Setzt dann lieber euer Geld dafür ein, uns Palästinenser in die israelische Gesellschaft zu integrieren 82 . Nach einem Bericht der „International Herald Tribune“ am 4. September fordern inzwischen mehrere palästinensische Führungspersönlichkeiten das Ende der internationalen Finanzhilfe für die Autonomiebehörde, um den Charakter der israelischen Besatzung klarzumachen. Dabei bezeichne der palästinensisch-amerikanische Geschäftsmann Sam Bahour die Idee des jüdisch-arabischen Staates nicht als eine taktische Drohung, sondern als eine Aufforderung an die Autonomiebehörde, ihre Strategie grundlegend zu überdenken. In dieselbe Richtung argumentiert der Bericht der „Palestine Strategie Study Group“ vom August 2008 83 .

13.08.2008: Bei seinem Besuch vereinbart der libanesische Präsident Michel Suleiman in Damaskus mit seinem syrischen Amtskollegen Bashar Assad die Aufnahme diplomatischer Beziehungen und die Festlegung der Grenzen. Dabei geht es auch um die Zughörigkeit der 25 Quadratkilometer großen Sheba-Farmen, die seit dem Junikrieg von 1967 besetzt sind. Nach den Worten des französischen Außenministers Bernard Kouchner soll der Botschafteraustausch zwischen beiden Staaten bis Ende 2008 erfolgen.

Bei einem Autobombenanschlag in der zweitgrößten libanesischen Stadt Tripoli werden elf Menschen, darunter neun Soldaten, getötet.

Die „Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung“ berichtet aus einem Gespräch mit dem Präsidenten des Europaparlaments, Hans-Gert Pöttering, dass dieser nach Besuchen in Damaskus und Beirut den Wunsch www.reiner-bernstein.de 85 – Chronologie 2008

Syriens nach einer Öffnung erkenne. Darauf solle Europa positiv reagieren.

12.08.2008: Nach einem Bericht von „Haaretz“ hat Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert dem palästinensischen Präsidenten Machmud Abbas ein Papier zugeleitet, wonach Israel bereit sei, sich aus 93 Prozent der palästinensischen Gebiete zurückzuziehen, dafür 5,5 Prozent eines Landstrichs im Negev an der Grenze zum Gazastreifen abzutreten und einen Korridor zwischen dem Gazastreifen und der Westbank einzurichten, der der israelischen Kontrolle nicht unterliegen soll. Voraussetzung sei die Rückkehr von „Fatah“ an die Macht im Gazastreifen. Zu den Themen „Jerusalem“ und „Flüchtlinge“ gibt das Papier keine näheren Auskünfte. Der Sprecher von Abbas weist den Vorschlag als unakzeptabel zurück 84 , für „Hamas“ ist er „nicht ernst gemeint“. Am 14. August berichtet „Haaretz“, in dem Papier Olmerts sei das Angebot enthalten, zehn Jahre lang jeweils 2000 Palästinenser aus humanitären Gründen in Israel aufzunehmen. Am 17. August meldet „Maariv“, dass in Olmerts Papier auch zum Thema „Jerusalem“ Aussagen enthalten seien. Danach würden die jüdischen Wohngebiete unter israelische, die arabischen Wohngebiete unter palästinensische Souveränität fallen, während Regelungen zur Jerusalemer Altstadt bis zum Abschlussdokument verschoben werden sollten.

10.08.2008: Bei einer Versammlung in Ramallah erklärt der palästinensische Verhandlungsführer – und Gegenspieler von Außenministerin Tsipi Livni – Achmed Qureia („Abu Ala“), dass die bilateralen Gespräche in einer Sackgasse stecken, es sei denn Israel ziehe sich aus allen Teilen der palästinensischen Gebiete zurück. Die einzige Alternative zur Zweistaatenregelung sei dann der gemeinsame Staat für Juden und Araber. Ein „Hamas“-Sprecher weist am 11. August diese www.reiner-bernstein.de 86 – Chronologie 2008

Lösung zurück. Israel müsse sich nicht nur aus der Westbank und aus Ost-Jerusalem zurückziehen, alles andere laufe auf den Verzicht der Palästinnenser auf ihr Recht auf Palästina hinaus. Nach einer Umfrage des palästinensischen „Jerusalem Media and Communications Center“ vom April 2008 können sich 23,4 Prozent der Palästinenser mit der Idee des gemeinsamen Staates anfreunden, während 47,1 Prozent auf einem eigenen Staat bestehen. Yossi Alpher weist am 19. August im Internetportal „bitterlemons“ darauf hin, dass die Idee des gemeinsamen Staates Verzweiflung und kein pragmatisch-strategisches Denken reflektiere. Für sie gebe es keinen israelischen Verhandlungspartner. An derselben Stelle betont Ghassan Khatib, dass im Gegensatz zu beredtsamen Ansichten und Analysen palästinensischer Intellektueller von der großen Mehrheit der palästinensischen Öffentlichkeit die Idee als eine gefährliche Strategie abgelehnt werde. Dagegen ist für den Vorsitzenden des „Community Mental Health Program“ im Gazastreifen, Eyad Sarraj, die Einstaatlösung die logische Konsequenz der israelischen Politik gegenüber den Palästinensern. Andernfalls würden unter den gegenwärtigen Voraussetzungen zwei von Israel abhängige Ministaaten im Gazastreifen unter „Hamas“ und in der Westbank unter „Fatah“ entstehen. Ägypten und Jordanien seien aufgrund ihrer politischen Schwäche gezwungen, dem Spiel der USA und Israels zu folgen, ohne auf ihre eigenen Interessen vollständig verzichten zu wollen. Da aber das unter sicherheitspolitischer Paranoia stehende Israel allein brutaler Macht folge, habe es keine Zukunft. Am 21. August schreibt der Jerusalemer Soziologe Meron Benvenisti in einer „Haaretz“-Kolumne, dass in Israel die palästinensische Favorisierung der Einstaatregelung als Beweis gewertet werde, dass die Palästinenser auf die Forderung nach Frieden verzichten. Ihre Forderung nach Annexion ihrer Gebiete und nach Gewährung von israelischen Bürgerrechten werde als eine Drohung verstanden, weil die staatsbürgerliche Gleichberechtigung eine universelle, tief in der westlichen Welt verankerte Norm sei. Dabei werde übersehen, so Benvenisti, dass dabei von Gleichberechtigung unter dem Aspekt www.reiner-bernstein.de 87 – Chronologie 2008 der Einkomensverhältnisse und der Machtverteilung keine Rede sein könne.

11.08.2008: In einem Kommentar für das israelisch-palästinensische Internetportal „bitterlemons“ erwartet Yossi Beilin bis Ende 2008 keinen Friedensvertrag zwischen beiden Seiten. Bestenfalls sei mit einer Vereinbarung über Prinzipien zwischen Israel und den Palästinensern sowie zwischen Israel und Syrien zu rechnen. Beilins Pessimismus steht in deutlichem Gegensatz zu den Forderungen, die den Verlauf der internationalen Konferenz der „Genfer Initiative“ Mitte Januar in Herzliya bestimmten 85 .

06.08.2008: In einem vom U.S. State Department verbreiteten Interviewtext erklärt Condoleezza Rice, dass die USA weder Ja noch Nein zu israelischen Militäroperationen gegen Iran sagen würden, weil Israel ein souveräner Staat sei. Dennoch gehe sie davon aus, dass alle diplomatischen Kanäle genutzt würden, um eine politische Regelung zu erreichen.

In einem zweiten Meinungsbeitrag für die „Süddeutsche Zeitung“ – der erste von ihr erschien am 15. März – führt die in Köln lebende Autorin Katajun Amirpur aus, dass Irans Präsident Machmud Achmadinedjad nicht wörtlich gesagt habe, er wolle Israel „von der Landkarte tilgen“, sondern „dieses Regime, das Jerusalem besetzt hält, müsse von den Seiten der Geschichte verschwinden“. Indem Amirpur aber bestätigt, dass die iranische Nachrichtenagentur Achmadinedjads Text weiterhin mit „the currupt [Israeli] element will be wiped off the map“ übersetzt, vermittelt sie den Eindruck, dass sich die Agentur ein vom Regime unabhängiges Dasein leisten kann.

www.reiner-bernstein.de 88 – Chronologie 2008

02.08.2008: Bei den seit Monaten schwersten palästinensischen Flügelkämpfen im Gazastreifen, bei denen sechs Personen, darunter ein Kind, sterben, geht die brüchige Waffenruhe zu Ende. Weitere drei Personen kommen am 3. August ums Leben. Hintergrund sind Rivalitäten zwischen „Hamas“ und „Fatah“-Anhängern.

Syriens Präsident Bashar Assad bemüht sich in Teheran um eine politische Regelung zum iranischen Programm der Nuklearanreicherung. Israels Verkehrsminister Shaul Mofaz erklärt von Washington aus, dass Iran vor einem wichtigen Durchbruch bei der Entwicklung seines Nuklearprogramms stehe. Israel werde keinen zweiten Holocaust zulassen.

Mohammed Suleiman, nationaler Sicherheitsberater von Syriens Präsident Bashar Assad, wird in der syrischen Hafenstadt Tartus unter mysteriösen Umständen ermordet.

Nach Angaben seines Anwalts ist der ägyptische Soziologe Saad Eddin Ibrahim, Leiter des unabhängigen „Ibn Khaldun Center for Development Studies“ in Kairo, wegen des Vorwurfs der Verunglimpfung des Staates zu zwei Jahren Haft verurteilt worden. Bereits im Mai 2001 war Ibrahim gemeinsam mit 27 Angehörigen des Instituts zu einer mehrjährigen Freiheitsstrafe bei schwerer Arbeit verurteilt worden. Ende Juli 2002 wurde er vom Gericht für Staatssicherheit wegen der illegalen Annahme von ausländischen Spendengeldern zu sieben Jahren Haft und zu Zwangsarbeit verurteilt, doch Anfang Dezember 2002 freigelassen, bevor er im September 2003 erneut beschuldigt wurde, ohne staatliche Genehmigung von der Europäischen Union Gelder angenommen zu haben. Tatsächlich hatte er mit den Mitteln ein System der Überwachung der Parlamentswahlen installiert. In einem Beitrag Mitte August 2003 schrieb Ibrahim in der Londoner Zeitung „Al- Hayat“: „We live in a generation of bad rulers and even worse intellectuals. ... It is obvious that rulers are opposed to all reform, but www.reiner-bernstein.de 89 – Chronologie 2008 it is less obvious how it can be that educated people use expressions like ›the Western invasion‹ or ›opposition to globalization.‹” Im Blick auf die Palästinenser, Sudan und Irak fuhr Ibrahim fort: “Arab rulers have done nothing to solve these long-term conflicts. Possibly they had an interest for them to continue, or perhaps they lacked the courage to tell the strife-torn peoples that war is no solution, or maybe they were unable to honestly tell their colleagues that they had to compromise.”

01.08.2008: Beim Einsturz eines Tunnels zwischen dem Gazastreifen und der ägyptischen Sinai-Halbinsel wird ein Palästinenser getötet.

Juli/August 2008: In der Ausgabe July/August 2008 berichtet der in Washington, D.C., herausgegebene „Report on Israeli Settlement in the Occupied Territories“ unter Berufung auf „Peace Now“ und einen Bericht von Akiva Eldar in „Haaretz“, dass gegenwärtig rund viertausend Siedlungseinheiten in der Westbank und in Ost-Jerusalem im Bau seien. Von den 184 mobilen Wohneinheiten, die in den ersten sieben Monaten 2008 aufgestellt worden seien, befänden sich 82 Prozent östlich der „Trennungsmauern“.

Juli 2008

30.07.2008: Unter dem Druck von sechs Ermitlungsverfahren gegen ihn kündigt Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert vor Journalisten in seiner Residenz an, dass er bei den parteiinternen Vorwahlen am 17. September nicht mehr kandidieren werde. Er werde zurücktreten, sobald der neue Spitzenkandidat von „Kadima“ gewählt worden sei. Bis dahin wolle er für die Ziele des Friedens arbeiten. Da sich die www.reiner-bernstein.de 90 – Chronologie 2008

Bildung einer neuen Regierung als schwierig erweisen dürfte, könnte Omert noch mehrere Monate im Amt bleiben. Verkehrsminister Shaul Mofaz zeigt an, dass er im Fall seiner Wahl eine „Regierung der nationalen Einheit“ bilden werde, während Oppositionsführer Benjamin Netanyahu („Likud“) allgemeine Neuwahlen verlangt. Verteidigungsminister Ehud Barak (Arbeitspartei) sieht sich in einem Interview von Washington aus in seiner Forderung nach dem Rücktritt Olmerts bestätigt. Der palästinensische Chefdiplomat Saeb Erakat, der sich mit Achmed Qureia und Tsipi Livni zu Gesprächen in Washington aufhält, wünscht die Fortsetzung der Verhandlungen. In gleicher Weise äußert sich Livni 86 . Ein Sprecher von „Hamas“ bezeichnet die Ankündigung des Rücktritts als ihren Sieg und als ein Zeichen des politischen Verfalls in Israel. Am 31. August reicht einer der engsten Berater Olmerts, Yoram Turbovitcz, seine Demission ein. Nach israelischen Presseberichten vom 20. August spricht sich Olmert als seinen Nachfolger an der „Kadima“-Spitze für Innenminister Meir Shitreet aus, der in den Umfragen bislang an letzter Stelle unter den Kandidaten rangiert.

29.07.2008: Unter türkischer Vermittlung beginnen Israel und Syrien die vierte Runde ihrer inoffiziellen Gespräche. Die Regierung in Jerusalem sieht sich nach eigenen Worten durch eine Reihe von syrischen Maßnahmen dazu ermutigt, ohne diese zu benennen. Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert sagt vorher, dass die Regierung in Damaskus im Verlauf der Gespräche bald vor der Entscheidung stehen werde, ihre Beziehungen zu Iran zu überprüfen. In diplomatischen Kreisen wird vermutet, dass die Europäische Union bei der Suche nach israelisch-syrischen Regelungen eine wichtige Rolle spielen könnte, nachdem die gegenwärtige französische Ratspräsidentschaft die Beziehungen zwischen Paris und Damaskus aufgewertet hat. Die für den 4. September geplante fünfte Gesprächsrunde wird von Israel abgesagt, weil der außenpolitische Berater Olmerts, Yoram Turbowicz, als Verhandlungsführer www.reiner-bernstein.de 91 – Chronologie 2008 zurückgetreten ist. Am 4. September erklärt Präsident Bashar Assad, dass er bei der türkischen Regierung ein „Prinzipiendokument“ für die künftigen direkten Verhandlungen hinterlegt habe und nun auf die Antwort aus Israel warte.

In einem Interview mit dem Armeerundfunk betont Israels Außenministerin Tsipi Livni, dass sie alle persönlichen und fachlichen Voraussetzungen für das Amt des Regierungschefs mitbringe. Sie kündigt an, bei den für Mitte September vorgesehenen parteiinternen Wahlen gegen Ehud Olmert anzutreten. Sicherheit sei viel mehr als eine Armee und das Kommando darüber. Sicherheit bestehe darin, die richtigen Entscheidungen zu treffen, fährt Livni fort.

Bei einem Zusammenstoß zwischen israelischen Soldaten und Palästinensern, die gegen die „Trennungsmauern“ in dem Dorf Naalin in der Westbank demonstrieren, wird ein neunjähriger Junge getötet:

Jonathan Steele berichtet im britischen „Guardian“ unter Berufung auf die zwei Menschenrechtsorganisationen „al-Haq“ und „Human Rights Watch“, dass bei „Fatah“ und „Hamas“ Missbrauch und Folter an der Tagesordnung seien 87 .

27.07.2008: In der „Washington Post“ berichtet Glenn Kessler, dass die Erfüllung arabischer Finanzzusagen für die Palästinensische Autonomiebehörde weit hinter den Zusagen zurückbleibe, obwohl die Öl-Einnahmen gewaltig gestiegen seien. Bahrein, Oman, Libyen, Kuwait und Qatar seien gegenüber der Autonomiebehörde mit 700 Millionen US-Dollar im Verzug. Dagegen hätten die Weltbank, die USA und die Europäische Union ihre Zusagen in diesem Jahr bereits fast erfüllt. www.reiner-bernstein.de 92 – Chronologie 2008

26.07.2008: Bei einem Sprengstoffanschlag in Gaza-Stadt werden fünf Angehörige von „Hamas“ und ein vierjähriges Mädchen getötet. Die „Hamas“-Führung beschuldigt „Fatah“ der Verantwortung für die Anschläge und nimmt mehr als zweihundert ihrer Anhänger fest. Im Gegensatz zu dem seit sechs Jahren für die ARD arbeitenden Kameramann Sawah Abu Saif können sich die unabhängigen Abgeordneten des „Palestinian Legislative Council“ Ziad Abu Amr, Leiter des „Palestinian Council for Foreign Relations“ und unabhängiger Abgeordneten im „Pelstzinian Legislative Council (OLC)“, und Zakariya al-Agha der Festnahme entziehen. Am 30. Juli schließt die ARD ihr Büro in Gaza-Stadt, weil Abu Seif noch immer von „Hamas“ festgehalten wird. Der ARD-Vorsitzende Fritz Raff (Saarbrücken) befürchtet, dass der Kameramann gefoltert worden ist 88 . Nach seiner Freilassung am 31. Juli bestätigen sich diese Vermutungen. Das ARD-Büro soll bis auf weiteres geschlossen bleiben. Am 15. August wird es vorübergehend wieder geöffnet.

24.07.2008: Britische Parlamentarier fordern im Unterhaus die Nutzung des europäisch-israelischen Assoziierungsvertrages, um Israel „wirksamer zur Einhaltung seiner Verpflichtungen zu übereden“, und äußern ihr Erstaunen über die EU-Entscheidung, die Beziehungen zu Israel aufzuwerten, während es nach wie vor internationales Recht verletze.

23.07.2008: Während seines eintägigen Besuchs in Israel und in Ramallah wird der US-demokratische Präsidentschaftsbewerber Barack Obama vom israelischen Staatspräsidenten Shimon Peres aufgefordert, im Falle seiner Wahl ein „hervorragender Präsident der Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika“ zu werden. Die Welt brauche dringend eine www.reiner-bernstein.de 93 – Chronologie 2008

Vision und eine Führung. Aus seinem Gespräch mit dem palästinensischen Präsidenten Machmud Abbas zitieren Nachrichtenagenturen Obama mit den Worten, dass er „nicht eine einzige Minute verschwenden“ werde, um politische Fortschritte auf der Grundlage amerikanischer Initiativen zu erreichen. Gegenüber Verteidigungsminister Ehud Barak rückt Obama von der antisyrischen Boykottpolitik George W. Bushs ab und erklärt, dass der Friedensprozess zwischen Israel und Syrien sehr wichtig sei. Wenige Stunden nach Obamas Abreise kündigt der Sprecher des Verteidigungsministeriums den Bau einer neuen Siedlung im Jordantal unter dem Namen Maskiot an. Am 25. Juli warnt M.J. Rosenberg vom linksliberalen „Israel Public Forum“ in Washington, D.C., vor der Illusion, dass Obama den arabisch-israelischen Konflikt genau kenne. Das Gegenteil sei der Fall.

22.07.2008: Ein junger palästinensischer Bauarbeiter aus Ost-Jerusalem fährt mit seinem schweren Radlader vorsätzlich in eine Passantengruppe hinein und verletzt achtzehn Personen zum Teil schwer, bevor er von einem israelischen Grenzpolizisten erschossen wird. Bei der Begegnung zwischen Israels Staatspräsidenten Shimon Peres und dem palästinensischen Präsidenten Machmud Abbas in der Jerusalemer Residenz von Peres, bei der zum ersten Mal die palästinensische Flagge gehisst wird, verurteilt Abbas den Terroranschlag. Israelische Politiker verlangen für palästinensische Attentäter und ihre Familien ein erhöhtes Strafmaß. Wenige Stunden nach dem Anschlag greift eine große Gruppe israelischer Religionsschüler im orthodoxen Wohnviertel Makor Baruch zwei palästinensische Jugendliche mit Schlagstöcken an.

Der nach der Annapolis-Konferenz Ende November 2007 von Außenminister Condoleezza Rice ernannte Koordinator General James Jones bereitet nach einer Meldung von „Haaretz“ einen äußerst kritischen Bericht über die israelische Besatzungspolitik vor. www.reiner-bernstein.de 94 – Chronologie 2008

In den vergangenen Wochen habe die US-Administration darüber gestritten, ob der Bericht in voller Länge oder nur als Zusammenfassung veröffentlicht werden solle. Er nehme sich die israelische Definition von Sicherheit in der Westbank im Blick auf einen Endstatusvertrag und die Effizienz der palästinensischen Sicherheitsdienste kritisch vor, wobei die USA ihre Hilfe für die Reform dieser Dienste nicht koordiniert hätten.

17.07.2008: Einen Tag nach einem Treffen mit europäischen Botschaftern im Außen- und Sicherheitspolitischen Ausschuss der Knesset ruft Yossi Beilin („Meretz/Yachad“) die europäischen Staaten dazu auf, sich auf eine Zahl palästinensischer Flüchtlinge festzulegen, die sie im Fall eines Friedensabkommens bereit sind aufzunehmen. Nur eine „bestimmte, nicht große“ Zahl würde von dieser Option Gebrauch machen, fügt Beilin in einem Interview mit der „Jerusalem Post“ hinzu. Eine Sprecherin der EU-Botschaften erwidert, dass es für eine Festlegung zu früh sei 89 .

Nach einer Meldung des „Inter Press Service“ spricht sich die überwältigende Mehrheit der US-amerikanischen Juden für die Wahl von Barack Obama im November 2008 aus. Gemäß einer Umfrage von „“ unter 800 Juden lehnen 83 Prozent die Nahostpolitik von Präsident George W. Bush ab, 16 Prozent stimmen ihr zu. Fünfzig Prozent stimmen der Frage zu, dass „Israel wahre Sicherheit nur durch Friedensverträge“ mit den arabischen Nachbarn erreichen könne, während 34 Prozent die Auffassung vertreten, dass Israels Sicherheit von der Bewahrung seiner militärischen Überlegenheit abhänge. 75 Prozent vertreten die Auffassung, dass die Zweistaatenlösung Israels Sicherheit stärken würde, und 72 Prozent glauben, dass die Zweistaatenlösung auch im Interesse der US- amerikanischen Sicherheit liege. 48 Prozent würden eher einen Kandidaten wählen, der Positionen einschließlich eines Angriffs auf Iran vertritt, wenn es ein Nuklearprogramm verfolgt, während 41 www.reiner-bernstein.de 95 – Chronologie 2008

Prozent einen solchen Kandidaten eher nicht wählen würden 90 . Dagegen berichten andere Medien, dass nach einer Gallup-Umfrage nur 61 Prozent der amerikanischen Juden Obama bei der Wahl am 04. November unterstützen würden.

16.07.2008: Nach diskreter Vermittlung des deutschen Bundesnachrichtendienstes (BND) übergibt die „Hisbollah“ am Morgen am Grenzort Rosh Haniqra die sterblichen Überreste der beiden von der „Hisbollah“ am 12. Juli 2006 an der libanesischen Grenze verschleppten israelischen Soldaten Ehud Goldwasser und Eldad Regev dem Internationalen Komitee vom Roten Kreuz. Ihre und die Entführung von drei weiteren israelischen Soldaten war der Auslöser des 33 Tage dauernden zweiten Libanon-Krieges. Im Gegenzug übergibt Israel 199 libanesische und palästinensische Tote des damaligen Krieges und lässt die libanesischen Gefangenen Khaled Zidan, Maher Kurani, Mohammed Srour und Hussein Suleiman frei sowie den 1980 wegen zweifachen Mordes zu 542 Jahren Gefängnis verurteilten Samir Kuntar 91 . Ein „Hisbollah“- Repräsentant bezeichnet die Freilassung als „offizielles Eingeständnis der Niederlage“ Israels. Erstmals seit Dezember 2006 zeigt sich der seither im Untergrund lebende „Hisbollah“- Generalsekretär Hassan Nasrallah in der Öffentlichkeit. Die fünf Libanesen werden, in Kampfanzüge eingekleidet, von jubelnden Demonstranten und am Abend von Staatspräsident Michel Suleiman am Beiruter Flughafen begrüßt. Ministerpräsident Fuad Siniora erklärt den Tag ihrer Übergabe zum Feiertag. Viele Geschäfte, Schulen und Universitäten bleiben geschlossen. Dass die Freilassung von Kuntar und des am 12. Februar in Damaskus einem Anschlag zum Opfer gefallenen Imad Mughniyeh 92 „im Mittelpunkt der Feierlichkeiten stehen, wirft ein fahles Licht auf den Heldenkult in Libanon – zwei Mörder, verehrt von den Massen“, schreibt am 17. Juli der Libanon-Korrespondent der „Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung“ Markus Bickel. www.reiner-bernstein.de 96 – Chronologie 2008

Nach einem Bericht der Moskauer Wirtschaftszeitung „Kommersant (Der Kaufmann)“ hat Saudi-Arabien der russischen Regierung angeboten, von ihr Waffen im Wert von 1,5 Milliarden Euro zu kaufen, wenn sie die Unterstützung Irans einstelle93 . Ein Sprecher von Ministerpräsident Wladimir Putin weist den Bericht zurück.

Marina S. Ottaway und Mohammed Herzallah berichten in einer Veröffentlichung des „Carnegie Endowment for International Peace“, dass arabische Staaten zumindest temporär eigene diplomatische Initiativen im Nahen Osten in die Wege leiten, die der US-Politik zuwiderlaufen, weil sie nicht länger der Administration in Washington vertrauen. Das gelte vor allem für die traditionellen Verbündeten Qatar und die Vereinigten Arabischen Emirate. Saudi-Arabien bemühe sich um die Versöhnung zwischen „Fatah“ und „Hamas“, obwohl die USA sich weigern, die Islamische Widerstandsbewegung anzuerkennen. Ägypten sei über die Beendigung der humanitären Krise im Gazastreifen hinaus mit der ungeklärten Präsidentschaftsnachfolge belastet, während allein Jordanien stillhalte, weil es zu stark von US-amerikanischer Hilfe abhängig sei 94 .

14.07.2008: In einem Meinungsbeitrag für die „New York Times“ kündigt der demokratische Präsidentschaftsbewerber Barack Obama seinen Plan an, die US-amerikanischen Truppen in Übereinstimmung mit Vorstellungen des irakischen Präsidenten Nuri al-Maliki innerhalb von sechzehn Monaten nach seinem Amtsantritt im Januar 2009 aus dem Zweistromland abzuziehen; Maliki selbst besteht darauf, dass bis Ende 2011 die internationalen Koalitionstruppen den Irak verlassen haben Gleichzeitig bekräftigt Obama in einer Rede am 15. Juli seine Absicht der massiven Truppenverstärkung in Afghanistan in einer Größenordnung von zehntausend Mann, um die Netzwerke www.reiner-bernstein.de 97 – Chronologie 2008 von „Al-Qaida“ und „Taliban“ zu zerstören sowie den „Schurkenstaaten“ den Zugriff auf Atomwaffen zu versperren.

13.07.2008: Der Co-Vorsitzende des „Israel Palestine Center for Research and Information“ in Jerusalem, Gershon Baskin, veröffentlicht in der palästinensischen Tageszeitung „Al-Quds“ einen Meinungsartikel, in dem er die Chancen für ein ausgehandeltes Vertragswerk zwischen beiden Seiten bis Ende des Jahres noch immer für möglich hält. Ein Scheitern würde dem Untergang der Zweistaatenregelung gleichkommen und eine neue, noch schrecklichere Runde der Gewalt einläuten. Das Gerede von der Einstaatlösung sei eine Lüge, denn sie drehe den Konflikt in die Richtung „Wir oder sie“ zurück, weil ein gemeinsamer Staat das Grundrecht des israelischen und des palästinensischen Volkes auf Selbstbestimmung leugnen würde. Scheitert der gegenwärtige Verhandlungsprozess, seien die Palästinenser aufgefordert, für das Ende der Besatzung zugunsten ihres souveränen Staates ohne Gewalt mit allen Mitteln des zivilen Widerstandes zu kämpfen. Der erste Schritt dazu sei die Proklamation des Staates Palästina in den Grenzen vom 4. Juni 1967 mit Jerusalem als Hauptstadt und die Aufforderung an die Welt, den neuen Staat in alle internationalen Foren einschließlich der Vereinten Nationen mit vollen Rechten aufzunehmen sowie die palästinensischen diplomatischen Vertretungen in Botschaften umzuwandeln 95 .

12./13.07.2008: Unter Vermittlung des französischen Präsidenten Nicolas Sarkozy sagt der syrische Präsident Bashar Assad im Gespräch mit dem libanesischen Ministerpräsidenten Fuad Siniora zu, erstmals diplomatische Beziehungen zwischen beiden Ländern aufzunehmen. Das französisch-syrische Kommuniqué erwähnt die Zusage Assads jedoch nicht 96 . Iran habe nicht die Absicht, Atomwaffen zu besitzen, www.reiner-bernstein.de 98 – Chronologie 2008 erklärt Assad zu Interessen, dass sein Land die Beziehungen zu Teheran einfriert. Bundesaußenminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier äußert am 13. Juli die Hoffnung, dass den Worten Taten folgen. Zur Aufwertung Syriens durch die französische Einladung nach Paris wiederholt Rudolph Chimelli am 14. Juli in der „Süddeutschen Zeitung“ die eiserne Regel für den Nahostkonflikt: „Es gibt keinen Krieg ohne Ägypten und keinen Frieden ohne Syrien.“

Unter Leitung der Präsidenten Nicolas Sarkozy und Hosni Mubarak findet in Paris die Gründungsversammlung des neuen Partnerschaftsprogramms mit dem umständlichen, vor allem deutsch-französische Kompromisse widerspiegelnden Titel „Barcelona-Prozess: Union für den Mittelmeerraum“ statt. Die neue Union hat 44 Mitglieder, darunter alle EU-Staaten, außerdem Monaco, Kroatien, Bosnien, Albanien und Montenegro, Israel, die Palästinensische Autonomiebehörde, alle arabischen Staaten sowie die Türkei. Der libysche Staatschef Muammar Ghaddafi nimmt nicht teil, Jordaniens König Abdullah II. weilt zu einem Privatbesuch in den USA. Kurzfristige Absagen kommen vom belgischen Ministerpräsidenten Yves Leterme und vom marokkanischen König Mohamed VI., letzterer aus „familiären Gründen“. Israel erhebt bis zuletzt Einwände gegen die Mitwirkung der Arabischen Liga, weil diese Israel wegen seiner Siedlungspolitik feindlich gesinnt sei. Der stellvertretende ägyptische Außenminister Madjali Wahhabi fordert den Generalsekretär der Liga Amr Moussa auf, die politische Einseitigkeit der Liga aufzugeben, auch Syrien zeige sich moderater als in der Vergangenheit. Zu einer Begegnung zwischen Syriens Präsident Bashir Assad und Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert kommt es in Paris nicht, dagegen trifft Olmert seinen türkischen Amtskollegen Recep Tayyip Erdogan zu einem 30-minütigen Gespräch, woraufhin Erdogan ein 45-minütiges Gespräch mit Assad geführt habe. Ein ranghoher syrischer Vertreter wird am 14. Juli in „Haaretz“ mit den Worten zitiert, dass die indirekten Verhandlungen mit Israel so lange fortgesetzt würden, solange es keinen amerikanischen Partner gebe. Israel und die Türkei, so heißt es in www.reiner-bernstein.de 99 – Chronologie 2008 dem Bericht weiter, würden sich gegenwärtig um eine Formel bemühen, welche die Beteiligung der USA erlaube. Bis zuletzt ist der für das Abschlussdokument vorgesehene Passus über den israelisch-palästinensischen Konflikt strittig, obwohl es die Absicht ist, die Mittelmeer-Union gegenüber dem 1995 initiierten Barcelona- Prozess politisch aufzuwerten 97 . Dagegen kündigt die Abschlusserklärung sechs Infrastruktur-, Wirtschafts-, Umwelt- und Investitionsprojekte an: Verbesserung der Wasserqualität im Mittelmeer, Autobahnbau, Ausbau der Seeverbindungen, Katastrophenschutz, Ausbau der Solarenergie und Wirtschaftsförderung, dazu Austauschprogramme für Studenten 98 . Ein Jahr später, am 29. Juli 2009, berichtet Nikolas Busse in der „Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung“, dass die Mittelmeerunion aufgrund innereuropäischer Kontroversen und Abstimmungsprobleme sowie der politischen Spannungen zwischen den Mitgliedern nicht gut vorangekommen sei. Sakozys Sonderberater Henri Guaino habe vor kurzem in der französische Nationalversammlung eingeräumt, dass mit „Gesprächen über die Säuberung des Mittelmeeres“ der Nahostkonflikt, die Teilung Zyperns und der Streit über die West-Sahara nicht aus der Welt geschafft werden könnten.

Das „Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network“ bedauert, dass das Abschlusskommuniqué der Tagung ausschließlich wirtschaftliche Projekte ausweist und damit den Ansprüchen der Völker in der Region nach Entwicklung und fundamentalen Freiheiten nicht Rechnung trage. Die Ernennung von Präsident Hosni Mubarak als Ko-Vorsitzendem der Mittelmeer-Union und die Ansiedlung ihres Sekretariats in Kairo unterstütze diktatorische Führungen und trage dazu bei, dass die Vertreter der Zivilgesellschaften weiter an den Rand gedrängt würden. Die Menschenrechtsorganisation betont, dass die Mittelmeer-Union nicht die Schaffung eines palästinensischen Staates aus den Augen verlieren dürfe 99 . www.reiner-bernstein.de 100 – Chronologie 2008

In Anwesenheit von Präsident Machmud Abbas erklärt Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert gegenüber Reportern in Paris, dass „wir noch nie so dicht an der Möglichkeit wie heute sind, eine Einigung zu erreichen“. In seiner offiziellen Ansprache äußert er sich vorsichtiger: „Wir sind in der Mitte von Verhandlungen“100 , wobei auffällig ist, dass er dabei auf die Rolle der USA hinweist und Europa nicht erwähnt. In der gemeinsamen Pressekonferenz entgegnet Abbas, „dass wir den Frieden innerhalb einiger Monate erreichen können“. Er würde sich, so Olmert weiter, eine direkte Verbindung zu Syrien wünschen, doch nicht auf Kosten der Verhandlungen mit den Palästinensern, „die von größter Bedeutung für uns sind“.

11.07.2008: Nach monatelangen, zum Teil blutigen Auseinandersetzungen, denen etwa siebentausend Menschen zum Opfer gefallen sein sollen, präsentiert sich in Beirut die neue libanesische Regierung unter Fuad Siniora. Die „Hisbollah“ stellt mit dem Arbeitsministerium nur einen Posten im dreißig Personen umfassenden Kabinett, doch wird ihr Gewicht durch fünf Minister gestärkt, die von der mit ihr verbündeten „Freien Patriotischen Bewegung“ gestellt werden. Drei Minister, darunter der Verteidigungs- und der Innenminister, werden von Präsident Michel Suleiman ernannt. Die Opposition hat ihre Forderung nach einem Vetorecht im Kabinett durchgesetzt. In der libanesischen Presse werden Bedenken geäußert, ob die neue Regierung die vor ihnen stehenden Aufgaben, die öffentliche Ordnung wiederherzustellen, bewältigen könne.

10.07.2008: In Anwesenheit von Kultur- und Sportminister Raleb Madjadele sowie Innenminister Meir Shitreet und Bildungsministerin Yuli Tamir erklärt Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert vor der von seinem Büro einberufenen „Konferenz für den arabischen Sektor“ in Haifa, dass die „israelischen Araber keine strategische Bedrohung sind. Sie sind www.reiner-bernstein.de 101 – Chronologie 2008

Bürger des Staates Israel mit gleichen Rechten. Ihr seid immer Teil des Staates gewesen und werdet es immer bleiben.“ Er hoffe, fährt Olmert fort, dass diese Konferenz dazu beitrage, Erscheinungen des Rassismus in der israelischen Gesellschaft zum Verschwinden zu bringen, und dass sie zum Wendepunkt „bei der Verbesserung des Status der israelischen Araber im Land“ werde.

09.07.2008: Die Jerusalemer Stadtverwaltung veröffentlicht Pläne für den Bau von je 900 neuen Wohneinheiten in Pisgat Ze’ev und Har Homa.

Die israelische Menschenrechtsorganisation „B’tselem“ („Im Angesicht“, Gen. 1,27) teilt mit, dass die israelische Regierung die Empfehlungen des Internationalen Gerichtshofs in Den Haag vom Juli 2004 („Advisory Opinion“ about „The Legal Consequences of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory“) 101 , den Verlauf der Trennungsmauern zu korrigieren, nicht Folge geleistet habe. Bis Mai 2008 seien 57 Prozent der geplanten Route, nämlich 409 Kilometer, fertiggestellt worden, weitere 66 Kilometer seien im Bau, und mit den restlichen 248 Kilometern sei noch nicht begonnen worden. Insgesamt würden damit 11,9 Prozent der Westbank und des einstigen arabischen Jerusalem dem israelischen Territorium zugeschlagen, auf dem gegenwärtig 498.000 Palästinenser (davon 222.500 in Ost-Jerusalem) und 381.000 Israelis in sechzig Siedlungen leben.

„Human Rights Watch“ fordert den jordanischen Ministerpräsidenten Nader Dahabi auf, den Gesetzentwurf zurückzuziehen, womit die Arbeit von unabhängigen Nichtregierungsorganisationen (NGO’s) eingeschränkt werden soll. Der Entwurf zeige die Intoleranz gegenüber einer kritischen Debatte über die Demokratie im Königreich. Die Europäische Union und die USA werden aufgefordert, im Zuge ihrer immensen finanziellen Hilfsmittel auf die Einhaltung der Menschenrechte in Jordanien zu drängen 102 . www.reiner-bernstein.de 102 – Chronologie 2008

Das „Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS)“ fordert nach einer Meldung des „Euro-Mediteranean Human Rights Network“ die syrische Regierung dazu auf, die summarische Exekution und die unmenschliche Behandlung von Insassen Militärgefängnis Sednaya zu beenden. Die Union der Mittelmeeranrainer, die am 13./14. Juli in Paris begründet werden soll und an der Präsident Bashar Assad teilnimmt, müsse in Damaskus in diesem Sinne intervenieren 103 .

Das iranische Militär feuert nach eigenen Angaben neun Kurz- und Mittelstreckenraketen bei einem Manöver in der Straße von Hormuz ab, die die Feinde des Landes zur „Vorsicht bei ihren politischem und militärischem Kalkül“ veranlassen sollen. Am selben Tag kündigen israelische Experten den Bau von Spionagesatelliten an, die auch über den Iran eingesetzt werden können. Am 10. Juli setzt Iran die Raketentests fort104 .

07.07.2008: Israels Verteidigungsminister Ehud Barak verbietet 36 internationale Organisationen, denen er die Unterstützung und Finanzierung von „Hamas“ nachsagt. Im vergangenen Jahr sollen sie rund 120 Millionen US-Dollar aus arabischen Staaten in den Gazastreifen und die Westbank eingeschleust haben. Gleichzeitig beschlagnahmen israelische Soldaten Computer, Dokumente, Bargeld und Möbel von Einrichtungen in Nablus, die „Hamas“ zu Wohltätigkeitszwecken unterhält. Außerdem sollen eine Mädchenschule und ein Sportklub geschlossen sowie Büros des palästinensischen Religionsministeriums durchsucht worden sein. Die Razzien dauern in den folgenden Tagen an.

Das Büro von Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert bestätigt, dass eine durch die Vereinten Nationen vermittelte Vereinbarung über einen Gefangenenaustausch Mitte kommender Woche mit der libanesischen „Hisbollah“ unterzeichnet worden ist. Von israelischer www.reiner-bernstein.de 103 – Chronologie 2008

Seite gehören dazu Ehud Goldwasser und Eldad Regev, die nach ihrer Gefangenennahme im Juni 2006 Auslöser für den zweiten Libanon-Krieg waren. Es wird vermutet, dass beide Soldaten tot sind.

Die Korrespondentin Sana Abdallah berichtet für „Middle East Times“ aus Amman über Anzeichen einer vorsichtigen politischen Abkehr Syriens vom Iran. In einem Interview mit dem Pariser „Figaro“ am 8. Juli äußert Präsident Bashar Assad die Erwartung, mit Israel direkte Gespräche aufzunehmen, und kündigt die „Öffnung nach Frankreich und nach Europa“ an.

06.07.2008: Nach einem Bericht der palästinensischen Nachrichtenagentur „Wafa“ hat Israels Staatspräsident Shimon Peres in einem Telefonat seinem palästinensischen Amtskollegen Machmud Abbas versichert, dass er entgegen der ihm zugeschriebenen Äußerung am Friedensprozess festhalte.

02.07.2008: Ein 30jähriger palästinensischer Arbeiter aus dem Ost-Jerusalemer Zur Baher, der am Bau der innerstädtischen Stadtbahnlinie beteiligt ist, tötet mit seinem Bulldozer in der Jaffastraße drei Israelis, darunter zwei Frauen, bevor er von einem Polizisten erschossen wird. Die israelischen Behörden gehen von der Tat eines Mannes mit gewalttätigem Hintergrund aus. Dagegen bezeichnet „Hamas“ in einer Erklärung den Mordanschlag als das „natürliche Ergebnis der israelischen Aggression“ gegen das palästinensische Volk. Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert verlangt die Zerstörung des Hauses des Attentäters, obwohl sich seine Familie von dem Mordanschlag distanziert. Verteidigungsminister Ehud Barak ordnet die Vorbereitung der Sprengung des Hauses an, auch wenn Generalstaatsanwalt Menachem Mazouz „ernsthafte rechtliche www.reiner-bernstein.de 104 – Chronologie 2008

Probleme“ heraufziehen sieht. Das israelische „Committee Against the Demolition of [Palestinian] Houses“ teilt mit, dass das israelische Militär seit 1967 rund 19.000 palästinensische Häuser niedergerissen habe.

01.07.2008: Die israelische Menschenrechtsorganisation „B’tselem (Im Angesicht, Gen. 1,27)“ wirft den Behörden ihres Landes Wasserdiebstahl vor. Jüngster Anlass für die Klage ist die skandalös ungleiche Versorgung zweier palästinensischer Dörfer in der Nähe von Ramallah, die im Gegensatz zu der jüdischen Siedlung Har Adar von privaten Lieferanten Wasser für den täglichen Gebrauch zum sechsfachen Preis kaufen müssen. Die Bohrung von Grundwasserquellen ist den Palästinensern verboten. Das Anzapfen „wilder Brunnen“ gehe mit der Gefahr verunreinigten Wassers einher, schreibt die Organisation.

Juli 2008: In seiner Juli-Umfrage berichtet das „Tami Steinmetz Center for Peace Research“ an der Univerität Tel Aviv, dass mehr als zwei Drittel aller Israelis nicht nur den Rücktritt von Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert fordern, sondern dass 53 Prozent dies auch von der gesamten Regierung verlagen. Nur 12,5 Prozent sprechen sich für die Fortsetzung der gegenwärtigen Regierung aus, während 25,5 Prozent zumindest eine neue Führung an der Spitze verlangen. 56 Prozent aller Israelis glauben, dass Jerusalem faktisch zwischen Israel und den Palästinensern geteilt sei. In den vergangenen fünf Jahren haben nur 39 Prozent Jerusalem einen Besuch abgestattet, im selben Zeitraum haben weitere 39 Prozent die Stadt nur zwischen einem und fünf Mal besucht. Dennoch lehnen 61,5 Prozent die Übergabe des Ostteils an die Palästinenser selbst im Falle eines Friedensvertrages ab. 42 Prozent der Israelis halten John McCain gegenüber Barack Obama für den besseren US-Präsidenten. www.reiner-bernstein.de 105 – Chronologie 2008

Juni 2008

30.06.2008: Das israelische Parlament verabschiedet in erster Lesung mit 65 gegen 18 Stimmen ein Gesetz, wonach jeder Rückzug aus den 1967 eroberten Gebieten einem Volksentscheid unterworfen oder von der Knesset mit Zweidrittelmehrheit gebilligt werden muss. In den Reden wird vor allem auf die Golanhöhen Bezug genommen. Außerdem beschließt das Parlament ein Gesetz, das die Kandidatur von Bewerbern ausschließt, die zu „Feindstaaten“ Kontakt unterhalten. Da es auf arabisch-palästinensische Abgeordnete abzielt, wird es als „Bishara-Gesetz“ bezeichnet 105 . Azmi Bishara war beschuldigt worden, während des zweiten Libanon-Krieges 2006 landesverräterische Beziehungen zu „Hisbollah“ und Syrien unterhalten zu haben, und entzog sich im April 2007 der Anklage durch Flucht ins Ausland 106 . Arabische Abgeordnete kündigen Klage beim Obersten Gericht an.

27.06.2008: In einem Beitrag des „Middle East Institute“ in Washington, D.C., wird von Überlegungen Yossi Beilins bei einer Veranstaltung des „Carnegie Endowment for International Peace“ am 23. Juni berichtet, dass die Ehud Olmert unterstellte Schwäche in Wahrheit seine politische Stärke sei: Er habe nichts zu verlieren. Die Kluft zwischen dem palästinensischen Konzept einer Zweistaatenlösung und der israelischen Idee eines umfassenden Friedens sei so klein, dass sie leicht überwunden werden könne. Alles hänge von der Einflussnahme durch den US-amerikanischen Präsidenten ab. Die von der iranischen Nukleartechnologie ausgehende Gefahr treffe nicht Israel. Gefährlich sei indessen, dass Teheran sie „Hisbollah“ und „Hamas“ zugänglich machen könnte. www.reiner-bernstein.de 106 – Chronologie 2008

24.06.2008: Mit zwanzig Außenministern und Delegationen aus 43 Staaten findet die eintägige „Berliner Konferenz zur Unterstützung der palästinensischen zivilen Sicherheit und Rechtsstaatlichkeit“ statt. Zu den Teilnehmern gehören der palästinensische Ministerpräsident Salam Fayyad, die israelische Außenministerin Tsipi Livni, ihre US- amerikanische Amtskollegin Condoleezza Rice, der russische Außenminister Sergei Lawrow, der Generalsekretär der Arabischen Liga Amr Mussa sowie die Europas Außenkommissare Javier Solana und Benita Ferrero-Waldner. In ihrer Eröffnungsansprache unterstreicht Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel, dass die Konferenz nur ein „kleines Mosaiksteinchen im großen Aufbauwerk der Zwei- Staaten-Lösung“ sei. Der Nahostbeauftragte des „Quartett“ Tony Blair erklärt den erstaunten Publikum: „Wenn die Palästinenser selbst für Sicherheit sorgen können, entfällt der Grund für die israelische Besatzung.“ Ferrero-Waldner beklagt bei der abschließenden Pressekonferenz ohne Namensnennung, dass die Zahlungsmoral der arabischen Staaten seit der Pariser Geberkonferenz Mitte Dezember 2007 weit hinter den Zusagen zurückgeblieben sei. Die Konferenz verständigt sich auf neue Finanzhilfen in Höhe von 156 Millionen Euro bis 2010 für die Palästinenser; die Bundesrepublik steuert dazu 15 Millionen Euro bei. Bundesaußenminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier erklärt am Vorabend der Konferenz in Ersten Deutschen Fernsehen „etwas vorsichtig“, dass er „eine neue Dynamik im Augenblick“ sehe. Zum Abschluss der Konferenz betont er, dass von hier „ein klares Signal der Unterstützung für den Ausbau eines palästinensischen Staates“ ausgehe. Doch „niemand hier um den Tisch ist naiv optimistisch“.

Als „ergänzende Maßnahme“ zur UN-Resolution 1803 vom März 2008 verschärft die Europäische Union ihre Sanktionen gegen Iran durch Einfrieren von Vermögen. Die Sanktionen treffen vor allem die in staatlichem Besitz befindliche Bank „Melli“ in den Standorten www.reiner-bernstein.de 107 – Chronologie 2008

Hamburg, London und Paris. Das größte Kreditinstitut mit Sitz in Teheran regelt einen wesentlichen Teil der iranisch-europäischen Geschäftsbeziehungen. Außerdem erweitert die EU die Liste von iranischen Personen und Körperschaften mit Verbindungen zum iranischen Atomprogramm. Ihnen soll die Einreise verweigert und ihr Vermögen eingefroren werden. Die deutsche Industrie befürchtet als iranische Gegenmaßnahme die Einstellung von Zahlungen für erbrachte Leistungen. In diesem Fall müssen von den Hermes- Bürgschaften Haftungsansprüche in Milliardenhöhe übernommen werden.

Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert reist zu Gesprächen mit Ägyptens Staatspräsident Hosni Mubarak in den Badeort Sharm el- Sheikh. Dabei geht es um die Freilassung des israelischen Soldaten Gilad Shalit und die unter ägyptischer Vermittlung erreichte Waffenruhe mit „Hamas“.

23.06.2008: In Wien findet unter internationaler Beteiligung eine Konferenz zum Wiederaufbau des palästinensischen Flüchtlingslagers Nahr al-Barid im Libanon statt, das im Mai 2007 durch innerlibanesische Auseinandersetzungen zerstört wurde. Am selben Tag flammen vorübergehend Kämpfe in der Hafenstadt Tripoli auf, bei denen neun Personen getötet wurden.

22.06.2007: Frankreichs Präsident Nicolas Sarkozy trifft zu einem dreitägigen Besuch in Israel ein. Am 23. Juni erklärt er vor der Knesset: „Ohne ein Ende der Kolonialisierung und eine Anerkennung Jerusalems als Hauptstadt für zwei Völker kann es keinen Frieden geben.“ Frankreich werde sich jedem entgegentreten, der Israel zerstören wolle, betonte Sarkozy gleichzeitig. Eine nukleare Bewaffnung Irans sei nicht hinzunehmen. Bei seinem Eintreffen in Ramallah www.reiner-bernstein.de 108 – Chronologie 2008 unterzeichnen Sarkozy und Präsident Machmud Abbas einen Vertrag über die Errichtung eines Industrieparks bei Bethlehem, für den Paris 21 Millionen Euro zur Verfügung stellen will.

21.06.2008: Im Vorfeld der internationalen Nahostkonferenz in Berlin am 24. Juni bezeichnet der palästinensische Ministerpräsident Salam Fayyad im Gespräch mit der „Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung“, dass „[m]it jedem neuen Tag und [mit] neuen Siedlungen (…) es schwerer (wird), zwei Staaten zu bilden. Siedlungen lassen keinen Platz für das nationale Interesse beider Staaten.“ Seine Teilnahme an der Berliner Konferenz, bei der es vorrangig um den Aufbau und die Verbesserung des Polizei- und Justizwesens sowie um den Strafvollzug gehen soll, begründet Fayyad damit, dass der Aufbau des Staates Palästina unabhängig von den Ergebnissen des Verhandlungsprozesses erfolgen müsse. Seit der Konferenz in Annapolis Ende November 2007 habe Israel zwölf Mal so viele Wohneinheiten errichtet wie in den sieben Monaten zuvor, nämlich 1731 statt 138. Die vom Frühjahr 2003 herrührende „Road Map“ unterscheide nicht zwischen den Siedlungen in Jerusalem und in anderen palästinensischen Teilen.

Dem israelischen Schriftsteller Amos Oz wird der Heinrich-Heine- Preis der Stadt Düsseldorf zugesprochen.

20.06.2008: Die „New York Times“ berichtet von umfangreichen Luft- und Seemanövern Israels gemeinsam mit Griechenland im östlichen Mittelmeer um Kreta herum zwischen dem 25. Mai und 12. Juni, bei denen Bombenangriffe auf iranische Atomanlagen geprobt worden seien. Israelische und US-amerikanische Regierungsstellen bestätigen die Manöver. www.reiner-bernstein.de 109 – Chronologie 2008

17.06.2008: Unter ägyptischer Vermittlung verständigen sich Israel und „Hamas“, ohne eine förmliche Erklärung zu unterzeichnen, auf eine halbjährige Waffenruhe („tachdiyeh“) , die am 19. Juni um 6 Uhr morgens Ortszeit in Kraft tritt, aber praktisch von beiden Seiten immer wieder gebrochen wird. In der ersten Phase sollen die bewaffneten Auseinandersetzungen zunächst für drei Tage beendet und im Gegenzug die Grenzübergänge Erez, Karni, Nachal Oz und Sufa für Lieferungen in den Gazastreifen geöffnet werden. In der zweiten Phase soll der im Juni 2006 entführte israelische Soldat Gilad Shalit freigelassen werden, wofür Israel den Grenzübergang vom Gazastreifen nach Ägypten bei Rafach öffnet. Am 22. Juni reichen die Eltern von Shalit Klage beim Obersten Gericht ein, weil die Vereinbarung ohne die Freilassung ihres Sohnes vereinbart worden ist. Als Gegenleistung verlangt „Hamas“ die Freilassung von 450 palästinensischen Gefangenen. In- und ausländische Kommentatoren weisen darauf hin, dass „Hamas“ die Vereinbarung gegenüber ihren innenpolitischen Kombattanten durchsetzen müsse. Auch in Israel wird in Regierungskreisen über die Waffenruhe gestritten, weil „Hamas“ aufgrund des massiven Waffenschmuggels aus Ägypten stärker denn je und nunmehr auch politisch aufgewertet sei. Der Chef der von „Hamas“ geführten Regierung Ismail Haniyeh bestätigt diese Version am 20. Juni: Seine Organisation sei keine Verpflichtung eingegangen, den Waffenschmuggel einzustellen. Tatsächlich werden in den darauffolgenden Tagen Raketen und Mörsergranaten auf israelisches Gebiet mit dem Ergebnis abgeschossen, dass die Grenzübergänge erneut vorübergehend geschlossen werden. Im Internet-Forum „bitterlemons“ beklagt sein Redakteur Ghassan Khatib am 30. Juni, dass die Waffenruhe die Position von „Hamas“ gegenüber der Palästinensischen Autonomiebehörde und dem palästinensischen Friedenslager stärke.

Kurz nach der Bekanntgabe der geplanten Waffenruhe bietet die israelische Regierung der Regierung in Libanon Friedensgespräche www.reiner-bernstein.de 110 – Chronologie 2008 an. Diese lehnt umgehend das Angebot mit der Begründung ab, statt separater Vereinbarungen könne es nur eine Gesamtlösung für den Nahen Osten geben.

15.06.2008: Nach der Ankündigung des Baus von 1300 weiteren Wohneinheiten in Ost-Jerusalem zeigt sich die US-amerikanische Außenministerin Condoleezza Rice nach der Begegnung mit ihrer israelischen Amtskollegin Tsipi Livni „sehr beunruhigt, dass in einer Zeit, wo Vertrauen zwischen beiden Seiten entstehen soll, das fortgesetzte Bauen und die Siedlungsaktivitäten das Potential in sich bergen, den derzeitigen Verhandlungen zu schaden“. Für den 16. Juni kündigt Rice Gespräche über die Umsetzung der Vereinbarungen von Annapolis mit dem Ziel des Endstatus an.

13.06.2008: In einem Interview mit der indischen Zeitung „The Hindu“ erklärt der syrische Präsident Bashar Assad, dass in Israel nach vielen Jahren die Überzeugung wachse, dass seine Sicherheit nicht allein durch die militärische Stärke gewährleistet werde. Für die Rückgabe der Golanhöhen werde Israel Frieden erhalten. Assad bestätigt, dass es sich um eine militärische Anlage gehandelt habe, die israelische Jagdflugzeuge am 6. September 2007 bombardierten, weist aber den Verdacht zurück, es sei um ein nukleares Entwicklungsprogramm gegangen. Die vorgelegten Beweismittel seien zu hundert Prozent fabriziert worden. Die in Qatar ausgehandelte Vereinbarung vom 21. Mai zur Beruhigung der Lage im Libanon würde ein neues Kapitel zwischen beiden Ländern eröffnen 107 .

12.06.2008: www.reiner-bernstein.de 111 – Chronologie 2008

Die „Jerusalem Post“ berichtet, der Rabbiner von Ofra in der Westbank habe verfügt, dass die Shabbatruhe verletzt werden dürfe, um den Ausbau der Siedlung zu beschleunigen, um so einem Urteil des Obersten Gerichts zuvorzukommen, bei dem ein Verfahren zweier israelischer Menschenrechtsorganisationen gegen den Ausbau anhängig ist.

Nach einem Bericht der „Jordan Times“ haben die palästinensischen Arbeitskräfte in der Westbank mit einwöchiger Verspätung am 10. Juni ihren Lohn ausgezahlt bekommen. Die Verzögerung sei entstanden, weil die israelischen Behörden die Überweisung von einbehaltenen Tarifen und Zöllen gemäß dem „Pariser Protokoll“ vom April 1994 108 ausgesetzt hätten, nachdem die Palästinensische Autonomiebehörde gegen die von Israel betriebene Aufwertung seiner Beziehungen zur Europäischen Union protestiert habe. Am 16. Juni machen die EU-Außenminister auf ihrer Sitzung in Luxemburg die vertiefende Zusammenarbeit mit Israel von der Lösung des Konflikts mit den Palästinensern abhängig, nachdem Israel seinen Wunsch nach Mitbestimmung an EU-Erklärungen zum Nahen Osten vorgetragen hatte. In der Debatte steht das „Israel- Lager“ mit Deutschland an der Spitze dem „Palästinenser-Lager“ mit Schweden, Belgien und Portugal gegenüber. Frankreich nimmt eine Mittelposition ein.

11.06.2008: Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert erteilt angesichts der gegen ihn erhobenen Korruptionsvorwürfe sein Einverständnis zu vorgezogenen parteiinternen Wahlen um den Vorsitz der „Kadima“- Partei. Ein Termin steht nicht fest, doch wird die Wahl nicht vor September erwartet. Verteidigungsminister Ehud Barak will die Koalition mit seiner Arbeitspartei fortsetzen, wenn „Kadima“ einen neuen Vorsitzenden kürt. Viele Abgeordnete von „Kadima“ und der Arbeitspartei fürchten jedoch um ihre Wiederwahl. Vorgezogene allgemeine Wahlen könnten nach Medienberichten am 11. www.reiner-bernstein.de 112 – Chronologie 2008

November stattfinden. Auf einer Konferenz zu politischer Korruption am 13. Juli in Jerusalem weist Generalstaatsanwalt Menachem Mazouz Forderungen zurück, er möge Olmert für amtsunfähig erklären. Es sei nicht seine Aufgabe, einen Ministerpräsidenten zu ernennen oder zu entlassen, dafür sei das politische System zuständig.

10.06.2008: Der frühere deutsche Botschafter in Washington, Wolfgang Ischinger, empfiehlt im Interview mit der „Süddeutschen Zeitung“ der Bundesregierung und den Europäern insgesamt, „nicht wie gebannt“ darauf zu warten, „bis der neue US-Präsident Anfang 2009 erzählt, wohin die Reise geht. Die Aufgabe für uns besteht darin, jetzt Projekte, Ideen und Ziele zu formulieren, damit man nach der Wahl in Washington konkrete Angebote machen kann. Man kann auch Erwartungen äußern, zum Beispiel, dass die neue Administration nicht so viel Zeit verstreichen lässt wie die Regierung Bush, bis sie sich um einen Frieden im Nahen Osten bemüht. Es gibt eine große Chance für die EU, sich als ein aktiver Partner zu präsentieren.“

09.06.2008: In der jüngsten Meinungsumfrage zwischen dem 5. und 7. Juni in der Westbank und im Gazastreifen ermittelt das „Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PCR)“ unter Leitung von Khalil Shikaki in Ramallah, dass die Popularität von Präsident Machmud Abbas gegenüber dem „Hamas“-Ministerpräsidenten Ismail Haniyeh um zwölf auf 52 Prozent gestiegen sei. Beim Vergleich zwischen Haniyeh und dem seit April 2002 im israelischen Gefängnis einsitzenden Marwan Barghouti würde letzterer mit 61 zu 39 Prozent abschneiden. Würden heute Parlamentswahlen stattfinden („Sonntagsfrage“), würden „Fatah“ 43 Prozent und „Hamas“ 31 Prozent der Stimmen auf sich vereinigen. www.reiner-bernstein.de 113 – Chronologie 2008

08.06.2007: Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert und die militärische Führung weisen die Forderung von Verkehrsminister Shaul Mofaz zurück, Iran anzugreifen, um dessen atomares Entwicklungsprogramm zu stoppen.

Der irakische Ministerpräsident Nuri el-Maliki bemüht sich in Teheran um die Verbesserung der Beziehungen zwischen beiden Staaten. Das Gespräch mit Präsident Machmud Achmadinedjad soll vor allem dazu dienen, die iranische Führung davon zu überzeugen, dass das geplante irakisch-amerikanische „Status of Forces Agreement“ zur langfristigen Stationierung von US-Truppen im Irak nicht gegen Iran gerichtet sei; es soll das im Dezember 2008 auslaufende UN-Mandat ablösen. Die nach der Absichtserklärung im Dezember 2007 aufgenommenen Verhandlungen mit den USA sind nach einer Meldung der „Washington Post“ vom 13. Juli bislang ergebnislos verlaufen.

06.06.2008: Das beim Jerusalemer „Israel Democracy Institute“ angesiedelte „Guttman Center“ legt das Ergebnis seiner jüngsten Umfrage vor. Danach vertrauen nur noch 49 Prozent der Justiz – ein Rückgang um zwölf Prozent –, während das Vertrauen in die Medien als Garanten der Demokratie auf 36 Prozent steigt. Sechzig Prozent glauben, dass Israel schwer und weitere dreißig Prozent erheblich unter der Korruption leidet. Sechzig Prozent sind an politischen Fragen interessiert. An der Spitze der positiven Umfragewerte steht das Militär mit 71 Prozent 109 .

05.06.2007: Nach einem Treffen mit „Hamas“-Repräsentanten am 2. Juni in Ramallah betont der palästinensische Präsident Machmud Abbas im www.reiner-bernstein.de 114 – Chronologie 2008

Fernsehen seinen Willen, „einen umfassenden Dialog“ mit der Islamischen Widerstandsbewegung aufnehmen zu wollen, „um die nationale Spaltung zu überwinden“.

04.06.2008: Am Tag, an dem der US-demokratische Präsidentschaftsbewerber Barack Obama die parteiinterne Mehrheit der Delegierten für den Nominierungsparteitag im August in Denver (Colorado) gewinnt, wirft das Internet-Portal „Middle East Times“ ihm, seiner bisherigen Konkurrentin Hillary Clinton und dem republikanischen Präsidentschaftsbewerber John McCain vor, kein außenpolitisches Profil zu zeigen, das sich vom gegenwärtigen Amtsinhaber George W. Bush grundlegend unterscheide. Obama habe für seinen Wahlkampf bisher 218.884.220 US-Dollar ausgegeben, Clinton 185.216.984 US-Dollar und McCain 72.666.309 US-Dollar.

03.06.2008: Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert äußert sich in seiner Rede vor der „Politischen Konferenz“ des „American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)“ zu Iran, dessen Bedrohung mit allen zur Verfügung stehenden Mitteln gestoppt werden müsse, zu Syrien und zu den Palästinensern. Hier rücke die Zeit für schwierige Kompromisse näher 110 . Tags zuvor, am 02. Juni, betont der republikanische Präsidentschaftsbewerber John McCain vor demselben Gremium die immense Bedrohung des Friedens durch den Iran, durch die „Hisbollah“ in Libanon und die palästinensische „Hamas“. Das israelische Volk werde erst in Frieden leben, wenn eine palästinensische Führung bereit sei, für den Frieden zu sorgen. Ein Hinweis auf die israelische Siedlungspolitik und die Kollektivsbestrafung der Bevölkerung im Gazastreifen findet sich in der Rede McCains nicht. Stattdessen kündigt er die Unterstützung der erweiterten Militärhilfe für Israel an, die im Oktober 2008 anlaufen soll, um dessen militärischen Vorsprung zu wahren 111 . Der www.reiner-bernstein.de 115 – Chronologie 2008 demokratische Präsidentschaftsbewerber Barack Obama folgt mit seiner Ansprache am 4. Juni. Nachdem er sich gegen böswillige Unterstellungen verwahrt hat, er sei kein Freund Israels, widmet er sich zunächst dem Eindruck, den die Shoah bei ihm hinterlassen habe. Obama betont, dass die Unterstützung Israels in den USA im Falle seiner Gefährdung parteiübergreifend sei. Er werde – wie McCain – das „Memorandum of Understanding“ zwischen beiden Ländern implementieren, wonach Israel im nächsten Jahrzehnt dreißig Milliarden US-Dollar erhalten soll. Im Gegensatz zu seinem Vorredner erklärt Obama, dass er sich nach seinem Amtsantritt sofort persönlich aktiv für die Zweistaatenregelung mit einem ungeteilten Jerusalem als der Hauptstadt Israels einsetzen werde, weil sie im Interesse aller Parteien sei. Zu den Voraussetzungen gehören nach seinen Worten das Ende des palästinensischen Terrors und des Waffenschmuggels in den Gazastreifen hinein sowie das Ende des Siedlungsbaus. Auch bei den Themen „Iran“ und „Irak“ setzt sich Obama politisch von McCain ab112 . Am 13. Juli bedauert Obama in einem Interview mit CNN, über das die „Jerusalem Post“ berichtet, seine Aussage zum „ungeteilten Jerusalem“: Sie sei schlecht formuliert gewesen. Er habe damit gemeint, dass durch Jerusalem kein Stacheldraht gezogen werden solle 113 .

Die für die jüdische Einwanderung nach Israel zuständige „Jewish Agency“ präsentiert einen Plan, mit dem eine „flexible Einwanderung“ gewährleistet werden soll: Bevor sich Juden zur dauerhaften Niederlassung in Israel entscheiden, sollen sie die Möglichkeit haben, sich an ihr neues Leben zu gewöhnen 114 . Die „Jewish Agency“ reagiert mit diesem Programm auf die seit Jahren rückläufige Einwanderung.

01.06.2008: Nach wachsendem Druck im Zuge der drohenden Anklage wegen Korruption und Bestechung 115 willigt Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert www.reiner-bernstein.de 116 – Chronologie 2008 in vorgezogene parteiinterne Wahlen („primaries“) zur Aufstellung der Kandidaten für die nächsten Parlamentswahlen ein.

Israels Wohnungsbauminister Zeev Boim ordnet die Ausschreibung für den Bau von 884 Wohneinheiten in Ost-Jerusalem an. Die Proteste von Präsident Machmud Abbas beim Treffen mit Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert bleiben ergebnislos. Der Siedlungsbau mache die israelisch-palästinensischen Gespräche „alles andere als einfach“, betont Bundesaußenminister Frank- Walter Steinmeier während seines Aufenthalts in Israel. Am 4. Juni berichtet der palästinensische Ministerpräsident Salam Fayyad, dass er die Europäische Union gebeten habe, von einer Aufwertung der Beziehungen zu Israel Abstand zu nehmen, solange der Siedlungsbau fortgesetzt wird.

Der ehemalige israelische Justizminister Yosef („Tommy“) Lapid, ein Überlebender der Shoah aus Serbien, erliegt im Alter von 77 Jahren in einem Tel Aviver Krankenhaus seinem Krebsleiden. Der Journalist war 1999 an der Spitze der von ihm mitbegründeten Partei „ (Wandel)“ in die Knesset gewählt worden. Er wanderte 1948 mit seiner Mutter in Israel ein, der Vater war in einem Konzentrationslager ermordet worden. Nach dem Austritt der strikt antireligiösen Partei aus der Koalition 2004 war Lapid bis zu seinem Tode Vorsitzender des Direktoriums der Gedenkstätte „Yad vaShem“ in Jerusalem.

Während seiner achten Nahostreise trifft Bundesaußenminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier zu einem eintägigen Besuch in Beirut ein und wird von dem neuen Staatspräsidenten Michel Suleiman empfangen. Durch eine großangelegte Vermittlung des bundesdeutschen Nachrichtendienstes (BND) wird der zum Islam konvertierte Nassim Nasser, Sohn einer jüdischen Mutter, der 1991 aus dem Libanon in Israel einwanderte und 2002 wegen Spionage zu einer sechsjährigen Gefängnisstrafe verurteilt wurde, gegen die sterblichen Überreste mehrerer israelischer Soldaten ausgetauscht. www.reiner-bernstein.de 117 – Chronologie 2008

Es wird erwartet, dass der Gefangenenaustausch bald auch den seit 1980 in Israel wegen der brutalen Ermordung eines Vaters und seiner Tochter in Nahariya einsitzenden Drusen Samir Kuntar und die beiden seit Juni 2006 von der „Hisbollah“ verschleppten israelischen Soldaten Ehud Goldwasser und Eldad Regev einschließen werde116 . Bei dem Anschlag Kuntars kamen außerdem eine zweite Tochter in den Armen ihrer Mutter durch Ersticken und ein israelischer Polizist ums Leben. Am Abend reist Steinmeier nach Jerusalem weiter. Am 2. Juni trifft er dort mit Außenministerin Tsipi Livni und Verteidigungsminister Ehud Barak zusammen. Steinmeiers geplante Fahrt nach dem Treffen mit Präsident Machmud Abbas von Ramallah nach durch das Jordantal zur Besichtigung des mit deutscher Hilfe geplanten Industrieparks wird von den israelischen Behörden aus „Sicherheitsgründen“ untersagt.

Nach einem Bericht der „New York Times“ haben am Vortag an der jährlichen „Salute to Israel Parade“ in der Stadt nur 50.000 Personen teilgenommen, obwohl zu den Gästen Israels stellvertretender Ministerpräsident Haim Ramon gehörte. Trotz erheblicher Werbeanstrengungen seien besonders wenige Ex-Israelis unter den Teilnehmern gewesen, berichtet das Blatt. Sie hätten eine kritischere Einstellung zu ihrem Ursprungsland als die US-amerikanischen Juden.

Mai 2008

30.05.2008: Die „Middle East Times” berichtet, dass der Golfstaat Bahrain als erstes arabisches Land die 43jährige jüdische Geschäftsfrau und Mutter zweier Kinder, Huda Ezra Ibrahim Nonoo, als Botschafterin nach Washington, D.C., schicken werde. Ihre Familie sei zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts aus Irak eingewandert. Das Blatt beziffert die Zahl der in Bahrain lebenden Juden auf 40 Personen. Frau Nonoo gehöre zu den Gründern der „Bahrain Human Rights Watch Society“, www.reiner-bernstein.de 118 – Chronologie 2008 die mehrfach von sunnitischen und schiitischen Fundamentalisten angegriffen worden sei. Die Gesamtbevölkerung des Königreichs beträgt rund eine halbe Million. Rudolph Chimelli ergänzt am 2. Juni in der „Süddeutschen Zeitung“, dass Nonoo zu den vierzig Mitgliedern der Beratenden Versammlung („Shura“) gehöre, die vom König ernannt wird, und dass nach Auffassung von Kritikern die genannte Menschenrechtsorganisation eine Scheinorganisation zur Förderung von Regierungsinteressen sei. Zu den in Bahrain lebenden sieben jüdischen Familien gehören nach Angaben von Chimelli 37 Menschen. Die Gesamtbevölkerung betrage 530.000 Personen.

Nach internationalen Medienberichten hat die Leitung der einflussreichsten islamischen Hochschule in Asien mit Sitz im indischen New Delhi ein Rechtsgutachten („Fatwa“) gegen den Terrorismus mit der Begründung erlassen, dass der Islam eine friedliebende Religion sei. Der Terrorismus sei eine Geißel der Menschheit, heißt es in dem Text.

26.05.2008: Professor Emeritus David Mumford von der Brown und der Harvard University, der 2008 den prestigeträchtigen „Wolf Foundation Prize” in Mathematik aus den Händen von Staatspräsident Shimon Peres erhielt, kündigt an, dass er sein Preisgeld, das er mit zwei anderen Wissenschaftlern teilt, der Bir Zeit-Universität bei Ramallah für studentische Austauschprogramme zur Verfügung stellen wird 117 .

25.05.2008: Palästinensische Quellen erklären laut Agenturmeldungen, dass Israel bei den Verhandlungen mit den Palästinensern 91,5 Prozent der Westbank – ohne Jerusalem – im Austausch für Gebiete in Israel angeboten habe, dass aber die palästinensischen Unterhändler lediglich zu einem Gebietsaustausch in der Größenordnung von 1,8 www.reiner-bernstein.de 119 – Chronologie 2008

Prozent bereit seien. Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert bezeichnet am 26. Mai vor dem Außen- und Sicherheitspolitischen Ausschuss der Knesset die Vorstellung als „Halluzination“, dass Israel alle 1967 eroberten Gebiete behalten könne. Gleichzeitig erteilt er Forderungen nach einem Israel als „Staat aller seiner Bürger“ eine Absage. Dieser, auf die Ein-Staat-Lösung zulaufende „sehr gefährliche Prozess“ gewinne bei den Eliten in den USA an Zustimmung.

24.05.2008: Der US-amerikanische Historiker Norman Finkelstein wird bei der Einreise am Flughafen Lod von israelischen Sicherheitskräften gehindert und nach mehrstündigem Verhör mit einem Flugzeug nach Amsterdam zurückgeschickt. Entgegen offiziellen Angaben betont Finkelstein, dem Verbindungen zu „Hisbollah“ und „al-Qaida“ vorgeworfen werden, dass er den Sicherheitskräften alle notwendigen Angaben gemacht habe. Der von ihm eingeschaltete israelische Anwalt Michael Sfarad kritisiert die Verhörmethoden als „Verhalten wie von Ländern des Sowjetblocks“.

23.05.2008: Das in Jerusalem ansässige „UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA)” berichtet, dass die Zahl der von Israel errichteten Sperren in der Westbank zwischen dem 4. September 2007 und dem 29. April 2008 um sieben Prozent auf 607 angestiegen sei. Während 103 Sperren abgebaut worden seien, seien 144 neue hinzugekommen. Im Mai 2008 habe das Militär weitere sieben Sperren abgebaut. Israel-Korrespondent Jörg Bremer stellt am 26. Mai in der „Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung“ einen Zusammenhang zwischen der steigenden Zahl der Sperranlagen, die vor allem der Sicherheit der Siedler dienen würden, und dem beendigten Weiterbau der „Trennungsmauern“ her. www.reiner-bernstein.de 120 – Chronologie 2008

21.05.2008: Die israelische und die syrische Regierung verständigen sich auf den Beginn indirekter Verhandlungen unter Vermittlung der Türkei. Zu den umstrittenen Golanhöhen soll Ehud Olmert eine „Formel“ übermittelt haben, deren Einzelheiten noch geheim seien, heißt es im Umfeld des israelischen Ministerpräsidenten 118 . Die „Jerusalem Post“ berichtet am 23. Mai, dass der demokratische US- Präsidentschaftskandidat Barack Obama die Aufnahme von Verhandlungen begrüße. Am 24. Mai erklärt der frühere Generalstabschef Dan Halutz in Beersheva, dass die Golanhöhen für die Sicherheit Israels nicht unverzichtbar seien. Am selben Tag weist die syrische Regierung israelische Forderungen zurück, als Vorbedingung für Gespräche die Beziehungen zu Teheran zu kappen.

In Bethlehem treffen sich Hunderte Geschäftsleute, Investoren und Politiker zu einer Tagung unter dem Titel „Palestine is open for business“. Nach seinen Gesprächen mit Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert, Außenministerin Tsipi Livni und Verteidigungsminister Ehud Barak in Jerusalem am 22. Mai erklärt der französische Außenminister Bernard Kouchner Tags darauf in Bethlehem, dass „nichts die Erweiterung der Siedlungen, die ein Friedenshindernis sind und die palästinensische Wirtschaftsentwicklung behindern, rechtfertigen“ könne. Die Tagung endet mit der Zusage von Investitionen in Höhe von 1,4 Milliarden US-Dollar 119 .

19.05.2008: Der französische Außenminister Bernard Kouchner bestätigt in einem Rundfunkinterview „Kontakte“ zu dem „Hamas“-Chef im Gazastreifen Ismail Haniyeh und dem „Hamas“-Ideologen Machmud Zahhar.

www.reiner-bernstein.de 121 – Chronologie 2008

18.05.2008: Zum Abschluss seiner Besuche in Israel, Saudi-Arabien und Ägypten fordert US-Präsident George W. Bush auf dem Weltwirtschaftsforum im ägyptischen Badeort Sharm el-Sheikh die arabischen Staaten zu politischen und wirtschaftlichen Reformen auf. Sie sollten die Menschenrechte mehr achten. Er äußert die Erwartung, dass sie sich den Bemühungen anschließen, Iran von seinem atomaren Entwicklungsprogrammen abzubringen. Außerdem hoffe er, dass bis zum Ende seiner Amtszeit ein palästinensischer Staat gegründet werden könne. Mit politischer Führungskraft und mit Mut sei dieses Ziel zu erreichen, das den dauerhaften Frieden ermögliche.

Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert kündigt eine baldige „strategische Entscheidung“ an, „wir stehen an der Wegegabelung“. Der Raketenbeschuss aus dem Gazastreifen müsse beendet werden.

17.05.2008: Der Israel-Korrespondent der „Süddeutschen Zeitung” Thorsten Schmitz berichtet, dass zum Bau der auf 790 Kilometer konzipierten langen „Trennungsmauern“ bisher 90.000 Olivenbäume in den palästinensischen Gebieten entwurzelt worden seien.

16.05.2008: Der frühere Generaldirektor im Jerusalemer Auswärtigen Amt Alon Liel 120 bittet in einem Offenen Brief US-Präsident George W. Bush um die Entendung eines Sondergesandten zur Überwachung der diplomatischen Kontakte zwischen Israel und Syrien. Die Syrer, so würden ihm – Bush – angesehene Orientalisten in Jerusalem bestätigen können, fürchten die Iraner ebenso wie die Israelis 121 . www.reiner-bernstein.de 122 – Chronologie 2008

Der Führer von „Al-Qaida (Die Basis)“, Usama Bin-Laden, sagt in einer Tonbandbotschaft Israel und seinen westlichen Verbündeten den totalen Kampf an.

Kurz vor dem Besuch von US-Präsident George W. Bush in Riyadh kündigt das Weiße Haus an, dass die USA Saudi-Arabien bei der Entwicklung eines zivilen Atomprogramms helfen wollen.

Die iranische Geheimpolizei verhaftet die gesamte Führung der Bahai, die mit 300.000 Gläubigen die größte nicht-moslemische Religionsgemeinschaft im Lande ist. Der Führung wird Kollaboration mit den USA und Israel vorgeworfen; in Haifa befindet sich das Weltzentrum der Religionsgemeinschaft, weil dort ihr Gründer bestattet ist. Die im 19. Jahrhundert entstandene Glaubensgemeinschaft hatten ihren Mittelpunkt im Iran und wanderte auf ormanischen Druck allmählich nach Bagdad und in die Nähe von Istanbul weiter, berichtet Wolfgang Günter Lerch am 7. August in der „Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung“. Im August 1980 verschwanden schon einmal sämtliche Mitglieder des „Nationalen Geistigen Rates“ der Bahai, im Dezember 1981 wurden ihre Nachfolger hingerichtet 122 . Am 10. Februar 2009 veröffentlicht dieselbe Zeitung Auszüge aus einem Offfenen Brief von mehr als 40 iranischen Intellektuellen und Künstlern, die vornehmlich in Deutschland, den USA und Kanada leben, in dem es heißt: „Wir sind beschämt, dass die Gemeinschaft der iranischen Intellektuellen schwieg, als diese Gruppe unserer Landsleute [gemeint sind die Bahai-Anhänger] auch nach der harten Unterdrückung in den ersten Jahrzehnten der Entstehung ihres Glaubens … Verfolgung ausgesetzt wurden“. Seit der Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts seien ihr etwa zwanzigtausend Menschen zum Opfer gefallen.

Bei den vorgezogenen Parlamentswahlen in Kuwait, an denen sechzig Prozent der rund 360.000 Wahlberechtigten teilnehmen, verstärken die sunnitischen und schiitischen Kandidaten ihr Gewicht von fünf auf 26 Mandate und verfügen damit über eine knappe www.reiner-bernstein.de 123 – Chronologie 2008

Mehrheit in der Abgeordnetenkammer. Eine Frau gehört ihr nach wie vor nicht an.

15.05.2008: In einem vertraulichen Brief an Israels Ministerpräsidenten Ehud Olmert setzen sich die Abgeordneten Yossi Beilin („Meretz/Yachad“) und Amnon Lipkin-Shahak (Arbeitspartei) sowie ein früherer Chef des Inlandsgeheimdienstes „Shin Bet“ und ein ehemaliger Kommandeur des Militärs im Gazastreifen für einen vertraulichen Dialog mit „Hamas“ ein. Der Boykott der Islamischen Widerstandsbewegung sei gescheitert, fügt der frühere Direktor des „Yaffee Center for Strategic Studies“ an der Universität Tel Aviv und heutige Co-Herausgeber des Internetportals „bitterlemons“, Yossi Alpher, hinzu.

14.05.2008: Bei seinem Besuch in Israel betont US-Präsident George W. Bush die Vertiefung der strategischen Partnerschaft zwischen beiden Ländern. Ziel der USA sei es, seinen stärksten Partner und Freund zu unterstützen – Israel habe 307 Millionen Einwohner – und über seine „hoffnungsvolle Zukunft“ zu sprechen. In seiner Ansprache am 15. Mai vor der Knesset wiederholt Bush diese Verpflichtung und nennt Israel die „freieste Demokratie im Nahen Osten“. Das Regime im Iran bezeichnet er als einen „unverzeihlichen Verrat künftiger Generationen“ 123 . In seiner Erwiderung, bei der mehrere jüdische Abgeordnete aus Protest das Plenum verlassen – auch arabische Abgeordnete weigern sich, an der Sitzung teilzunehmen –, zeigt sich Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert davon überzeugt, dass die Mehrheit der israelischen Bevölkerung die Zweistaatenregelung unterstütze 124 . In Ramallah und Gaza-City demonstrieren mehrere zehntausend Menschen mit schwarzen Luftballons und fordern die Durchsetzung des Rechts auf Rückkehr. www.reiner-bernstein.de 124 – Chronologie 2008

Im Interview mit dem „Deutschlandfunk“ bringt Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert seine Erwartung zum Ausdruck, dass noch in diesem Jahr eine grundlegende Vereinbarung mit der Palästinensischen Autonomiebehörde zustande kommen werde. Olmert betont, dass dabei die nationalen Interessen Israels nicht verletzt werden dürften. Der an der George Washington University lehrende Politologe Nathan J. Brown hingegen kommt dem Schluss, dass der mit der Madrider internationalen Konferenz im Oktober 1991 in Gang gesetzte Friedensprozess zu seinem Ende gekommen sei, und stellt seinen Beitrag in der Mai-Ausgabe des Internetforums des „Carnegie Endowment for International Peace“ unter die Überschrift „Sunset for the Two-State Solution?“. Der Wahlsieg von „Hamas“ im Januar 2006 sei keine vorübergehende Erscheinung, und die israelische Politik habe in den vergangenen vier Jahrzehnten alles daran gesetzt, einer Zweistaatenregelung die Lebensgrundlagen zu entziehen. Die internationale Staatengemeinschaft schließlich habe mit ihrem Boykott von „Hamas“ auch die Palästinensische Autonomiebehörde und ihre Institutionen bestraft.

In Ashkelon schlägt eine Rakete ein, die im Gazastreifen abgefeuert worden ist, und verletzt 15 Personen.

13.05.2008: In seiner Ansprache anlässlich des 60. Gründungsjubiläums Israels wendet sich der palästinensische Ministerpräsident Salam Fayyad an die israelische Bevölkerung mit der Frage, wie sie im Wissen um die damaligen Begleitumstände die palästinensische „Nakba“, die Siedlungspolitik, die Verbrechen der Siedler, die Haltung des Staates und das Verhalten der Okkupationsarmee feiern könne. Wenn beide Völker nicht gemeinsam im Rahmen des Friedens feiern könnten, gebe es nichts zu feiern. www.reiner-bernstein.de 125 – Chronologie 2008

Angesichts einer drohenden Anklage gegen Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert wegen Betrug, Korruption und Bestechung erklärt US- Präsident George W. Bush am Vorabend seines Besuchs in Jerusalem im Gespräch mit israelischen Journalisten in Washington, D.C., dass der Friedensprozess nicht allein vom Wirken einer einzelnen Person abhänge, und nennt als personelle Alternativen zu Olmert Außenministerin Tsipi Livni und Verteidigungsminister Ehud Barak. Die USA, fährt Bush fort, könnten keinen Frieden erzwingen, doch brauchten die Palästinenser einen territorial geschlossenen Staat und keinen „Schweizer Käse“. Auch wenn er Israel gezwungen habe, im Januar 2006 palästinensische Wahlen mit dem Ergebnis des „Hamas“-Sieges zuzulassen, bedauere er seinen Vorstoß im nachhinein nicht 125 .

10.05.2008: Daniel Barenboim veröffentlicht im Berliner „Tagesspiegel“ einen sehr persönlichen Beitrag über sein Leben als Musiker, Ehemann und politisch denkender Mensch in Israel 126 .

09.05.2008: Ein Gärtner wird im Kibbutz Aza durch eine Rakete aus dem Gazastreifen getötet. Die israelische Armee tötet vier „Hamas“- Angehörige in einem Vergeltungsschlag.

08.05.2008: Der Staat und die jüdische Bevölkerung begehen den 60. Jahrestag der Gründung Israels mit Festen, Veranstaltungen und Militärparaden. In palästinensischen Fenstern sind dagegen schwarze Fahnen zu sehen. Daniel Barenboim, Chef des „West- Östlichen Divan Orchesters“, den Tom Segev den „berühmtesten und am meisten verehrten Israeli auf der Welt“ nennt127 , verzichtet auf seine Anwesenheit bei den Feierlichkeiten, zumal da die www.reiner-bernstein.de 126 – Chronologie 2008 israelischen Behörden den aus arabischen und moslemischen Staaten stammenden Orchestermitgliedern die Einreise verweht hätten128 .

Jordaniens Behörden untersagen Veranstaltungen aus Anlass des palästinensischen Flucht- und Vertreibungsdramas („Nakba“) 1947/48. Vermutet wird, dass sie damit die Kritik an der jordanischen Politik unterbinden wollen, die damals kein Interesse an der Entstehung eines palästinensischen Staates an den Tag legte.

Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert kündigt an, dass er zurücktreten werde, sollte die Justiz Anklage wegen Korruption erheben. Olmert wird vorgeworfen, von einem US-amerikanischen Geschäftsmann in seiner Amtszeit als Jerusalemer Bürgermeister mehrere hunderttausend US-Dollar für private Zwecke angenommen zu haben. Das israelische Parteiengesetz verbietet die Annahme von ausländischen Finanzmitteln.

Das „Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR)“ in Ramallah protestiert gegen die vorübergehende Festnahme von drei palästinensischen Journalisten in Bethlehem, Hebron und Kalkilya, denen die politische Nähe zu „Hamas“ vorgeworfen wird, durch die „Allgemeinen Palästinensischen Sicherheitsdienste“. Die Festnahme widerspreche der Pressefreiheit und dem Recht auf freie Meinungsäußerung gemäß der palästinensischen Verfassung und internationalen Rechtsbestimmungen.

Das Komitee für den internationalen Aachener Friedenspreis teilt mit, dass die diesjährige Auszeichnung am 1. September in Aachen an die israelische Frauengruppe „Machsom Watch“ verliehen wird.

07.05.2008: Nachdem die libanesische Regierung das mit Syrien verbundene organisationseigene Telekommunikationsnetz der „Hisbollah“ www.reiner-bernstein.de 127 – Chronologie 2008 gekappt hat, brechen in Beirut schwere Straßenkämpfe zwischen Anhängern der schiitischen „Hisbollah“ von Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah und der Regierung unter Führung des sunnitischen Ministerpräsidenten Fuad Siniora aus. Die libanesische Fluglinie „Middle East Airlines“ stellt ihren Betrieb ein, ihr Sicherheitschef Wafif Shawkeer wird entmachtet. Die Behörden schließen den Hafen von Beirut. Die Kämpfe greifen auch auf die Hafenstadt Tripoli über. Beobachter befürchten einen neuen Bürgerkrieg, weil das Militär in die Auseinandersetzungen hineingezogen werden und als Ordnungsfaktor ausfallen könnte. Die christlichen Parteien und Milizen halten sich vorerst in dem schiitisch-sunnitischen Machtkampf ersichtlich zurück, obwohl die „Hisbollah“ die Residenz des maronitischen Politikers Saad Hariri sowie seinen TV-Sender und seine Zeitung angreift. Die Außenminister der arabischen Staaten rufen in einer Dringlichkeitssitzung in Kairo die Parteien zur Beendigung der Gewalt auf, können jedoch ihre politische Hilflosigkeit nicht vertuschen. Ägypten und Saudi-Arabien befürchten eine schiitische Vormachtstellung in Libanon. Dagegen beschuldigen die Regierungen in Teheran und Damaskus die USA und Israel, für den Gewaltausbruch verantwortlich zu sein. Am 10. Mai vereinbaren Regierung und „Hisbollah“ einen brüchigen Waffenstand, wobei die „Partei Gottes“ ankündigt, den zivilen Widerstand fortzusetzen. Markus Bickel weist am selben Tag in der „Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung“ darauf hin, dass die Kommandeure der im Herbst 2006 eingesetzten UN-Schutztruppe (UNIFIL) die in der UN-Resolution 1701 vorgesehene Entwaffnung der „Hisbollah“ ablehnen, solange diese ihr nicht selbst zustimme. In einer öffentlichen Erklärung beschuldigt Siniora am 11. Mai die „Hisbollah“, in Beirut schlimmer gehaust zu haben, „als es der israelische Feind gewagt hat“. Tomas Avenarius erwartet am 13. Mai in der „Süddeutschen Zeitung“ die „Hisbollahrisierung“ Libanons. Am 15. Mai nimmt die Regierung die Entmachtung des Sicherheitschefs des Beiruter Flughafens und die Zerschlagung des illegalen „Hisbollah“-Telefonnetzes zurück, das von der Armee überprüft werden soll. Daraufhin willigt die „Partei Gottes“ in Vermittlungsgespräche mit der Regierung in Qatar ein, die www.reiner-bernstein.de 128 – Chronologie 2008 am 16. Mai beginnen. Das nahöstliche Konfliktgeschehen, kommentiert Avenarius am 16. Mai, sei inzwischen so eng vernetzt, dass sich die einzelnen Schlachten kaum mehr getrennt schlagen lassen. Nachdem bei den bürgerkriegsähnlichen Kämpfen 81 Menschen ums Leben gekommen sind, verständigen sich am 21. Mai die beiden libanesischen Konfliktparteien nach neunzehn fehlgeschlagenen Versuchen auf die Wahl des bisherigen Oberkommandierenden Michel Suleiman zum neuen Staatspräsidenten am 25. Mai. Ferner wird vereinbart, dass elf der dreißig Personen umfassenden „Regierung der nationalen Einheit“ mit Angehörigen der „Amal“-Partei von Parlamentspräsident Nabih Berri und ihren Verbündeten besetzt werden, dass sie über eine Sperrminorität verfügen sollen und dass ein neues Wahlgesetz vorbereitet wird, das der demographischen Entwicklung seit den frühen 1940er Jahren Rechnung trägt 129 . Am 25. Mai erhält der 59jährige Suleiman bei seiner Wahl zum neuen Staatspräsidenten 118 von 127 Stimmen im Parlament. Nach seiner Wahl wird die Bildung der neuen Regierung eingeleitet. Von den dreißig Kabinettsmitgliedern werden drei vom Staatspräsidenten ernannt.

06.05.2008: Das Statistische Zentralamt Israels berichtet, dass sich die Bevölkerung des Landes am Vorabend der Feiern zum 60. Gründungsjubiläum auf 7,282 Millionen Menschen beläuft, von denen zwanzig Prozent arabischer Herkunft sind.

In der Internetausgabe der „Süddeutschen Zeitung“ äußert sich der frühere israelische Botschafter in Deutschland, Avi Primor, skeptisch über die Erfolgsaussichten der gegenwärtigen israelisch- palästinensischen Verhandlungen. Das Versprechen von US- Präsident George W. Bush habe keine großen Chancen, bis Ende 2008 eine Verständigung durchzusetzen. Für die Sicherheitsbedürfnisse Israels brauche es keine unterschriebenen Papiere, Versprechen und internationalen Garantien – „das ist alles www.reiner-bernstein.de 129 – Chronologie 2008

Quatsch“ –, sondern eine internationale Truppe, „die wirklich gerüstet ist. Und die zweitens eine ganz klare Mission hat, Sicherheit zu erzwingen.“ Dafür würde er, Primor, muslimische Truppen etwa aus der Türkei befürworten. Dagegen sollten die Europäer einschließlich der Deutschen mehr politische Verantwortung übernehmen.

Nach dem Sieg bei den studentischen Parlamentswahlen an der Bir Zeit-Universität nahe Ramallah setzen sich auch die „Fatah“- Kandidaten mit 21 gegen 20 Sitze für „Hamas“ an der Universität in Hebron durch.

05.05.2008: Israels Generalstaatsanwalt Menachem Mazouz erhebt Anklage gegen den früheren Finanzminister Avraham Hirchson wegen Veruntreuung, Amtsmissbrauch, Geldwäsche und Bestechung.

In einem Rückblick auf die Entstehungsgeschichte Israels zitiert Ofri Ilani in der hebräischen Ausgabe von „Haaretz“ aus den jetzt erstmals vorliegenden Tagebüchern des damaligen Rektors der Hebräischen Universität, Judah L. Magnes (1877 – 1948) aus der Zeit nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg. Bei einer Begegnung mit US- Präsident Harry Truman habe er versucht, die Amerikaner von der Anerkennung eines jüdischen und eines arabischen Staates in Palästina abzuhalten, weil ihrer Errichtung immer neue Kriege folgen würden. Magnes habe sogar die Verhängung von Sanktionen gegen beide Staaten vorgeschlagen. Am 7. Mai äußert der palästinensische Kulturwissenschaftler und Archäologe Nazmi Jubeh, der zum inneren Kreis der „Genfer Initiative“ gehörte, im Interview mit der Berliner „taz“ Zweifel, „ob eine Zwei-Staaten-Lösung überhaupt [noch] sinnvoll, logisch und hilfreich für uns ist. Dies ist keine Intellektuellendebatte mehr, sondern das interessiert inzwischen breite Schichten. Die Zahl derjenigen, die nicht mehr an eine Zwei- Staaten-Regelung glauben, wächst täglich 130 .“ www.reiner-bernstein.de 130 – Chronologie 2008

Das „Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN)“ fordert die libanesischen Behörden auf, die ausbeuterischen Arbeitsbedingungen der überwiegend aus dem Ausland stammenden Haushaltskräfte nachhaltig zu verbessern. Ihre Beschwerden würden die Verweigerung und Verzögerung von Lohnauszahlungen, verweigerte Freizeiten und Ausgehsperren sowie übermäßig lange Arbeitszeiten einschließen. Zum Missbrauch gehöre auch die unsichtbare sexuelle Drangsalierung von Frauen.

04.05.2008: In der gemeinsamen Pressekonferenz mit ihrer israelischen Kollegin Tsipi Livni wiederholt US-Außenministerin Condoleezza Rice in Jerusalem den Wunsch nach einer Vereinbarung zwischen Israel und den Palästinensern bis Ende 2008. Berater von Präsident Machmud Abbas werden mit der Ankündigung zitiert, dass dieser zurücktreten werde, wenn in den kommenden Monaten keine sichtbaren Ergebnisse erzielt würden. Zwei Tage zuvor betont Livni in London die israelische „Vision zweier Staaten für zwei Völker“, die in Frieden, Sicherheit und Wohlstand nebeneinander leben. Es vergehe fast kein Tag ohne Verhandlungen.

02.05.2008: In einer Londoner Erklärung verlangt das „Nahost-Quartett“ unter Mitwirkung seines Repräsentanten Tony Blair kontinuierliche und intensive Verhandlungen zwischen Israel und der Palästinensischen Autonomiebehörde mit dem Ziel der Schaffung eines palästinensischen Staates in der Westbank und im Gazastreifen unter dem Schirm der „Road Map“. Deshalb beklagt das „Quartett“ die fortgesetzten Siedlungsaktivitäten und fordert Israel zu ihrer Einstellung auf. Schließlich verlangen die Außenminister von den arabischen Geberstaaten, ihre Zusagen von der Pariser Konferenz Mitte Dezember 2007 einzuhalten 131 . www.reiner-bernstein.de 131 – Chronologie 2008

Ghait al-Omari, der in den Jahren 2001 bis 2003 zum palästinensischen Team der „Genfer Initiative“ gehörte und heute in Washington, D.C., arbeitet, warnt in einem Kommentar vor der Illusion, dass die Einbindung von „Hamas“ in den Verhandlungsprozess ihre Politik erheblich verändern würde. „Hamas“ weise nicht die Zweistaatenregelung zurück, doch sei ihr Verhalten einer kalten rationalen Logik verpflichtet. Bisher habe sich gezeigt, dass ihr die Verweigerung von Kompromissen nach innen und außen genutzt habe. Gegenüber Israel hätten sich selbst die pragmatischsten Stimmen lediglich zu einer vorläufigen Waffenruhe bereit erklärt. Nach innen laute die Botschaft, dass sich Extremismus auszahle. Die Marginalisierung von „Hamas“ werde nur dann gelingen, wenn die moderaten palästinensischen Kräfte einen lebensfähigen palästinensischen Staat auf dem Verhandlungsweg durchsetzen könnten. Der Autor plädiert deshalb für die Wiederbelebung der Vereinbarungen von Annapolis im November 2007 132 .

In einem Interview mit der „Frankfurter Rundschau” macht der in Jerusalem lebende Historiker und Publizist Tom Segev die gemeinsame israelische Identität vor allem an der hebräischen Sprache fest. Obwohl viele junge Israelis einen zweiten Pass besitzen, glaubten sie nicht mehr an einen Frieden mit den Palästinensern. Aufgrund des „religiösen Wahnsinns“ auf beiden Seiten glaube auch er, Segev, nicht mehr an den Frieden. Israel steuere noch mehr auf eine Apartheid zu. Am Ende laufe es entweder auf eine weitere Unterdrückung der Palästinenser oder auf eine binationale Lösung hinaus. Segev wirft Angela Merkel vor, dass sie bei ihrem Besuch im März die israelische Regierung völlig kritiklos gewürdigt habe, obwohl im Lande selbst die Diskussion über diese Politik offener, schmerzhafter und manchmal gewalttätiger sei.

Das „Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN)“ protestiert mit anderen Menschenrechtsorganisationen gegen die www.reiner-bernstein.de 132 – Chronologie 2008

Exekution von vier Personen in syrischen Gefängnissen im April. Im Verlauf des Jahres 2007 seien in Saudi-Arabien mindestens 158 Personen, darunter drei Frauen und Kinder, hingerichtet worden. 76 von ihnen seien ausländische Staatsbürger gewesen.

01.05.2008: Nach zweitägigen Beratungen verabschieden der Vatikan und iranische Theologen in Rom eine sieben Punkte umfassende Erklärung zum Verhältnis zwischen Glaube, Vernunft und Gewalt. Darin betonen sie, dass sich Glaube und Vernunft nicht widersprechen können und nicht zur Rechtfertigung von Gewalt missbraucht werden dürfen 133 .

In Anwesenheit des ungarischen Verteidigungsministers, des stellvertretenden israelischen Erziehungsministers, des Präsidenten der Europäisch-Jüdischen Union in Frankreich, des früheren aschkenasischen Oberrabbiners Israels, hinterbliebenen israelischen Familien, verwundeten [israelischen] Soldaten und ihren Familien, Mitgliedern der Delegation „Zeugen in [israelischer] Uniform“ des israelischen Militärs, jungen Menschen aus Israel und aus aller Welt, israelischen Staatsbürgern sowie Freunden und Gästen aus aller Welt hält der israelische Generalstabschef Gabi Aschkenasi eine Ansprache beim „Marsch der Lebenden“ im früheren Vernichtungslager Auschwitz-Birkenau. Darin rühmt er den Mut und die Entschlossenheit der israelischen Kämpfer und Kommandeure bei der Ausführung des letzten Willens, der Träume und der stillen Gebete der sechs Millionen jüdischen Ermordeten. „Nie wieder!“ ruft Ashkenazi der Welt zu, werde es Israel zulassen, bei den anderen um Gnade zu bitten 134 .

April 2008 www.reiner-bernstein.de 133 – Chronologie 2008

April 2008: In seinem „War and Peace Index“ für den Monat April berichtet das „Tami Steinmetz Center for Peace Research“ an der Universität Tel Aviv aus seiner Meinungsumfrage, dass 66 Prozent der jüdischen Israelis nicht an eine Vereinbarung mit Syrien und 70 Prozent an keine Vereinbarung mit den Palästinensern glauben. Nur 19 Prozent befürworten den Rückzug Israels von den Golanhöhen im Gegenzug für einen Friedensvertrag mit Damaskus, 34 Prozent sind gegen Verhandlungen mit den Palästinensern, obwohl 70 Prozent die Formel von der Zweistaatenregelung unterstützen. 55 Prozent sprechen sich gegen die Übergabe der arabischen Stadtviertel Jerusalems an die Palästinenser aus, und 60 Prozent lehnen eine gemeinsame israelisch-palästinensische Verwaltung der heiligen Stätten ab. 17 Prozent befürchten einen gewaltsamen Aufstand der arabischen Bürger gegen den Staat. 78 Prozent der jüdischen Israelis vertreten die Auffassung, dass Israel auf militärischem Gebiet erfolgreich sei.

28.04.2008: Das israelische Militär tötet mit einem Geschoss in Beit Hanoun (Gazastreifen) sieben Palästinenser – darunter eine Mutter mit vier Kindern zwischen 15 Monate und sechs Jahren während des Frühstücks sowie einen 17jährigen Passanten –, andere werden verletzt. Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert bedauert den Tod, macht aber wie Verteidigungsminister Ehud Barak die Raketenangriffe von „Hamas“ verantwortlich. In israelischen Presseberichten wird am 30. April eine Untersuchung des Militärs zitiert, wonach die Toten durch die Detonation eines palästinensischen Sprengkörpers ums Leben gekommen sein sollen. Der liberal-konservative Uzi Benziman warnt in einem „Haaretz“-Kommentar davor, den Tod dem Feind in die Schuhe zu schieben. Die offizielle Lesart erinnere an frühere Vorfälle, bei denen das israelische Militär später eigenes Versagen habe einräumen müssen 135 . www.reiner-bernstein.de 134 – Chronologie 2008

Ein palästinensisches Militärgericht in Hebron fällt ein Todesurteil gegen den 25jährigen Polizeioffizier Imad Sa’ed, der der Kollaboration mit den israelischen Sicherheitsdiensten beschuldigt worden ist. Präsident Machmud Abbas muss das Urteil bestätigen. Das „Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR)“ appelliert an ihn, die Todesstrafe umzuwandeln 136 . Die Exekution wäre die erste seit sieben Jahren. Am 10. Juni teilen die palästinensischen Behörden mit, dass Sa’ed nicht hingerichtet werden soll. Über die Dauer seiner geplanten Inhaftierung wird nichts mitgeteilt.

Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert bezeichnet die Gründung des Staates Israel als das historische Wunder des 20. Jahrhunderts und würdigt bei der Eröffnung der Ausstellung „Meine Heimat“ im Holocaust-Museum „Yad vaShem“ in Jerusalem den Beitrag, den die Überlebenden der Shoah zum Aufbau des Staates geleistet haben 137 .

Nach einem Bericht der „Jerusalem Post“ hat sich die israelische „Pensionistenpartei“ gespalten, die bei den Wahlen 2006 sieben Parlamentssitze errang und mit zwei Kabinettsposten in die Regierung einrückte. Die Abspaltung zweier Mandatsträger will künftig den Namen „Gerechtigkeit für Rentner“ führen. Sie stehen dem aus Russland eingewanderten und umstrittenen Multimillionär Arcadi Gaydamek und seiner Gruppierung „Soziale Gerechtigkeit“ nahe.

26.04.2008: Aus Israel kommend, sollen während der Pessach-Woche, die an diesem Tag zu Ende geht, über 50.000 Touristen Hebron besucht haben. Das israelische Militär habe alles in seiner Macht Stehende getan, um ihnen den Übergang über die 112 Kontrollstellen in der Stadt zu erleichtern. Nach palästinensischen Angaben gibt es außerhalb der Stadt weitere 156 Kontrollpunkte. www.reiner-bernstein.de 135 – Chronologie 2008

25.04.2008: In einer Ansprache vor der „American Task Force on Palestine“ – einem Zusammenschluss von US-amerikanischen Staatsbürgern vorwiegend palästinensischer Herkunft – in Zusammenarbeit mit dem „Saban Center for Middle East Policy“ in Washington, D.C., scheut der vormalige Leiter des palästinensischen Teams der „Genfer Initiative“ , Yasser Abed Rabbo, voreiner Prognose zurück, ob der israelisch-palästinensische Konflikt auf einen Kompromiss oder eine politische Katastrophe zusteuere. Ein Vergleich zwischen Worten und Taten der politisch Verantwortlichen in den USA und in Israel laufe auf eine Schizophrenie hinaus. Ähnliche Skepsis äußert der frühere Nahost-Berater von Bill Clinton, Aaron David Miller 138 , auf derselben Veranstaltung. Deutliche Kritik übt Miller an der US-Politik, der er während des Gipfeltreffens in Camp David im Juli 2000 eine Voreingenommenheit zugunsten Israels vorhält. Der damalige Präsident habe keine Strategie gehabt, sondern nur Taktik 139 . Am 8. Mai zitiert die „Los Angeles Times“ Abed Rabbo mit den Worten, dass die Zahl der Palästinenser auch im Kreis rational denkender Intellektueller abnehme, die noch an die Zweistaatenregelung glauben. Eine kleine, aber wachsende Zahl von gemäßigten Palästinensern würde die Auffassung vertreten, fährt das Blatt fort, dass die israelischen Angebote einer palästinensischen Unabhängigkeit weniger Gewinn erbringe als ein gemeinsamer jüdisch-arabischer Staat unter Einbeziehung der Westbank und des Gazastreifens. Nach den Worten von Qadura Faris, der zu den palästinensischen Erstunterzeichnern der „Genfer Initiative“ gehörte, sei die palästinensische Strategie der Zweistaatenregelung erschöpft, so dass die politischen Ziele überdacht werden müssten. Außerdem habe der politisch unabhängige Kolumnist Ali Jarbawi Israel mit den Worten angesprochen: „I would say, ‚Be our guest. Continue your occupation. But we’re going to declare this is all one state and ask for equal rights. Are you going to be able to keep us under control for another 40 years?’ 140 ” www.reiner-bernstein.de 136 – Chronologie 2008

Die „New York Times“ berichtet, dass prominente US-amerikanische Juden eine neue Israel-Lobby-Gruppe in Washington, D.C., unter der Bezeichnung „J Street“ gegründet haben 141 , um den Einfluss von Organisationen wie dem „American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)“ einzudämmen. Die Gruppe wolle Kandidaten bei den Wahlen im Herbst unterstützen, die sich nachdrücklich für die Zweistaatenregelung und die Unterstützung der Palästinensischen Autonomiebehörde einsetzen. Zu den Initiatoren von „J Street“ gehöre der frühere juristische Berater des israelischen Teams der „Genfer Initiative“ , Daniel Levy 142 . In AIPAC-Kreisen werde herablassend darauf hingewiesen, dass der Haushalt von „J Street“ nicht mehr als 1,5 Millionen US-Dollar beträgt, während AIPAC hundert Millionen US-Dollar zur Verfügung stehen.

24.04.2008: Unter Leitung von Qadura Faris („Fatah“) und dem früheren Erziehungsminister Nasser Addein al-Shaer („Hamas“) veranstaltet die „Palestinian Peace Coalition / Geneva Initiative“ in Ramallah eine Konferenz mit Jugendvertretern und Repräsentanten der Zivilgesellschaft. Al-Shaer, Stellvertreter von Ismail Haniyeh im Gazastreifen, gilt als der „starke Mann“ von „Hamas“ in der Westbank.

Beim 35 Minuten dauernden Treffen von US-Präsident George W. Bush mit dem palästinensischen Präsidenten Machmud Abbas in Washington, D.C., betont Bush, dass „ein palästinensischer Staat“ zu seinen obersten Prioritäten gehöre und nicht wie ein Schweizer Käse aussehen dürfe. Gleichzeitig wird der Präsident aus der Umgebung von Abbas für seine Absichten während der Nahostreise im Mai kritisiert: Er habe nicht vor, ein palästinensisches Flüchtlingslager zu besuchen oder mit Flüchtlingen zu sprechen. Jon Alterman, ehemals Mitglied des Planungsstabes im State Department und gegenwärtig Direktor des Nahostprogramms am „Center for Strategic and International Studies“, wirft Bush vor, die www.reiner-bernstein.de 137 – Chronologie 2008

Palästinenser nicht nur zu beleidigen, sondern sie auch zu verletzen, wenn er nach Israel reise, während die palästinensische Führung ihn in Kairo treffen müsse. Bush wird außer in Israel auch in Ägypten und Saudi-Arabien erwartet. Am 7. Mai verkündet Bushs nationaler Sicherheitsberater Stephen Hadley, dass der Besuch des Präsidenten in Israel rein zeremoniellen Charakter haben werde. Eine gemeinsame Sitzung mit der israelischen Regierung und der Palästinensischen Autonomiebehörde sei nicht geplant.

In Washington wird in einer nicht-öffentlichen Sitzung der außen- und sicherheitspolitischen Ausschüsse beider Häuser des US- Kongresses ein Video vorgeführt, das nordkoreanische und syrische Fachleute im Sommer 2007 bei der Arbeit in einer Nuklearanlage im Osten Syriens zeigen soll. Der Reaktor wurde nach Konsultationen mit Washington am 6. September 2007 von israelischen Jagdbombern zerstört. Vier Tage später sollen die Syrer die Reste der Anlage gesprengt haben, um verdächtige Spuren zu verwischen. Westliche Fachleute bezweifeln allerdings, das Syrien ein volles Atomwaffenprogramm entwickeln könne, weil ihm dazu die fachlichen Voraussetzungen fehlen würden.

Als der libysche UN-Botschafter Ibrahim Dabashi im UN- Sicherheitsrat die israelische Belagerung des Gazastreifens den deutschen Konzentrationslagern vergleicht, verlassen die Delegierten der USA, Großbritanniens, Frankreichs, Belgiens und Costa Ricas das Plenum. Der südafrikanische Ratspräsident Dumisano Kumalo bricht daraufhin die Sitzung ab.

23.04.2008: US-Präsident George W. Bush trifft im Weißen Haus mit Jordaniens König Abdullah II. zusammen.

Bundesaußenminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier unterrichtet in Berlin den ägyptischen Staatspräsidenten Hosni Mubarak über den Stand www.reiner-bernstein.de 138 – Chronologie 2008 der Vorbereitungen auf die für den 24. Juni geplante internationale Konferenz zur Stärkung der palästinensischen Polizei und Justiz.

Der Israel-Korrespondent der „Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung“ Jörg Bremer zieht eine ernüchternde Bilanz der Friedensbewegung „Peace Now“ in den vergangenen dreißig Jahren. Wahrscheinlich sei sie eine der erfolgreichsten Organisationen ihrer Art, doch scheinen ihre Vorstellungen eines baldigen Friedens fern zu sein.

Eine syrische Nachrichtenagentur meldet, dass Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert dem syrischen Präsidenten Bashar Assad durch den türkischen Ministerpräsidenten Recep Tayyib Erdogan eine Botschaft übermittelt habe, wonach Israel zum vollen Rückzug von den Golanhöhen bereit sei. Olmerts Büro erklärt dazu, dass es dazu keinen Kommentar gebe. Die Rechtsopposition bezeichnet die vermeintliche Bereitschaft als einmalige nationale Kapitulation, Olmert opfere Israels Sicherheit. Dagegen begrüßt Yossi Beilin („Meretz/Yachad“) die Absicht und fordert Olmert auf, in schnelle und intensive Verhandlungen über einen Friedensvertrag einzutreten. Der Generalsekretär der Bewegung „Frieden Jetzt“, Yariv Oppenheimer, bezeichnet am 24. April in der „Jerusalem Post“ eine Rückgabe der Golanhöhen als unzeitgemäß. In einem Interview mit der auflagenstärksten Zeitung „Yediot Acharonot (Letzte Nachrichten)“ am selben Tag zeigt sich Olmert zu Gesprächen mit Assad bereit. Dieser jedoch lehnt ebenfalls am 24. April in einem Interview mit der Zeitung „Al-Watan (Die Heimat)“ in Qatar direkte Verhandlungen mit Israel ohne Beteiligung der USA ab, die er bis zum Amtsantritt der neuen Präsidentschaft im Januar 2009 für nicht zum Frieden bereit hält, und verweist auf die Rolle der Türkei als Vermittlerin. Der syrische Außenminister Walid Muallem ergänzt, dass Syrien nicht zu Lasten der Palästinenser verhandeln werde. Das Büro des iranischen Präsidenten Machmud Achmadinedjad warnt Syrien, vor den „Konspirationen und den Bürgerkriegen unserer Feinde“ zu kapitulieren. Nach arabischen Presseberichten www.reiner-bernstein.de 139 – Chronologie 2008 verlangt Abbas vor dem Beginn von Verhandlungen eine schriftliche Zusicherung Israels, die Golanhöhen zu räumen.

22.04.2008: In einem Beitrag in „Le Monde“ schlägt der israelische Autor A.B. Yehoshua die Stationierung von bewaffneten Einheiten, vornehmlich aus Europa, entlang der israelisch-palästinensischen Grenze vor, um die Zweistaatenregelung sicherzustellen.

In einer Anzeige verwahrt sich Meir Margalit, ehemaliges Mitglied der Jerusalemer Stadtverordnetenversammlung und heute beim israelischen Komitee gegen die Zerstörung palästinensischer Häuser tätig, gegen die politisch unverbindliche Rede von Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel vor der Knesset am 18. März. In der „Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung“ wirft ihr Margalit vor, dass ihr Schweigen kein Freundschaftsdienst für Israel gewesen sei, das Gegenteil sei der Fall. Nur wenn die Besetzung palästinensischer Territorien aufhöre, habe der Staat Israel eine politische Überlebenschance, zitiert Margalit den israelischen Ministerpräsidenten Ehud Olmert 143 .

Eine Resolution des US-Repräsentantenhauses aus Anlass des 60. Gründungsjahres Israels wird ohne Gegenstimme angenommen. Der demokratische Abgeordnete Dennis Kucinich (Ohio) äußert sich kritisch zur israelischen Politik gegenüber den Palästinensern, stimmt jedoch der Resolution zu 144 .

Der 18. Versuch, einen neuen libanesischen Präsidenten zu wählen, schlägt in Beirut fehl.

Die US-demokratische Präsidentschaftsbewerberin Hillary Rodham Clinton droht dem Iran im Falle eines atomaren Angriffs auf Israel mit „völliger Vernichtung“. www.reiner-bernstein.de 140 – Chronologie 2008

„Al-Qaida“ verwahrt sich gegen die Behauptung des libanesischen „Hisbollah“-Fernsehens, dass Israel für die Anschläge am 11. September 2001 in New York verantwortlich sei, und reklamiert die Anschläge für sich.

21.04.2008: Zum Abschluss seiner neuntägigen Nahostreise, bei der er auch mit dem Leiter des Politischen Büros von „Hamas“ in Damaskus, Khaled Meshal, und mit Syriens Staatspräsidenten Bashar Assad zusammentraf, berichtet der frühere US-Präsident Jimmy Carter in einem Vortrag in Jerusalem, dass die Islamische Widerstandsbewegung und Syrien zum Frieden mit Israel in den Grenzen von 1967 bereit seien. 85 Prozent aller Probleme einschließlich der Grenzfragen und der Wasserverteilung seien geklärt, wird Assad von Carter zitiert. Gleichzeitig wirft der ehemalige US-Präsident der israelischen Regierung vor, am Frieden nicht interessiert zu sein. Noch am selben Tag bekräftigt Meshal, dass eine Anerkennung des Staates Israel für seine Organisation nicht in Frage komme, und bietet stattdessen eine zehnjährige Waffenruhe an. Die israelische Regierung weist diesen Vorschlag umgehend zurück. Während der Vorsitzende der Partei der „Sefardischen Thorawächter (Shas)“ Eli Yishai Carter bittet, sich für die Freilassung des seit Juni 2006 von „Hamas“ inhaftierten Gilad Shalit zu verwenden, bezeichnet der israelische Botschafter Dan Gillerman vor Journalisten in Washington, D.C., am 24. April Carter wegen seines Treffens mit Meshal als bigott. Yossi Beilin („Meretz/Yachad“) fordert daraufhin am 25. April die umgehende Abberufung Gillermans. Akiva Eldar berichtet ebenfalls am 25. April in „Haaretz“, dass US-Außenministerin Condoleezza Rice frühzeitig über alle Details der Reise Carters unterrichtet gewesen sei und dass die kritischen Querschläge aus dem State Department nicht von ihr, sondern von dem ehemals einflussreichen Berater Elliott Abrams ausgingen. In einem Interview mit der arabischen Fernsehstation „al- Djazeera (Die Halbinsel)“ am 26. April erklärt Meshal, dass die www.reiner-bernstein.de 141 – Chronologie 2008 angebotene Waffenruhe mit Israel nur taktischer Natur sei. Der Kampf gehe weiter. Am 26. Mai notiert Carter in einem Beitrag für die „Süddeutsche Zeitung“, dass nach einer Zählung der israelischen Menschenrechtsorganisation „B’tselem“ zwischen dem 27. Februar und 3. März 2008 im Gazastreifen 106 Palästinenser, darunter 54 Zivilisten, bei israelischen Militäreinsätzen getötet wurden.

In der hebräischsprachigen Ausgabe von „Haaretz“ wird Jimmy Carter mit den Worten zitiert, dass die USA jeden Vertrag Israels mit Syrien unterstützen würden. Das habe er auch Bashar Assad mitgeteilt. Gegenüber Yossi Beilin („Meretz/Yachad“) schlägt Carter vor, eine „ syrische Genfer Initiative“ in die Wege zu leiten.

In der „International Herald Tribune“ zitiert der Chefredakteur der Beiruter Zeitung „The Daily Star“ Rami C. Khoury aus einer Meinungsumfrage unter Leitung der Politologen Shibley Telhami und James Zogby vom März in Ägypten, Jordanien, Libanon, Marokko, Saudi-Arabien und den Vereinigten Arabischen Emiraten. Aus ihr geht eine von 83 Prozent der Befragten vertretene Ablehnung der US-amerikanischen Politik in der Region hervor. Nach Auffassung von 65 Prozent vertritt Washington andere Ziele als die Förderung demokratischer Werte, und 61 Prozent fordern, dass sich die Amerikaner aus dem Irak zurückziehen und die inneren Angelegenheiten der dortigen Bevölkerung überlassen. 81 Prozent glauben, dass die Lage der Iraker vor der amerikanischen Intervention besser gewesen sei als heute. 50 Prozent verlangen von Washington die Förderung eines arabisch-israelischen Friedens. Für die meisten Befragten stellt der Iran keine große Bedrohung dar, das Land habe das Recht auf ein eigenes Nuklearprogramm.

In der libanesischen Stadt Zahle werden zwei Mitglieder der christlichen Phalange-Partei erschossen. Als Hintergrund werden Rivalitäten zwischen christlichen Fraktionen vermutet.

www.reiner-bernstein.de 142 – Chronologie 2008

18.04.2008: Unter der Überschrift „Glückwünsche und Sorgen” veröffentlicht die „Frankfurter Rundschau“ einen Aufruf von deutschen Wissenschaftlern, Parlamentariern und Intellektuellen zum 60. Gründungsjubiläum des Staates Israel 145 .

17.04.2008: In einer Kolumne für „Haaretz” plädiert Ari Shavit für ein „Geschäft” mit „Hamas“: einen islamischen Staat im Gazastreifen im Gegenzug für die Demilitarisierung ihres Widerstandes. Bei „Hamas“ handele es sich um Verbrecher und Mörder, doch auch Israel habe durch die Vertreibung der Palästinenser 1948 schweres Unrecht auf sich geladen 146 .

Einer der Mitbegründer von „Hamas“ und frühere Außenminister der Regierung im Gazastreifen, Machmud Zahhar, begründet in der „Washington Post“ den Kampf seiner Islamischen Widerstandsbewegung mit der Absicht Israels, gegen die Palästinenser „einen totalen Krieg“ zu führen, und vergleicht diesen Kampf mit der Gegenwehr der „mutigen Juden des Warschauer Ghettos zur Verteidigung ihres Volkes“. Der Friedensprozess könne nicht einmal beginnen, ohne dass Israels sich zuerst auf die Grenzen von 1967 zurückziehe, alle Siedlungen auflöse, alle Soldaten aus dem Gazastreifen und aus der Westbank zurückziehe, die illegale Annexion Jerusalems rückgängig mache, alle Gefangenen freilasse sowie die Küste und den Luftraum freigebe. Diese Schritte würden den Beginn gerechter Verhandlungen signalisieren und den Grundstein für die Rückkehr von Millionen Flüchtlingen ausmachen 147 .

Der religiös-orthodoxe Jerusalemer Bürgermeister Uri Lupolianski kündigt eine weltweite jüdische Spendenaktion an, damit durch verbesserte Bildungschancen für palästinensische Kinder und Jugendliche im Ostteil der Stadt dem Einfluss von „Hamas“ Einhalt www.reiner-bernstein.de 143 – Chronologie 2008 geboten werden könne. Die Spenden sollen die staatlichen und kommunalen Mittel ergänzen. Colette Avital (Arbeitspartei), die zu den Erstunterzeichnern der „Genfer Initiative“ gehört, habe bereits drei Millionen US-Dollar unter britischen Juden gesammelt.

Eine sieben Personen umfassende Bundestagsdelegation unter Leitung von Jerzy Montag (Bündnis 90/Die Grünen), dem Leiter der deutsch-israelischen Parlamentariergruppe, wird in Hebron von Siedlern tätlich belästigt und angegriffen. Die israelische Polizei sei untätig geblieben, berichten sie. Die Delegation bricht ihren Besuch ab. Die Deutsche Botschaft in Tel Aviv protestiert im israelischen Außenministerium. Sie selbst äußert sich zu dem Vorfall nicht 148 . Das Auswärtige Amt in Berlin reagiert „mit großem Befremden“.

16.04.2008: Der US-amerikanische Präsidentschaftskandidat der Demokraten, Barack Obama, kritisiert den früheren Präsidenten Jimmy Carter für seine Absicht, in Damaskus mit dem Leiter des Politischen Büros von „Hamas“, Khaled Meshal, zu sprechen. Carter trifft mit ihm am 17. April zusammen und fordert die Beteiligung von „Hamas“ am israelisch-palästinensischen Verhandlungsprozess. Zuvor teilt Carter mit, dass ihm die israelischen Behörden die Einreise in den Gazastreifen verwehrt haben.

15.04.2008: Nach dem Tod von drei israelischen Soldaten im Gazastreifen sterben bei Angriffen israelischer Helikopter fünfzehn Palästinenser, darunter mindestens fünf Kinder und ein palästinensischer Kameramann, der für die britische Agentur „Reuters“ arbeitete. Auf das Gebiet des westlichen Negevs gehen mehr als zwei Dutzend „Qassam“-Raketen nieder. www.reiner-bernstein.de 144 – Chronologie 2008

Bei einer Begegnung zwischen der österreichischen Außenministerin Ursula Plassnik und Yossi Beilin in Wien bezeichnet Plassnik die „Genfer Initiative“ als wichtigen Anreiz und vitales Zeichen für den Willen der israelischen und der palästinensischen Zivilgesellschaft zum Frieden.

14.04.2008: In einem Beitrag für „DIE ZEIT“ beschäftigt sich Joschka Fischer insbesondere mit dem künftigen politischen und strategisch- militärischen Gewicht Irans und betont, dass die nukleare Aufrüstung Teherans nicht auf eine Bedrohung durch die Atommacht Israel zurückzuführen sei, sondern auf eigene hegemoniale Gelüste und auf iranisches Prestigedenken. Die drohende Balkanisierung des Nahen Ostens würde nicht Israel nützen, sondern Iran zugute kommen, das auf eine sehr alte und stabile Staatlichkeit zurückblicke, sowie im Falle des Irak der Blindheit, Arroganz und Inkompetenz der US-Politik anzulasten sei. Die Zeit eines laizistischen arabischen Nationalismus laufe ab. An seine Stelle trete ein politischer Islam, der sich erfolgreich der nationalen und sozialen Frage bemächtigt habe. Am meisten fortgeschritten sei dieser Prozess mit „Hamas“ in Palästina, doch auch in Syrien und Ägypten zeichne sich – wenn auch nicht so radikal und schnell – eine ähnliche Entwicklung ab. In den arabischen Teilen des Irak habe sie im Gefolge der US-Intervention bereits stattgefunden. Der von den USA angestoßene Demokratieexport laufe objektiv auf die Stärkung des politischen Islam hinaus. Am Beispiel der Türkei werde sich erweisen, ob er sich in Richtung Demokratie und Modernisierung bewegt. Abschließend formuliert Fischer drei Fragen: 1. Wird der Prozess der ökonomischen Modernisierung schneller und erfolgreicher verlaufen als die politische Islamisierung und Radikalisierung? 2. Wird in der Türkei die Verbindung von politischem Islam einerseits sowie ökonomisch-sozialer und demokratischer Modernisierung andererseits gelingen? 3. Wird der www.reiner-bernstein.de 145 – Chronologie 2008

Hegemonialkonflikt mit Iran zu einer militärischen Konfrontation führen oder politisch gelöst werden können?

13.04.2008: Das politisch rechts stehende israelische „Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies“ publiziert die Ergebnisse einer von ihm in Auftrag gegebenen Meinungsumfrage. Danach sprechen sich 62 Prozent der jüdischen Israelis gegen und 29 Prozent für Verhandlungen über die Teilung Jerusalems aus. 71 Prozent verlangen über die Ergebnisse der Verhandlungen zu Jerusalem eine Volksabstimmung, während 19 Prozent dies für nicht notwendig halten. 48 Prozent lehnen die Berücksichtigung der in der Diaspora lebenden Juden in dieser Befragung ab, 38 Prozent geben eine positive Antwort darauf. Auch im Rahmen eines Schlussvertrages mit den Palästinensern lehnen 58 Prozent die Teilung Jerusalems ab, während 29 Prozent dazu bereit sind. 45 Prozent halten eine palästinensische Hauptstadt in Teilen Jerusalems für nicht möglich, während 14 Prozent ihr positiv gegenüberstehen.

12.04.2008: Uri Avnery berichtet in seinem Tagesrundbrief, dass Israels öffentliche Hand rund 40 Millionen US-Dollar für die Feierlichkeiten zum 60. Gründungsjahr bereitgestellt habe – obwohl der Bevölkerung nicht zum Feiern zumute sei, sondern die Stimmung düster sei.

11.04.2008: Daniel Levy, ehemaliger Rechtsberater des israelischen Teams der „Genfer Initiative“ und heute in Washington, D.C., arbeitend, referiert in seiner regelmäßigen Kolumne, dass nach einem Bericht des israelischen Fernsehens das Militär analog den Verfahrensweisen der US-Truppen in Irak plane, die Kontrolle aller www.reiner-bernstein.de 146 – Chronologie 2008

„Checkpoints“ in der Westbank entlang der „Trennungsmauern“ zu privatisieren. Die Frauenhilfsorganisation „Machsom Watch“ habe schon wachsende Spannungen, explosive Auftritte und eingeschränkte Kommunikationsmöglichkeiten zu den Mitarbeitern dieser Privatfirmen beklagt.

10.-13.04.2008: Die „Palestinian Peace Coalition – Geneva Initiative“ veranstaltet im türkischen Antalya ein Seminar mit palästinensischen und israelischen Regierungsangestellten, parlamentarischen Hilfskräften, Journalisten, Friedensaktivisten und Führungskräften von Frauenorganisationen. Ziel der Veranstaltung ist der Abbau von Vorurteilen und Stereotypen auf beiden Seiten unter Einbeziehung von Rollenspielen. Zu den Referenten gehören als Erstunterzeichner der „Genfer Initiative“ Saman Khoury und Menachem Klein, die über die gegenwärtige Atmosphäre in beiden Gesellschaften berichten.

10.04.2008: Nach einer Meldung der „Jerusalem Post” haben Israels Außenministerin Tsipi Livni und der palästinensischen Verhandlungsleiter Achmed Qureia („Abu Ala”) in Geheimgesprächen die Übergabe des ehemaligen Fluggeländes Atarot im Norden Jerusalems an die Palästinensische Autonomiebehörde vereinbart.

Yossi Verter zitiert in „Haaretz“ aus einer Ansprache Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert am 7. April vor Offizieren mit den Worten: „Judäa und Samaria sind strategisch und historisch bedeutsam, doch nach meiner Auffassung werden wir schließlich den größten Teil der Gebiete aufgeben müssen. Ich sage dies mit einem Gefühl tiefen Schmerzes. Ich bin ein Jude, der sein ganzes Leben in dem Glauben erzogen wurde, dass dies das Land Israel ist, und dazu habe ich meine Meinung nicht geändert. Doch die Lage ist www.reiner-bernstein.de 147 – Chronologie 2008 schwierig, und wir müssen uns entscheiden. Nach meiner Auffassung hat das Volk in seinem Herzen bereits entschieden.“

In der derselben Ausgabe berichtet Yossi Verter von der jüngsten Meinungsumfrage der Universität Tel Aviv unter Leitung von Professor Camil Fuchs, wonach die Partei der „Grünen“ bei Wahlen erstmals mit drei Abgeordneten in die Knesset einziehen würde. Dagegen würden die Arbeitspartei unter Ehud Barak acht Sitze und „Likud“ unter Führung von Benjamin Netanyahu sechs Sitze verlieren.

Der frühere Direktor des „American Jewish Congress“ und heutige Direktor des „US/Middle East Project“, Henry Siegman, setzt sich in einem Beitrag für die „Süddeutsche Zeitung“ außergewöhnlich kritisch mit der internationalen Zurückhaltung gegenüber der israelischen Politik auseinander 149 .

08.04.2008: Der seit April 2002 in israelischer Haft sitzende ehemalige Führer des „Fatah“-Ablegers „Tanzim (Organisation)“, Marwan Barghouti, zeigt sich in einem Brief an die israelische Bewegung „Frieden Jetzt“ davon überzeugt, dass das palästinensische Volk zu einem historischen Kompromiss auf der Grundlage internationaler Entscheidungen mit dem Ergebnis zweier in Frieden miteinander lebender Staaten bereit sei. Der Brief wird von Qadura Faris, einem palästinensischen Erstunterzeichner der „Genfer Initiative“ , bei der 30-Jahr-Feier der Bewegung in Tel Aviv verlesen. Fares, der dreizehn Jahre in israelischen Gefängnissen gesessen hat, ist als Kritiker der geringen Reformbereitschaft von „Fatah“ ein politischer Verbündeter von Barghouti. Am 17. März hatte dieser angekündigt, bei der nächsten Wahl des palästinensischen Präsidenten im Jahr 2009 kandidieren zu wollen. www.reiner-bernstein.de 148 – Chronologie 2008

In der Zentrale des israelischen Teams der „Genfer Initiative“ in Tel Aviv kündigt Yossi Beilin („Meretz/Yachad“) eine Nahostkonferenz unter Führung Washingtons für Mai im ägyptischen Badeort Sharm el-Sheikh an, um die Verabredungen von Annapolis im November 2007 in politische Ergebnisse umzumünzen. Beilins Ankündigung wird offiziell bestätigt.

In Ägypten finden Kommunalwahlen statt. Sie werden von sozialen Unruhen, bei denen zwei Menschen ums Leben kommen, und politischem Streit begleitet. Die in sich zerstrittene Moslembruderschaft ruft am 7. April zum Boykott auf. Aus den Wahlen geht die „Nationaldemokratische Partei“ von Präsident Hosni Mubarak mit einem 95-Prozent-Anteil als Sieger hervor – die Wahlbeteiligung lag bei lediglich fünf Prozent. Nach Berichten arabischer Beobachter hat die Regierung erneut Zuflucht zu autoritären Praktiken genommen und den Reformprozess zwischen 2003 und 2005 eingestellt.

Die Bundestagsfraktion von „Bündnis 90/DieGrünen“ richtet 33 Fragen im Rahmen einer Kleinen Anfrage an die „Politik der Bundesregierung und EU im israelisch-palästinensischen Konflikt angesichts der Krise im Gazastreifen“ 150 . Einen Vergleich der Anfrage mit der Antwort des Auswärtigen Amtes übergibt Judith Bernstein als Mitglied der „Jüdisch-Palästinensischen Dialoggruppe“ bei einem Treffen mit Jerzy Montag am 23. Juni 151 .

07.04.2008: Yariv Oppenheimer, Generalsekretär der Bewegung „Frieden Jetzt“, die in diesem Monat ihr dreißigjähriges Jubiläum feiert, beschuldigt die israelische Regierung der politischen Doppelzüngigkeit. Ihre Rhetorik, eine Zweistaatenregelung anzustreben, stehe in diametralem Gegensatz zu ihren Handlungen, die Siedlungen in Jerusalem und in der Westbank auszubauen 152 . www.reiner-bernstein.de 149 – Chronologie 2008

Der Gründer und Direktor der palästinensischen Menschenrechtsorganisation „Monitoring Group“ Bassam Eid warnt vor einer simplen Interpretation der innerpalästinensischen Gewalt. Im allgemeinen werde sie als Ergebnis des Konflikts mit Israel interpretiert und übersehe die Uneinigkeit und die Zerwürfnisse der verschiedenen politischen Fraktionen, Familien und Städte, die Eid mit dem Begriff „Intrafada“ belegt. Auf sie seien zwischen dem Ausbruch der Zweiten Intifada im Herbst 2000 bis Ende 2007 sechzehn Prozent der palästinensischen Toten zurückzuführen.

06.04.2008: Der palästinensische Präsident Machmud Abbas kündigt ein Referendum an, dem sich eine Vereinbarung mit Israel stellen soll.

05./04.04.2008: Auf ihrem ersten Bundeskongress der „Linksjugend“, die der Partei „Die Linke“ nahesteht, wird in Leipzig die ursprünglich vorgesehene Formulierung einer uneingeschränkten Solidarität mit den Palästinensern gestrichen.

03.04.2008: Nach palästinensischen und israelischen Presseberichten hat Yasser Abed Rabbo, enger Berater von Präsident Machmud Abbas, die Autonomiebehörde aufgefordert, die Verhandlungen mit Israel einzustellen, solange die „Konspiration“ der Siedlungspolitik fortgesetzt werde.

02.04.2008: Der Leiter des Politischen Büros von „Hamas“ mit Sitz in Damaskus, Khaled Meshal, empfiehlt in einem Interview mit der palästinensischen Zeitung „al-Ayyam (Die Tage)“ jenen Israelis, die www.reiner-bernstein.de 150 – Chronologie 2008 sich für Gespräche mit „Hamas“ einsetzen, dass sie ihre Regierung zur Beendigung der Aggression gegen das palästinensische Volk aufrufen, weil sich die Araber und die Palästinenser gemeinsam für die Schaffung eines palästinensischen Staates in den Grenzen von 1967 ausgesprochen hätten. Die USA und „andere in der internationalen Gemeinschaft“ seien aufgefordert, die israelische Politik auf dieses Ziel zu verpflichten. „Das ist die Lösung.“

„Haaretz“ berichtet von einer internationalen Umfrage der BBC, wonach Iran weltweit der negativste Einfluss zugeschrieben wird. An zweiter und dritter Stelle folgten Israel und die USA. Deutschland werde der beste Einfluss auf die Weltpolitik zugeschrieben.

01.04.2008: Arabische Abgeordnete lösen in der Knesset einen Sturm der Entrüstung aus, als in erster Lesung ein Gesetzentwurf der „Nationalen Union/Nationalreligiöse Partei“ und der Partei „Unser Haus Israel (Israel Beitenu)“ debattiert wird, wonach die Bewerbung eines Kandidaten um ein Abgeordnetenmandat nach dem Besuch eines Feindstaates ohne vorherige Genehmigung null und nichtig sein soll 153 . Ein Abgeordneter der „Vereinigten Arabischen Liste“ bezeichnet den Entwurf „schlimmer als die Nürnberger Gesetze“, worauf er und seine arabischen Kollegen als „fünfte Kolonne“ charakterisiert werden. Nach Angaben der Generalstaatsanwaltschaft unterstützt die Regierung den Gesetzentwurf.

März 2008

Ende März: In seinem „War and Peace Index“ für den Monat März berichtet das „Tami Steinmetz Center for Peace Research“ an der Universität Tel www.reiner-bernstein.de 151 – Chronologie 2008

Aviv aus seiner Meinungsumfrage, dass 55 Prozent der Israelis die Westbank als „befreites Gebiet“ und 32 Prozent als „besetztes Gebiet“ bezeichnen würden. Für 57 Prozent stehe fest, dass die „Grüne Linie“ von 1967 nicht als künftige Grenze zwischen Israel und den Palästinensern fungieren solle, dass der Grenzverlauf die meisten Siedlungen einschließen solle und dass die palästinensische Bevölkerung Israels auf die palästinensische Seite umsiedeln sollte.

Der frühere US-Generalkonsul in Jerusalem, Ed Abington, verbreitet einen Brief, in dem er der Politik seiner Regierung ein vernichtendes Urteil ausspricht 154 .

31.03.2008: Israel-Korrespondent Jörg Bremer berichtet in der „Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung“, dass die israelischen und palästinensischen Teams unter Leitung von Tsipi Livni und Achmed Qureia („Abu Ala“) die „Genfer Initiative“ als „Anregung“ für ihre Verhandlungen betrachten.

30.03.2007: In Anwesenheit von Israels Verteidigungsminister Ehud Barak und dem palästinensischen Ministerpräsidenten Salam Fayyad lässt US- Außenministerin Condoleezza Rice in Jerusalem gegenüber Journalisten ihre Ungeduld darüber erkennen, dass die israelische Regierung ihre eigenen Zusagen nicht einhält, die Bewegungsfreiheit der palästinensischen Bevölkerung in der Westbank durch die Auflösung von fünfzig Checkpoints im Umfeld von Jenin, Tulkarem, Kalkilya und Ramallah zu erleichtern. In Amman verlangt Rice am 31. März nach einem Gespräch mit König Abdullah II. und Präsident Machmud Abbas: „Settlement activity should stop – expansion should stop.“ www.reiner-bernstein.de 152 – Chronologie 2008

29./30.03.2008: Syriens Präsident Bashar al-Assad eröffnet in Damaskus die Sitzung der Arabischen Liga. Die libanesische Regierung boykottiert die Sitzung. Saudi-Arabien, Ägypten, Jordanien, Jemen, Irak, Bahrain, Oman, Marokko und Somalia sind nur mit niederrangigen Delegationen vertreten. In Riyadh, Kairo und Amman wird Syrien beschuldigt, an der Beruhigung der Lage in Libanon nicht interessiert zu sein. Beobachter vermuten, dass durch Kritik an der syrischen Regierung diese in die Arme von Iran, „Hisbollah“ und „Hamas“ getrieben wird. Letztere fordert die Arabische Liga auf, ihren Friedensplan von 2002/2007 zurückzuziehen, da Israel nicht am Frieden interessiert und nur die Sprache der Gewalt sowie des Heiligen Krieges verstehe. Die Sitzung endet mit der Warnung an Israel, dass die Gültigkeit des saudischen Friedensplans von Israel abhänge: „The continuation by the Arab side to present the Arab peace initiative is tied to Israel executing its commitments in the framework of international resolutions to achieve peace in the region.“

27.03.2008: Der Publizist Ari Shavit fällt in „Haaretz” ein vernichtendes Urteil über den politischen Charakter von Regierungschef Ehud Olmert und spricht ihm jede Substanz jenseits liebenswürdiger Umgangsformen ab. Abgesehen davon, dass er keine Skrupel habe, morgen das Gegenteil von dem zu behaupten, was er heute gesagt habe, habe er versagt, das Schulsystem zu revolutionieren, habe das Rechtssystem beschädigt, habe vor den „Sefardischen Thorawächtern (Shas)“ kapituliert – eine Anspielung auf Drohungen der Partei, im Falle von Verhandlungen über Jerusalem die Koalition zu verlassen –, die Zentralisierung der Wirtschaft vorangetrieben und die Spaltung der Gesellschaft hingenommen. Unter Olmert sei Israel zu einem rücksichtslosen Land geworden, das die Armen und Hilflosen aufgegeben habe 155 . In derselben Zeitung bescheinigt www.reiner-bernstein.de 153 – Chronologie 2008

Shavit am 3. April Verteidigungsminister Ehud Barak, der Öffentlichkeit nicht die Wahrheit über seine Pläne mitzuteilen, und schlägt ihm einen Brief vor, um sich politisch zu rehabilitieren 156 .

Das israelische Tourismusministerium teilt mit, dass im Februar rund 200.000 Touristen Israel besucht haben, eine Steigerung gegenüber demselben Monat im Vorjahr um 46 Prozent. Von den 200.000 Gästen seien 4.800 direkt nach Eilat weitergefahren, während 25.000 – mehrheitlich Russen, Ukrainer und Polen – über den ägyptischen Grenzübergang Taba einreisten und für einen Tag Israel besuchten.

26.03.2008: Präsident Machmud Abbas wiederholt, dass die Gespräche zwischen der israelischen Regierung und der Palästinensischen Autonomiebehörde alle zentralen Fragen einschließen: Jerusalem, Flüchtlinge, Siedlungen, Grenzen und Sicherheit. Er hoffe, dass bis Ende 2008 eine Regelung gefunden werden könne.

Auf Anfragen des „Meretz”-Abgeordneten Avshalom Vilan erklärt der Siedlungsbeauftragte von Verteidigungsminister Ehud Barak, dass für Umsiedler aus dem Siedlungsblock Gush Katif im Gazastreifen vier mobile Quartiere in der Siedlung Teneh Omarim in den südlichen Hebron-Bergen aufgestellt worden seien. Die Siedlung liegt östlich der „Trennungsmauern“, von denen die israelische Regierung bisher behauptet hat, mit ihnen würde nicht der künftige Grenzverlauf präjudiziert. Vilan bezeichnet die Anlage als eine „schamlose Kapitulation vor der extremen Rechten“. Weiter berichtet „Haaretz“, dass andere Siedler aus dem Gazastreifen auf Zuweisungen in der Nähe von Ariel und im Jordantal warten würden. Am 27. März veröffentlicht Akiva Eldar in „Haaretz“ ein Feature über die Bewohner der Siedlung Neve Dotan in der nördlichen Westbank, wo zahlreiche Häuser leerstehen, und berichtet von Zweifeln, unter www.reiner-bernstein.de 154 – Chronologie 2008 diesen Bedingungen in anderen Orten neue Wohneinheiten zu errichten.

Auf Betreiben des neuen „Meretz“-Vorsitzenden Haim Oron beschließt eine Kommission der Knesset eine Anhörung über den Völkermord an den Armeniern während des Ersten Weltkrieges. Die Regierung erhebt keine Einwände.

Der im vergangenen Jahr gewählte Präsident der Deutsch- Israelischen Gesellschaft und frühere Leiter der Konrad-Adenauer- Stiftung in Israel, Johannes Gerster, fordert die Bundesregierung auf, analog der Einrichtung von Zentren für Deutschlandstudien an den Universitäten Jerusalem und Haifa Israel-Studienzentren an deutschen Universitäten aufzubauen. Ziel der „seriösen Israelforschung“ müsse es sein, „zu einem realistischen Bild Israels in Deutschland“ beizutragen. „Mit einer breiteren Kenntnis über Israel heute kann das Interesse junger Deutscher an Israel geweckt und verstärkt werden“, erklärt Gerster. „Dies ist wichtig für die Intensivierung der deutsch-israelischen Beziehungen und gegen die oft unfaire und unzutreffende Darstellung des modernen Israel in den europäischen Medien und nicht zuletzt ein ganz wesentlicher Beitrag gegen Antisemitismus und Extremismus in deutschen Landen.“

25.03.2008: Die Präsidenten Hosni Mubarak (Ägypten) und Wladimir Putin (Russland) unterzeichnen in Moskau eine Vereinbarung über die Zusammenarbeit bei der friedlichen Nutzung der Atomenergie. Danach kann sich Russland bei der vorgesehenen Ausschreibung für den Bau des ersten Atomkraftwerks in der Nähe von Alexandria beteiligen.

24.03.2008: www.reiner-bernstein.de 155 – Chronologie 2008

Nachdem der Vorsitzende der Partei „Unser Haus Israel (Israel Beitenu)” Avigdor Lieberman den arabischen Staatsbürgern in der Knesset damit gedroht hat, nach Bildung einer neuen Regierung mit ihnen „aufzuräumen“, verlassen die arabischen Abgeordneten und die Abgeordneten von „Meretz“ unter Protest das Plenum. Lieberman selbst wohnt in der Siedlung Nokdim südlich von Jerusalem im „Etzion-Block (Gush Etzion)“.

23.03.2008: Auf Betreiben des jemenitischen Staatspräsidenten Ali Abdullah Saleh verständigen sich „Fatah“ und „Hamas“ in Sana’a auf eine Deklaration, wonach zwischen ihnen Anfang April Gespräche stattfinden sollen. Einen Tag später, am 24. März, streiten beide Seiten über die Bedeutung der Vereinbarung. Der Sprecher des israelischen Verteidigungsministeriums warnt Machmud Abbas am 23. März vor einer Einheitsregierung. Dann würden die „Friedensverhandlungen“ abgebrochen.

20.03.2008: Jörg Bremer berichtet in der „Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung”, dass der palästinensische Chefdiplomat Saeb Erakat in einem Gespräch mit ausländischen Korrespondenten erklärt habe, Israelis und Palästinenser seien „noch nie so nah“ an einem Vertrag gewesen, man befinde sich derzeit in seinen „Geburtswehen“. Am 31. März schreibt Itamar Eichner in der Zeitung „Yediot Acharonot“, dass sich Tsipi Livni und Achmed Qureia seit der Konferenz von Annapolis im November 2007 über fünfzig Mal getroffen hätten.

Der russische Außenminister Sergej Lawrow und Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert geben in Jerusalem eine Vereinbarung bekannt, wonach Russland der Palästinensischen Autonomiebehörde 25 Panzerwagen liefert, die ohne Maschinengewehre ausgerüstet sind. Weitere 25 Wagen sollen www.reiner-bernstein.de 156 – Chronologie 2008 zunächst in Jordanien gelagert werden, bis Israel ihrer Lieferung in die Westbank zustimmt.

19.03.2008: Israelische und ägyptische Unterhändler verständigen sich prinzipiell darauf, dass Ägypten die Elektrizitätsversorgung im Gazastreifen allein übernimmt.

Der frühere Herausgeber der „ZEIT“, Theo Sommer, kritisiert in einem Kommentar den Auftritt Angela Merkels vor der Knesset. Darin habe sie die Frage offen gelassen, ob ihre Zusicherung, Israels Sicherheit sei für die deutsche Politik nicht verhandelbar, automatisch auch den Bündnisfall einer weiteren „Fehlkalkulation wie den letzten Libanon-Krieg“ einschließe und ob eine „einseitige Festlegung Berlins zugunsten Israels … als Freibrief verstanden werden mag, (der allerdings) den Friedensprozess lediglich erschweren, nicht jedoch befördern“ würde 157 .

Aus seinen Haushaltsmitteln übergibt Buneesaußenminister Frank- Walter Steinmeier zwanzig neue Polizeifahrzeuge an den Leiter der Palästinensischen Generaldelegation in Berlin, Hael Al-Fahoum.

Der US-amerikanische Generalkonsul in Jerusalem übergibt dem palästinensischen Ministerpräsidenten Salam Fayyad einen Scheck über 150 Millionen US-Dollar als erste Tranche von 550 Millionen US-Dollar in den nächsten drei Jahren.

18.03.2008: In einer vom Jerusalemer Büro der Friedrich-Naumann-Stiftung in Auftrag gegebenen Meinungsumfrage des Instituts „Near East Consulting“ zwischen dem 25. September und dem 17. Oktober 2007 sprechen sich 78 Prozent der Palästinenser für einen Staat aus, der von der Religion gelenkt wird. Die Mehrheit von 41 Prozent www.reiner-bernstein.de 157 – Chronologie 2008 bezeichnet sich zunächst als moslemisch, gefolgt von palästinensisch mit 29 Prozent, „ein Mensch“ mit 23 Prozent und arabisch mit fünf Prozent. 88 Prozent der Befragten weisen die Idee zurück, dass Frauen allein und ohne Zustimmung ihrer nächsten männlichen Verwandten reisen dürfen. Gleichzeitig würden 71 Prozent eine Versöhnung zwischen Arabern und Juden begrüßen.

16.-18.03.2008: Eine deutsche Regierungskoalition unter Leitung von Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel, zu der Außenminister Frank- Walter Steinmeier, Justizministerin Brigitte Zypries, Umweltminister Sigmar Gabriel, Wirtschaftsminister Michael Glos, Familienministerin Ursula von der Leyen, Forschungsministerin Annette Schavan und Verteidigungsminister Franz Josef Jung gehören, reist zur ersten Runde der jährlichen Regierungskonsultationen nach Israel. Solche Verabredungen bestehen bislang zwischen Deutschland, Frankreich, Italien, Spanien, Polen und Russland. Zum Abschluss ihres Besuchs hält Merkel am späten Nachmittag des 18. März in der Knesset eine rund 20-minütige Ansprache in Deutsch, die sie mit einem in hebräischer Sprache gehaltenen Dank beginnt. In ihrer Rede betont sie, dass das Existenzrecht Israels zur deutschen Staatsräson gehöre 158 – wobei Merkel das Urteil des Bundesverfassungsgerichts von 1994 übersieht, wonach die Bundeswehr im Ausland nur im Rahmen von „Systemen gegenseitiger kollektiver Sicherheit“ eingesetzt werden darf, also bei Beschlusslagen der Vereinten Nationen, der Europäischen Union und der NATO. Zum Konflikt mit den Palästinensern, die – bis auf eine Würdigung Machmud Abbas’ – nur im Zusammenhang des Raketenbeschusses aus dem Gazastreifen vorkommen, äußert sich die Bundeskanzlerin in großer Zurückhaltung. Mit ihrer Betonung der Zweistaatenregelung knüpft sie an die Rhetorik der israelischen www.reiner-bernstein.de 158 – Chronologie 2008

Regierung an, die es vermeidet, die Frage zu beantworten, wo der Staat Palästina entstehen soll. Merkel selbst begnügt sich mit der Anspielung, dass Israel „schmerzliche Zugeständnisse“ zugemutet werden müssten. Für ihren Auftritt ist die parlamentarische Geschäftsordnung der Knesset geändert worden, die diese Ehre bisher nur Staatsoberhäuptern zuteil werden ließ. Der Sitzung bleiben fünf Abgeordnete fern. In einem Kommentar bedauert der Historiker Tom Segev in „Haaretz“ am 19. März, dass die Regierungskonsultationen eine „Veranstaltung der vollständigen und unzweideutigen Unterstützung der [israelischen] Politik“ von deutscher Seite gewesen seien. Nicht einmal US-amerikanische Politiker seien so weit gegangen 159 .

15.03.2008: In einem Interview mit der Internetausgabe der „ZEIT“ betont Yossi Beilin, dass die wahren Freunde Israels die seien, die den Frieden wollen. Indem er auf Angela Merkels Besuch in Israel eingeht, führt er aus, dass sein Land eine solche Freundschaft nicht brauche.

Der Europäische Rat der Staats- und Regierungschefs erklärt in einer Stellungnahme zum Abschluss seiner Beratungen in Brüssel, dass die israelische Siedlungstätigkeit in allen Teilen der palästinensischen Gebiete einschließlich Ost-Jerusalems nach internationalem Recht illegal sei. Außerdem wird in der Erklärung die kontrollierte und dauerhafte Öffnung aller Übergänge vom und in den Gazastreifen verlangt.

14.03.2008: US-Außenministerin Condoleezza Rice beschuldigt die israelische Regierung und die Palästinensische Autonomiebehörde, nicht genug zur Umsetzung der Verpflichtungen aus der „Road Map“ zu tun: der www.reiner-bernstein.de 159 – Chronologie 2008

Auflösung der „illegalen Außenlager“, dem Abbau von „Checkpoints“ und der Einstellung der Siedlungstätigkeit. Ein Regierungssprecher in Washington warnt am 15. März Israelis und Palästinenser vor der Einschätzung, dass Präsident George W. Bush Mitte Mai als „lahme Ende“ zur 60-Jahr-Feier nach Israel kommen werde. In einem Bericht spricht Barak Ravid in „Haaretz“ von drei US-amerikanischen Wünschen: der schrittweisen Auflösung der „illegalen Außenlager“, der Rückführung von Teilen der „Trennungsmauern“ auf die „Grüne Linie“ von 1967 sowie der Verabschiedung eines Gesetzes zur Entschädigung von Siedlern, die nach Israel zurückzukehren bereit sind.

Die Jerusalemer Polizei nimmt vorläufig den Exekutivdirektor der „Rabbis for Human Rights”, Arik Ascherman, unter der Beschuldigung fest, er habe Palästinenser im Stadtteil Silwan zum Widerstand gegen israelische Pläne ermuntert, Ausgrabungen mit dem Ziel eines Parks anzulegen, der die jüdische Präsenz von alters her dokumentieren soll 160 . Am 17. März berichtet der Friedensaktivist Reuven Kaminer (Jerusalem), dass die „Frauen in Schwarz“, zu denen seine Frau Dafna gehört, bei ihrer stillen Mahnwachen am Freitag Anschläge radikaler Israelis befürchten 161 .

13.-15.03.2008: Das „Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research“ in Ramallah unter Leitung von Khalil Shikaki ermittelt in einer Umfrage zwischen dem 13. und 15. März, dass in den vergangenen drei Monaten die Popularität von „Hamas“, ihrer Führung, ihrer Positionen und ihrer Legitimität um zehn Prozent gestiegen ist. Nachdem sie nach dem Ausbruch der blutigen Rivalitäten im Gazastreifen im Juni 2006 gesunken war, würde „Hamas“ im Falle von Neuwahlen 35 Prozent und „Fatah“ 42 Prozent der Stimmen erhalten. Die Popularität von „Fatah“ im Gazastreifen liegt bei 43, von „Hamas“ bei 40 Prozent, während sich in der Westbank 31 Prozent für „Hamas“ und 41 Prozent für „Fatah“ entscheiden würden. www.reiner-bernstein.de 160 – Chronologie 2008

Bei der Wahl des Präsidenten würde Machmud Abbas 46 und Ismail Haniyeh 47 Prozent der Stimmen erhalten 162 .

13.03.2008: Die in Ramallah wohnende israelische Journalistin Amira Hass ruft die palästinensische Bevölkerung zum gewaltfreien Widerstand gegen die israelische Besatzung auf 163 .

Als Araber verkleidete israelische Sicherheitskräfte töten in Bethlehem vier Palästinenser, die bis 2001 an Terrorakten gegen Israel beteiligt waren, sich aber mittlerweile davon distanziert haben. An ihrer Beerdigung nehmen 50.000 Menschen teil.

12.03.2008: In seinem Korrespondentenbericht schreibt Rainer Hermann in der „Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung”, dass Syrien an einem Friedensschluss mit Israel interessiert sei und nicht auf eine Verständigung zwischen Israel und den Palästinensern warten wolle, dessen Umsetzung mehr als ein Jahrzehnt in Anspruch nehmen würde. Voraussetzung des Friedens mit Israel sei die Rückgabe der Golanhöhen. Dann würde Damaskus seine Unterstützung der „Hisbollah“ in Libanon einstellen und sich aus der iranischen Umarmung lösen. Bis dahin wolle das syrische Regime seine Unterstützung von „Hisbollah“ und „Hamas“ als Faustpfänder gegen den US-amerikanischen Widerstand durchstehen. Am 15. März berichten die Medien, dass das syrische Verhandlungsangebot von dem türkischen Ministerpräsidenten Recep Tayyip Erdogan an die israelische Regierung übermittelt worden sei. Danach verlange Damaskus „offene“ Verhandlungen und das vorherige Ende der Gewalt zwischen Israel und den Palästinensern. Im Gegenzug habe die israelische Regierung Damaskus vor einer militärischen Unterstützung der libanesischen „Hisbollah“ gewarnt. www.reiner-bernstein.de 161 – Chronologie 2008

10.03.2008: Zum Erstaunen seiner Leser bekennt sich der Publizist Ari Shavit in „Haaretz“ zu einer „Friedenspartei wie Meretz“, die das Land mehr denn je brauche. Wenn der Rechtsstaat angegriffen werde, wenn die Reichen tun, was sie wollten, und wenn sich der Ministerpräsident bedingungslos der „Partei der Sefardischen Thorawächter (Shas)“ ausliefere 164 , brauche Israel eine sozialdemokratische Partei wie „Meretz“. Selbst jene, die nicht mit jedem Punkt und Komma der „Genfer Initiative“ einverstanden seien, sollten die Hoffnung nicht aufgeben, dass aus den parteiinternen Wahlen in der nächsten Woche eine Führung hervorgehe, die „Meretz“ als Menschenrechtspartei stärke. Während sich Yossi Beilin, und Amos Oz für Haim („Jumas“) Oron ausgesprochen hätten, trete er, Shavit, für die Wahl von Zahava Gal-On ein, weil sie die politischen Gegner nicht mit Samthandschuhen anfasse, sondern gegen sie kämpfe. Im Gegensatz zu den meisten männlichen Knesset-Abgeordneten zeige sie Rückgrat 165 . Uzi Benziman ergänzt in derselben Zeitung am 16. März, dass Oron für die Erweiterung des Friedenslagers stehe, Gal-On für eine klare linke Politik und der mittlerweile sich ebenfalls bewerbende Ran Cohen für die Sozialpolitik. Aus den parteiinternen Wahlen am 18. März geht Oron aus Sieger hervor; 54 Prozent der abgegebenen Stimmen entfallen auf ihn. Oron kündigt an, keine Koalition mit der gegenwärtigen Regierung anzustreben, weil sie das eine sage und das andere tue. Cohen vereinigt 27 Prozent der Stimmen auf sich, Gal-On 18 Prozent. In seinem Abschiedsbrief als Vorsitzender wiederholt Beilin seine Hoffnungen, dass noch in diesem Jahr eine „historische Vereinbarung“ mit den Palästinensern erreicht werden könne 166 . Am 24. März veröffentlicht „Haaretz“ einen internen Revisionsbericht, in dem der Partei ein „Zustand der Paralyse“ bescheinigt wird. Sie sei zu keiner Wahlkampagne fähig, ihre Bankschulden beliefen sich auf 12,4 Millionen Neue Shekel (~ 2,25 Millionen Euro), ihr sei die Parteijugend verlorengegangen, die Führung habe ihre Autorität an www.reiner-bernstein.de 162 – Chronologie 2008 die Parlamentsfraktion abgegeben, und der Anteil der arabischen Stimmen habe bei den Wahlen 2006 nur noch ein Viertel betragen.

Tom Segev bricht für den mittlerweile in Essex lehrenden Haifaer Historiker Ilan Pappe eine Lanze. In einen Beitrag für „Haaretz“ bescheinigt er ihm, dass er sein Land liebe, dass er das Recht auf Israels Existenz nicht bestreite, aber den Staat nicht liebe. Seine Option, die die meisten Israelis zurückweisen würden, laute „ein Land, das all seinen Bürgern gehört, Juden und Arabern“.

In einem Bericht über den Besuch des neuen israelischen Botschafters in Berlin, Yoram Ben-Ze’ev, beim Bayerischen Rundfunk in München vermeiden die anwesenden Redakteure kritische Fragen zur israelischen Politik gegenüber dem Gazastreifen, so dass sich der Botschafter veranlasst sieht, sie selbst ins Gespräch zu bringen 167 .

In Beirut scheitert der 16. Anlauf, einen neuen Staatspräsidenten zu wählen. Parlamentspräsident Nabih Berri („Amal“ 168 ) kündigt an, dass mit der Wahl in zwei Wochen grundlegende Wahlreformen verbunden sein sollen.

09.03.2008: Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert genehmigt die Errichtung von rund 750 neuen Wohneinheiten in der Siedlung Giv’at Z’eev bei Jerusalem 169 . Am 11. März wird die Planung von weiteren 400 Wohneinheiten in Neve Ya’acov bekannt. Olmerts Pressesprecher Mark Regev betont, dass der Ausbau der großen Siedlungsblöcke ihren Verbleib bei Israel im Falle eines Friedens mit den Palästinensern unterstreiche.

Gegenüber dem US-amerikanischen Nahost-Gesandten James Jones legt Außenministerin Tsipi Livni die Messlatte für die israelische Zustimmung zu einem palästinensischen Staat noch www.reiner-bernstein.de 163 – Chronologie 2008 einmal höher, indem sie verlangt, er müsse nicht nur in Frieden mit Israel leben wollen, sondern auch in der Lage sein, den Terror zu bekämpfen und versprechen, alle israelischen Sicherheitsbedürfnisse zu erfüllen. Das gelte nicht nur für die Zeit auf dem Weg zum palästinensischen Staat, sondern auch nach seiner Gründung. Damit behält sich Israel nach Livnis Worten das Recht auf militärische Interventionen vor.

08.03.2008: Nach arabischen Presseinformationen hat König Abdullah von Saudi-Arabien angeboten, auf seine Kosten die vom israelischen Militär im Gazastreifen zerstörten Häuser wieder aufbauen zu lassen.

06.03.2008: Ein Palästinenser namens Ala Abu Dhaim aus dem Ost-Jerusalemer Viertel Jebel Mukaber ermordet, als orthodoxer Jude verkleidet, in der „Yeshivat Merkaz haRav 170 “ im Stadtteil Kiryat Moshe – auf der Überlandstraße nach Tel Aviv gelegen – acht Israelis und wird bei einem Schusswechsel getötet. Beim Besuch der Yeshiva am 9. März wird Erziehungsministerin Yuli Tamir (Arbeitspartei) als „Mörderin“ und „Oslo-Verbrecherin“ beschimpft. Tamir muss den Besuch abbrechen. In einem Rundfunkinterview kündigt sie am 9. März die Überprüfung der staatlichen Finanzierung der Yeshiva an, weil sie keine demokratischen Werte vermittle. Dagegen beklagt Ehud Olmert ebenfalls am 9. März die toten Religionsschüler und betont, dass die Yeshiva „viele Generationen lang die besten Soldaten produziert“ habe, „die das zionistische Bekenntnis realisiert haben“. Außenminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier verurteilt „diesen verbrecherischen Akt auf das Schärfste“. Die Yeshiva, gegründet von Rabbiner Zvi Yehuda Kook (1891 – 1982), war – damals noch in der Jerusalemer Innenstadt gelegen – im Februar 1974 der Ausgangspunkt für die Gründung des „Gush Emunim (Block der Glaubenstreuen)“, der der Siedlerbewegung nach 1967 erstmals www.reiner-bernstein.de 164 – Chronologie 2008 eine organisierte Plattform lieferte. Der Attentäter selbst soll seine Tat gegenüber seiner Schwester damit begründet haben, dass „die Bilder aus Gaza ihn nicht schlafen ließen“. Ende Januar 2009 – kurz vor den Parlamentswahlen am 10. Februar 2009 – entscheidet die Regierung über die Zuweisung von 169 Millionen Neue Shekel (~ 30 Millionen Euro) an die religiösen Hochschulen für Stipendien, obwohl sie in den Haushaltsplan nicht vorgesehen sind 171 .

05.03.2008: Das polnische Innenministerium kündigt an, dass denjenigen Juden, die im Zuge der antisemitischen Vorfälle zwischen 1968 und 1972 das Land in Richtung Israel verlassen haben, das Recht auf Wiedererlangung ihrer früheren Staatsbürgerschaft eingeräumt werden soll.

04.03.2008: Nach Gesprächen in Kairo trifft US-Außenministerin Condoleezza Rice in Ramallah ein, bevor sie nach Jerusalem weiterreist. Dabei drückt sie die Erwartung aus, dass die israelisch-palästinensischen Gespräche im Rahmen eines „aktiven Friedensprozesses“ umgehend wiederaufgenommen werden.

In Washington zeigt sich US-Präsident George W. Bush bei einem Treffen mit Jordaniens König Abdullah II. optimistisch, dass noch in diesem Jahr ein Friedensvertrag erreicht werden könne. Seine Außenministerin Condoleezza Rice pflichtet ihm von Ramallah aus nach Gesprächen mit Präsident Machmud Abbas und Ministerpräsident Salam Fayyad bei.

03.03.2008: Das israelische Militär beendet die Bodenoffensive „Heißer Winter“ und zieht am frühen Morgen seine Soldaten aus dem Gazastreifen www.reiner-bernstein.de 165 – Chronologie 2008 zurück. Ein Sprecher von „Hamas“ bezeichnet den Abzug als „Sieg“, obwohl Israel die Luftangriffe fortsetzt, bei denen zwei Palästinenser sterben. Nach palästinensischen Angaben sind bei den Kämpfen in den vergangenen Tagen 127 Personen getötet worden, fast vierhundert wurden verletzt. Mehr als 160 Raketen sollen aus dem Gazastreifen auf israelische Ortschaften abgefeuert worden sein. Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert erklärt in der Knesset, dass sich Israel alle Optionen für den Fall des fortgesetzten Raketenbeschusses offenhalte; im selben Sinne äußert sich Außenministerin Tsipi Livni. Am 4. März nimmt die israelische Luftwaffe die Angriffe wieder auf und tötet zwei als Terroristen bezeichnete Palästinenser – darunter einen Anführer des „Islamischen Djihad“ –, bevor am Abend israelische Panzer in den Gazastreifen eindringen. Die Waffenruhe hält nicht.

Ein israelischer Siedler tötet einen 17jährigen Palästinenser durch einen Schuss, nachdem palästinensische Jugendliche auf einen Bus Steine geschleudert haben.

Der UN-Sicherheitsrat verschärft auf seiner Sitzung in New York die Sanktionen gegen Iran; nur Indonesien enthält sich der Stimme. Die UN-Mitgliedsstaaten werden aufgefordert, gegen Personen und Institutionen Reiseverbote zu verhängen, die mit dem iranischen Atomprogramm in Verbindung gebracht werden. Außerdem soll in begründeten Verdachtsfällen in den Luft- und Schiffsverkehr eingegriffen werden. Gleichzeitig bekräftigt die Resolution den Wunsch nach einer diplomatischen Regelung des Konflikts. Vom Sitz der Internationalen Atomenergiebehörde (IAEA) in Wien aus fordert deren Präsident Mohammed el-Baradei Teheran zur besseren Zusammenarbeit und zur Aussetzung des Programms zur Urananreicherung auf.

Nach Agenturberichten gibt UN-Generalsekretär Ban Ki-moon seiner Sorge Ausdruck, dass die libanesische „Hisbollah“ ihr Waffenarsenal auf über 30.000 Raketen aufgestockt habe. www.reiner-bernstein.de 166 – Chronologie 2008

Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel und Frankreichs Präsident Nicolas Sarkozy verständigen sich in Hannover auf eine „Mittelmeer-Union“, der außer den südlichen Nachbarn alle 27 EU-Staaten angehören sollen. Nach den Worten Merkels solle damit der 1995 in Gang gesetzte, aber ergebnisarme Barcelona-Prozess fortentwickelt werden. Bis 2007 waren für ihn nicht weniger als 16 Milliarden Euro eingeplant worden, von denen siebzig Prozent abgerufen wurden. Für den Neuansatz sind im EU-Haushalt 16 Milliarden Euro bis 2013 vorgesehen. Am 13. Juli – wenige Tage nach dem Beginn der französischen EU-Präsidentschaft – soll in Paris in Beisein aller Regierungschefs, Präsidenten und Monarchen diese Mittelmeer- Union feierlich gegründet werden. Dem „Figaro“ gegenüber kündigt Sarkozy am 6. März an, dass sie zwei Präsidenten haben solle, einen aus dem südlichen und den anderen aus dem nördlichen Teil. Bei ihrem Treffen am 15. März in Paris verständigen sich die europäischen Staats- und Regierungschefs auf den Titel „Barcelona- Prozess: Union für das Mittelmeer“. Unabhängige Beobachter bezweifeln, ob er jene Früchte tragen wird, die dem Barcelona- Prozess versagt blieben. Am 1. Mai kündigt Sarkozy zum Abschluss seines Staatsbesuchs in Tunesien an, dass die größte Herausforderung darin bestehe, das Mittelmeer weltweit zum saubersten Meer zu machen. Dazu gehören nach seinen Worten die Schaffung einer Atombehörde für den Transfer von Nukleartechnologie, die Nutzung der Solarenergie, das Wassermanagement, die Schaffung schneller Schiffsverbindungen, gemeinsame Universitäten und die Entwicklung einer gemeinsamen Forschungsorganisation. Politische Zielsetzungen nennt Sarkozy nicht. Am 11. Juni erklärt der libysche Staatschef Muamar Ghaddafi, dass die Mittelmeer-Union zum Scheitern verurteilt sei. An dem Gründungstreffen in Paris am 13. Juli werde er nicht teilnehmen.

Der Chefredakteur des Londoner „Guardian“, Alan Rusbridger, entschuldigt sich dafür, dass seine Zeitung im April 2002 bei der palästinensisch-israelischen Konfrontation im Flüchtlingslager das www.reiner-bernstein.de 167 – Chronologie 2008 israelische Vorgehen mit dem Angriff von „al-Qaida“ am 11. September 2001 verglichen habe. Bei der Konfrontation im Flüchtlingslager kamen 54 Personen ums Leben, die Hälfte davon israelische Soldaten. Gleichzeitig bedauert Rusbridger, dass eine Ausgabe in der vergangenen Woche den Begriff „Holocaust“ von Matan Vilnai übernommen habe.

02.03.2008: Aus dem Gazastreifen gehen vierzig Raketen auf Israel nieder. Ein 14jähriger Palästinenser stirbt in Hebron durch den Schuss eines israelischen Soldaten. Bei israelischen Angriffen auf das Flüchtlingslager Jebaliyah nahe der Stadt Gaza sterben zehn Palästinenser. Ägypten öffnet den Grenzübergang Rafach zur medizinischen Versorgung von palästinensischen Verletzten. Das U.S. State Department verlangt das sofortige Ende der Gewalt. Bundesaußenminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier bedauert die Unverhältnismäßigkeit des israelischen Militäreinsatzes. Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert spricht Kritik aus dem Ausland jedes moralische Recht ab.

01.03.2008: Bei israelischen Angriffen im Gazastreifen kommen 61 Palästinenser, darunter 16 Jugendliche und Kinder sowie ein Baby, und zwei israelische Soldaten ums Leben. Die Palästinensische Autonomiebehörde suspendiert die Gespräche mit Israel. Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert kritisiert, dass diese Entscheidung „Hamas“ in die Hände spiele.

Auf einer Dringlichkeitssitzung des UN-Sicherheitsrates auf Antrag der Arabischen Liga – vertreten durch Libyen und der Palästinensischen Autonomiebehörde – verurteilt UN- Generalsekretär Ban Ki-moon den Beschuss israelischer Ortschaften www.reiner-bernstein.de 168 – Chronologie 2008 vom Gazastreifen aus und bezeichnet die israelische Antwort darauf als „exzessiv und unverhältnismäßig“.

Präsident Machmud Abbas bezeichnet die israelischen Angriffe als „schlimmer als den Holocaust“, während der Leiter des Politischen Büros von „Hamas“ in Damaskus, Khaled Meshal, von einem „wahren Holocaust“ spricht. Einen Tag zuvor, am 29. Februar, bedauert Israels stellvertretender Verteidigungsminister Matan Vilnai in einem Rundfunkinterview, dass sein Land „keine andere Wahl“ habe, als militärisch massiv zu operieren, und dass die Palästinenser „eine größere Shoah über sich bringen, weil wir unsere ganze Kraft auf Luft- und Bodenschläge einsetzen werden“. Vilnais Sprecher bedauert später die Verwendung des Begriffs: Sein Chef habe nie beabsichtigt, sich auf den Holocaust zu beziehen.

Februar 2008

29.02.2008: In der hebräischsprachigen Ausgabe von „Haaretz“ erscheint ein Interview mit dem Berater von Präsident Machmud Abbas, Yasser Abed Rabbo – dem Leiter des palästinensischen Teams der „Genfer Initiative“ und heutigen Leiter des Exekutivausschusses der PLO (ohne Mitglied der größten PLO-Organisation, der „Fatah“, zu sein) –, in dem er sich für den Fall des Scheiterns der Verhandlungen mit Israel für die einseitige Ausrufung des Staates Palästina ausspricht. Auf die Frage nach dem Modell dieser Unabhängigkeit führt Abed Rabbo aus: „Wir werden die Unabhängigkeit ausrufen und erklären: Israel ist der Angreiferstaat, der Gebiete eines anderen souveränen Staates besetzt. Wir werden die Arabische Liga um ein Treffen bitten, bei dem sie unsere Unabhängigkeitserklärung anerkennt, und wir werden das von der ganzen Welt erbitten. Wir werden der Welt sagen: Ihr habt innerhalb von 24 Stunden Kosovo anerkannt, erkennt auch uns an.“ Auf die www.reiner-bernstein.de 169 – Chronologie 2008

Frage nach der möglichen Reaktion der USA und der Europäer bemerkt Abed Rabbo: „Ich vertraue darauf, dass einige Staaten Europas auf diese Idee positiv reagieren werden. Ich glaube, dass sie ihre Sympathie zum Ausdruck bringen, weil sie wissen, dass wir das Maximum im Verhandlungsprozess gegeben haben, das war 1988 anders 172 .“ Abed Rabbo räumt ein, dass Abbas der Idee ablehnend gegenübersteht. Er gesteht Ehud Olmert guten Willen zu, fürchtet jedoch, dass er auf einen palästinensischen Staat in vorläufigen Grenzen hinarbeite, was weder von der palästinensischen Bevölkerung noch von den arabischen Staaten akzeptiert würde. Eine strategische Partnerschaft mit „Hamas“ hält Abed Rabbo für ebenso unmöglich wie eine solche zwischen „Meretz“ und „Shas“ in Israel. Im Zuge der einseitigen Unabhängigkeitserklärung schlägt er vor, dass die Palästinenser zum Checkpoint Kalandia ziehen und dort unbewaffnet und gewaltlos für ihre Souveränität demonstrieren. Beispielhaft führt er das palästinensische Dorf Bil’in zwischen Ramallah und Modiin an, das ohne die Geschosse von „Hamas“ gegen die Besatzung kämpfe 173 . Am 10. Juli reichen Rechtsvertreter des Dorfes Klage in Quebec gegen zwei kanadische Unternehmen ein, die die Vermarktung des Geländes von Modiin Illit in der Westbank betreiben 174 . Nach einem Bericht des Tel Aviver Büros der Heinrich- Böll-Stiftung vom 28. Juli melden israelische Zeitungen, dass die Armee 2,4 Kilometer des Sicherheitszauns zwischen Israel und der Westbank niederreißen werde. Sie würden ersetzt werden durch 4,9 Kilometer dichter an der einstigen „Grünen Linie“, womit 2.500 Dunam (2,5 Quadratkilometer) an ihre palästinensischen Besitzer zurückfallen würden.

Nach israelischen Presseberichten werden mindestens 26 Palästinenser bei einem Schusswechsel in der Ortschaft Jabaliyah im nördlichen Gazastreifen durch israelisches Militär getötet. „Haaretz“ berichtet, dass seit dem 25. Februar insgesamt mindestens 49 Palästinenser getötet worden seien. In der www.reiner-bernstein.de 170 – Chronologie 2008 palästinensischen Bevölkerung wird der Vorwurf laut, dass „Hamas“ sie zu Geiseln des Kampfes gegen Israel mache.

28.02.2008: Mindestens 18 Palästinenser werden durch Operationen des israelischen Militärs im Gazastreifen getötet, darunter drei Kinder und ein Baby. Mehr als dreißig „Qassam“-Raketen gehen auf israelischem Territorium nieder.

27.02.2008: Seit dem 26. Februar feuert „Hamas“ über achtzig Raketen auf Israel ab. Dabei kommt ein 30jähriger israelischer Student in Sderot ums Leben. Auch ein Wohnhaus in Ashkelon wird von einer Rakete der russischen „Grad“-[Katyusha-]Serie getroffen. Das israelische Militär tötet fünf als „Hamas“-Aktivisten bezeichnete Palästinenser im Gazastreifen. Von Tokio aus warnt Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert davor, dass Israel keine Führungsfigur von „Hamas“ schonen werde.

Noemi Chazan, Mitglied von „Meretz/Yachad“, emeritierte Politologin an der Hebräischen Universität in Jerusalem und vormalige Vizepräsidentin der Knesset, wird zur Präsidentin des US- amerikanischen „New Israel Fund“ gewählt. Sie tritt ihr neues Amt im Juni 2008 an.

Nach einem Eklat beim Treffen zwischen dem saudischen Außenminister Saud al-Faisal mit dem syrischen Präsidenten Bashar Assad bricht Riyadh die diplomatischen Beziehungen zu Damaskus ab.

Die Europäische Union protestiert in einem Schreiben an die Regierung des Iran gegen den Entwurf eines neuen Gesetzes, wonach künftig „Apostasie, Ketzerei und Zauberei“ mit dem Tode bestraft werden sollen. Sollte das Gesetz in Kraft treten, würde es www.reiner-bernstein.de 171 – Chronologie 2008 besonders die Anhänger der „Bahai“ treffen, deren Religion sich im 19. Jahrhundert vom Islam gelöst hatte 175 .

26.02.2008: „Haaretz“ veröffentlicht eine Umfrage, wonach sich 64 Prozent der israelischen Bevölkerung für und 28 Prozent gegen einen Waffenstillstand mit „Hamas“ aussprechen. Auch die Hälfte der „Likud“-Wähler unterstütze einen solchen Schritt.

Der für heute vorgesehene weitere Versuch, einen neuen libanesischen Präsidenten zu wählen, ist in Beirut auf den 11. März vertagt worden. Die USA entsenden ihren Lenkwaffenzerstörer „Cole“ ins östliche Mittelmeer, weil die Stabilität im gesamten Nahen Osten von großer Bedeutung sei.

Ein Gericht in Ottawa weist eine Klage zurück, mit der ein kanadischer Staatsbürger in seinem Pass die Eintragung seines Geburtsortes Jerusalem mit dem Zusatz „Israel“ durchsetzen wollte. Das Gericht erklärt, dass Israel gemäß dem UN-Teilungsplan vom November 1947 in keinem Teil Jerusalems Souveränitätsansprüche erheben könne.

25.02.2008: Israels stellvertretender Ministerpräsident Haim Ramon erklärt vor einem Kontrollausschuss der Knesset, dass nach Angaben aus dem Verteidigungsministerium sämtliche 450 Wohneinheiten der seit 1975 errichteten Siedlung Ofra (Westbank) auf privatem palästinensischem Grund und Boden errichtet worden seien. Keiner der Teilnehmer, darunter Repräsentanten der Siedlerbewegung, widerspricht den Angaben Ramons. Ein Berater von Verteidigungsminister Ehud Barak erklärt zusätzlich, dass in den rund hundert Außenlagern („outposts“) der Siedlungen etwa siebentausend Menschen leben. www.reiner-bernstein.de 172 – Chronologie 2008

Tausende Palästinenser folgen im Gazastreifen friedlich dem Protestaufruf des von „Hamas“ kontrollierten „Komitees gegen die [israelische] Belagerung des Gazastreifens“, indem sie eine Menschenkette entlang der rund vierzig Kilometer langen Verbindungsstraße zwischen dem Norden und Süden des Landstrichs ziehen. Die israelische Armee sichert die Grenze vor Übergriffen durch ein großes Aufgebot. Gleichzeitig töten nach Augenzeugenberichten israelische Soldaten drei „Hamas“-Aktivisten.

Jericho wird an das Elektrizitätsnetz Jordaniens angeschlossen. Die Kosten sind von der Regierung Norwegens und von der Islamischen Entwicklungsbank übernommen worden.

Ida Funk, Nili Mirsky und Tuvia Ruebner erhalten den israelischen Literaturpreis 2008. Eine rechtsgerichtete Gruppierung „Professoren für den Frieden“ protestiert dagegen, dass der Jerusalemer Politologe Zeev Sternhell ebenfalls den Israel-Preis erhalten soll.

24.02.2008: Das israelische Kabinett stellt 350 Millionen Neue Shekel (~ 66 Millionen Euro) für die Befestigung von 3600 Wohnungen in einem 4,5 Kilometer breiten Abschnitt zum Gazastreifen in den kommenden zwei Jahren bereit.

Die israelische Regierung und die Palästinensische Autonomiebehörde setzen Verhandlungsteams für die strittigen Themen von Jerusalem über die Flüchtlingsfrage bis zu Sicherheit, Handel und Wasser ein.

23.02.2008: Der stellvertretende israelische Ministerpräsident Haim Ramon regt in Tel Aviv ein Gesetz an, wonach alle Siedler östlich des www.reiner-bernstein.de 173 – Chronologie 2008

„Trennungszauns“ in der Westbank entschädigt werden sollen, wenn sie sich für den Verzicht auf ihre Wohnorte entschließen.

Der Bürgermeister von Sderot, Eli Moyal, befürwortet gegenüber dem britischen „Guardian” eine Waffenruhe mit „Hamas“, um den „Qassam“-Beschuss aus dem Gazastreifen zu stoppen, damit „das Töten unschuldiger Menschen auf beiden Seiten“ aufhört. Am selben Tag demonstrieren zehntausend Israelis in der Stadt ihre Solidarität mit den Einwohnern. Im Nachgang erklärt Moyal, dass seine Bemerkungen von der Zeitung aus dem Zusammenhang gerissen worden seien.

22.02.2008: Yossi Verter zitiert in „Haaretz“ einen mit den Verhandlungen zwischen Israel und der Autonomiebehörde vertrauten Minister mit den Worten: „Sie sprechen offenkundig über alles, aber sprechen über alles nicht wirklich.“

21.02.2008: Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert beklagt bei einer Tagung, dass die zwanzig Prozent der nichtjüdischen Bevölkerung Israels seit vielen Jahren auf verschiedenen Gebieten unter der Ungleichbehandlung leiden würden.

Das Parlament der Türkei verabschiedet mit 242 der 341 anwesenden Abgeordneten ein neues Stiftungsrecht, das die Eigentumsrechte der christlichen und jüdischen Minderheiten – die keine Rechtspersönlichkeiten sind – ausweitet und die Rückgabe enteigneten Besitzes vorsieht. Aufgrund eines Gerichtsurteils aus dem Jahr 1974 beschlagnahmte der Staat in die Tausende gehende Immobilien im Wert von rund 150 Milliarden US-Dollar entschädigungslos, die diese Stiftungen nach 1936 erworben hatten. www.reiner-bernstein.de 174 – Chronologie 2008

18.02.2008: Vor den anstehenden Kommunalwahlen in Ägypten beginnt eine Verhaftungswelle gegen die verbotenen Moslembrüder. Im 454 Sitze umfassenden Parlament sind sie als „unabhängige Kandidaten“ mit 88 Mitgliedern vertreten.

Die palästinensische Nachrichtenagentur „Maan“ meldet, dass im „Orient House“ in Ost-Jerusalem wieder dreißig bis vierzig Personen arbeiten. Die einstige PLO-Zentrale in der Stadt war 2001 von den israelischen Behörden mit der Begründung geschlossen worden, dass sich ihre Tätigkeit gegen die politische Souveränität Israels über die Stadt richte. Ein Regierungssprecher bestätigt am 21. Februar die Fortdauer der Schließung.

In einem Meinungsbeitrag für eine Zeitung in Doha (Golf-Emirate) plädiert die frühere US-amerikanische Außenministerin Madeleine K. Albright an die im November zu wählende neue US-Präsidentschaft, nicht länger die Welt in gute und böse Menschen zu teilen, den Islam nicht als den Feind Amerikas zu betrachten, nicht zu glauben, dass sich die USA über das Gesetz erheben könnten, und mit Entschiedenheit für einen ausgewogenen („even-handed“) Frieden zwischen Israel und dem palästinensischen Volk zu sorgen. Amerika müsse mehr lernen und weniger Lehren erteilen.

14.02.2008: In Beirut versammeln sich mehr als hunderttausend Menschen im Gedenken an den ehemaligen Ministerpräsidenten Rafik Hariri, der am 14. Februar 2005 ermordet wurde. Bei dem Anschlag kamen weitere 22 Personen ums Leben. Wenige Kilometer entfernt findet eine große Trauerkundgebung für den am 12. Februar in Damaskus ermordeten „Hisbollah“-Führer Imad Mughniyeh statt. Mughnieh war der „Hisbollah“-Sekretär in Homs. Kommentatoren halten es für www.reiner-bernstein.de 175 – Chronologie 2008 wenig wahrscheinlich, dass die Planung des Attentats ohne Kenntnis des allgenwärtigen syrischen Geheimdienstes möglich gewesen sei.

13.02.2008: In der Nacht zum 13. Februar wird in Damaskus der 45jährige Chef des militärischen Arms der libanesischen „Hisbollah“ Imad Mughniyeh getötet. Mughniyeh soll am Tod von 300 Menschen bei einem Attentat auf den US-Marinestützpunkt in Beirut und an zwei Anschlägen auf die dortige US-Botschaft 1983176 sowie an der Entführung einer amerikanischen Passagiermaschine beteiligt gewesen sein. Der US-Geheimdienst setzte eine Belohnung von 25 Millionen US-Dollar zur Ergreifung Mughniyahs aus. Israel wirft ihm vor, für die Bombenanschläge auf das jüdische Gemeindezentrum in Buenos Aires 1992 und 1994 verantwortlich zu sein, bei dem 114 Menschen starben 177 , bestreitet aber die Verantwortung für den Anschlag in Damaskus. „Haaretz“-Kommentator Ari Shavit vermutet am 22. Februar, dass Israel für den Anschlag auf Mughniyeh verantwortlich sei. Ein Frieden mit Syrien würde Israel einen kalten, aber stabilen Frieden bringen sowie Iran und die „Partei Gottes“ im Libanon isolieren. Am 26. Februar beschuldigt die Witwe Mughniyehs von Teheran aus das syrische Regime der Ermordung ihres Mannes. In arabischen Medien wird darüber spekuliert, ob die nächste turnusmäßige Sitzung der Arabischen Liga in Damaskus wie geplant mit der Teilnahme der obersten Repräsentanten der arabischen Staaten stattfinden wird.

12.02.2008: Der Chefberater der „Hamas“-Regierung, Achmed Yousef, schreibt in „Haaretz“, dass sich Israel nicht über den Terroranschlag in Dimona – dem ersten innerhalb von fünf Jahren – wundern dürfe, nachdem durch israelische Angriffe im Gazastreifen Hunderte Palästinenser ums Leben gekommen oder schwer verletzt worden seien. In den vergangenen zwei Jahren seien zweitausend www.reiner-bernstein.de 176 – Chronologie 2008

Palästinenser getötet worden, ein Verhältnis von 40 zu 1 gegenüber den israelischen Opfern. Yousef erinnert daran, dass „Hamas“ seit geraumer Zeit für einen langen Waffenstillstand plädiert habe und dass neun Monate vor ihrer Wahl im Januar 2006 eine einseitige Waffenruhe befolgt worden sei. „Wenn die Menschen in Sderot wissen wollen, warum Raketen um sie herum fallen, sollten sie ihre eigene Regierung nach dem Gründen fragen.“ Yousef beschuldigt gleichzeitig Präsident Machmud Abbas, sich der israelischen und amerikanischen Drohung zu beugen, nicht mit Hamas zusammenzuarbeiten, so dass er sein Verhandlungsmandat verloren habe. Angesichts der israelischen Politik in den palästinensischen Gebieten bleibe den Palästinensern nichts als der Widerstand. Yousef verzichtet darauf, sich zur politischen Verantwortung von „Hamas“ gegenüber der eigenen Bevölkerung zu äußern.

In den frühen Morgenstunden nehmen die israelische Armee, die Polizei und der Sicherheitsdienst Betreiber von vierzehn Wechselstuben in Nablus, Jenin, Tulkarem, Ramallah und Hebron (Westbank) mit der Begründung fest, dass sie ihre Gewinne an palästinensische Terrorgruppen weitergeleitet hätten 178 . Gideon Levy berichtet am 21. Februar in „Haaretz“ aus Hebron, dass die dortigen Geldwechsler nach eigenen Angaben täglich mindestens 100.000 US-Dollar tauschen und dass sich israelische Soldaten persönlich bei ihren Razzien bereichert hätten.

Die Informationsminister der Arabischen Liga stimmen auf Antrag Ägyptens und Saudi-Arabiens einer Charta zu, die es den Mitgliedstaaten erleichtern soll, Nachrichtensendern die Lizenz zu entziehen, die kritische Talkshows ausstrahlen 179 .

11.-13.02.2008: Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert führt Gespräche mit der Bundesregierung in Berlin. Die Schwerpunkte liegen auf dem israelisch-palästinensischen Konflikt und der atomaren Bedrohung www.reiner-bernstein.de 177 – Chronologie 2008 durch Iran. Es fällt auf, dass Bundesaußenminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier nicht an den Gesprächen teilnimmt, sondern sich in Staaten Westafrikas aufhält. In der gemeinsamen Pressekonferenz mit Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel stellt Olmert eine Vereinbarung über die Grenzfragen mit den Palästinensern noch 2008 in Aussicht; sie sei „das einfachste“ der drei Hauptprobleme (neben Jerusalem und der Flüchtlingsfrage). Im Blick auf den Gazastreifen deutet Olmert Meinungsverschiedenheit mit Merkel an. Für den 17./18. März sind erstmals in Jerusalem israelisch-deutsche Regierungskonsultationen vorgesehen 180 .

11.02.2008: Der Sammelbewegung „Frieden Jetzt” wird ihre Gemeinnützigkeit entzogen. Ihre bildungspolitische Organisation „Sha’al Education Enterprise“ sei keine wohltätige Organisation, sondern äußere sich politisch zugunsten der Zweistaatenregelung. Der Antrag auf Entzug der steuerlichen Vergünstigung kam von einem Mitglied der rechtsextremistischen Partei „Moledet (Heimat)“-Partei. „Peace Now“ kündigt Einspruch an. Die „Jüdische Stimme für gerechten Frieden in Nahost“, die deutsche Sektion der „European Jews for a Just Peace“, protestiert scharf gegen diese Entscheidung und fordert das israelische Justizministerium auf, sie rückgängig zu machen 181 .

Der Nahostkorrespondent der „Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung“ Rainer Hermann berichtet, dass ein ägyptisches Berufungsgericht das Urteil einer unteren Instanz aufgehoben habe, wonach zum Islam konvertierte Kopten nicht zu ihrer ursprünglichen Religion zurückkehren dürfen, so dass ihnen das Innenministerium die Eintragung als Christen verweigert. Einige Kläger führten ins Feld, dass sie zum Islam wegen ihrer Heirat mit einer Muslima übergetreten und nach der Scheidung diesen Schritt rückgängig machen wollten. Die koptische Kirche selbst lehnt Scheidungen strikt ab. Der Aufstieg in staatliche Ämter und in der Armee ist den www.reiner-bernstein.de 178 – Chronologie 2008

Kopten, die rund zehn Prozent der Gesamtbevölkerung ausmachen, versagt.

10.02.2008: Die „Jerusalem Post” berichtet unter Bezug auf einen Angehörigen der Palästinensischen Autonomiebehörde, dass sich Israel bei Geheimgesprächen zur Teilung Jerusalems bereit erklärt habe. Ein politisches Verwirrspiel setzt ein 182 .

07.02.2008: In einem Essay für die „London Review of Books“ über die Zukunft des Gazastreifens weist der Direktor des „US/Middle East Project“ und Professor an der Universität London, Henry Siegman, das Argument von „Hamas“ zurück, dass ihre Raketen nur zwei oder drei Israelis getötet hätten, während durch die israelischen Angriffe auch palästinensische Frauen, Kinder und alte Menschen tödlich getroffen würden. Dass die „Qassam“-Raketen nicht in israelischen Kindergärten eingeschlagen seien, sei kein humanitäres Verdienst von „Hamas“ und des „Islamischen Djihad“, sondern reines Glück. Andererseits seien die amoralischen Angriffe auf israelische Zivilisten keine Lizenz für Israel, die Zivilbevölkerung in Gaza fast verhungern zu lassen.

04.02.2008: Bei einem Selbstmordanschlag im Geschäftszentrum von Dimona im nördlichen Negev sterben drei Personen. Einer der beiden palästinensischen Attentäter wird getötet.

03.02.2008: Nach zwölf Tagen – seit der gewaltsamen Öffnung am 23. Januar – riegeln die ägyptischen Behörden das letzte Teilstück der Grenze www.reiner-bernstein.de 179 – Chronologie 2008 zwischen dem Sinai und dem Gazastreifen wieder ab, gestatten aber einen kleinen Grenzverkehr.

Januar 2008

30.01.2008: Israels Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert und Verteidigungsminister Ehud Barak nehmen den 617 Seiten starken Bericht der Winograd- Kommission zur Untersuchung des zweiten Libanon-Krieges im Sommer 2006 aus den Händen des Vorsitzenden Eliyahu Winograd entgegen 183 . Olmert lehnt einen Rücktritt ab, obwohl der Bericht auch ihm Versagen anlastet. Das Militär räumt in einer Antwort Fehler ein und verweist auf deren Behebung in der Zwischenzeit 184 .

29.01.2008: Ägyptische Sicherheitskräfte und „Hamas”-Angehörige beginnen mit der Sicherung der Grenze zwischen dem Gazastreifen und dem Sinai durch Stacheldraht.

In einem Beitrag für die „International Herald Tribune“ gibt Daniel Barenboim bekannt, dass er zusätzlich zur israelischen die palästinensische Staatsbürgerschaft angenommen habe. Barenboim, dessen Familie in den frühen 1950er Jahren aus Argentinien eingewandert war, begründet seine Entscheidung mit der Diskriminierung der palästinensischen Bevölkerung in Israel und mit der israelischen Besatzungspolitik in den palästinensischen Gebieten, die eine Zweistaatenregelung verhindere. Barenboim fordert alle Israelis auf, seinem Beispiel zu folgen 185 .

27.01.2008: www.reiner-bernstein.de 180 – Chronologie 2008

Ehud Olmert und Machmud Abbas treffen in Olmerts Jerusalemer Residenz zu einem zweistündigen Gespräch zusammen. Im Mittelpunkt steht die Lage an der Grenze zwischen den Gazastreifen und Ägypten.

Bei Auseinandersetzungen in Beirut kommen acht Personen ums Leben.

George Habash stirbt 81jährig an Herzversagen in Amman. Der in eine griechisch-orthodoxe Familie in Lydda (Lod) geborene Habash verließ 1948 mit seinen Eltern das Land auf der Flucht, studierte Medizin in Beirut und gründete nach dem Junikrieg 1967 die „Volksfront für die Befreiung Palästinas (PFLP)“. Viele Jahre machte die „Volksfront“ durch Terrorakte und Flugzeugentführungen von sich reden. Ende 2000 legte Habash sein Amt als Generalsekretär der „Volksfront“ nieder.

25.01.2008: In einem Vorort von Beirut wird der Geheimdienstoffizier Eid Wissam durch eine Autobombe ermordet. Der 31jährige Tote, mit dem zusammen drei weitere Personen sterben, arbeitete bei der Aufklärung mehrerer Anschläge mit, so an Ermittlungen um die Ermordung von Ex-Premier Rafik Hariri am 14. Februar 2005.

23.01.2008: Mehrere hunderttausend Palästinenser aus dem Gazastreifen stürmen die von Israel errichtete und von „Hamas“ niedergerissene eiserne Sperranlage am „Philadelphi-Korridor“ in Rafach, um sich auf der ägyptischen Seite mit Lebensmitteln und Gütern des täglichen Gebrauchs zu versorgen. Die ägyptischen Streitkräfte schreiten auf Anordnung von Präsident Hosni Mubarak zunächst nicht ein. Die Sprengung der eisernen Grenzanlage wird als schwere Niederlage des israelischen Sicherheitskonzepts gewertet. Mubarak lädt den www.reiner-bernstein.de 181 – Chronologie 2008 palästinensischen Präsidenten Machmud Abbas für den 30. Januar nach Kairo ein. Nach dem Gespräch lehnt Abbas Kompromisse mit „Hamas“ ab, obwohl ägyptische Diplomaten ihn dazu drängen.

Bundesaußenminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier und der palästinensische Ministerpräsidenten Salam Fayyad treffen in Berlin zusammen. Dabei bringt Steinmeier die Hoffnung zum Ausdruck, dass „bis zum Jahresende [2008] die Weichen für einen palästinensischen Staat gestellt werden können“ 186 .

22.01.2008: Israel schränkt die Lieferung von Benzin und die Durchleitung von Elektrizität in den Gazastreifen ein.

21.01.2008: Ministerpräsident Ehud Olmert ordnet an, dass mit Ausnahme von Maale Adumim und Beitar neue Baugenehmigungen in Ost- Jerusalem jenseits der einstigen „Grünen Linie“ seiner Genehmigung bedürfen.

Nach dem Bericht des „Human Rights Council“ für die UN- Vollversammlung gibt es in der Westbank und in Ost-Jerusalem 149 Siedlungen. Gegenwärtig würde in 88 Siedlungen gebaut, um dem Bevölkerungswachstum von 4,5 Prozent Rechnung zu tragen. Außerdem gebe es 105 Außenlager der Siedlungen („outposts“). 38 Prozent der Westbank bestünden aus Siedlungen, Außenlagern, Militärzonen und israelischen Naturreservaten, in die die Palästinenser keinen Zugang haben. 83 Prozent der Siedler in der Westbank wohnen und 69 Siedlungen liegen innerhalb – das heißt westlich – der „Trennungsmauern“, deren Länge auf 721 Kilometer geplant sei. Davon seien 59 Prozent fertiggestellt und seit dem Votum des Internationalen Gerichtshofs in Den Haag vom Februar 2004 um zweihundert Kilometer erweitert worden. Wenn sie www.reiner-bernstein.de 182 – Chronologie 2008 fertiggestellt seien, würden 60.000 Palästinenser in 42 Dörfern und Städten innerhalb der „Trennungsmauern“ liegen; dreizehn Prozent der Westbank mit wertvollen Wasserressourcen und reichen landwirtschaftlichen Böden wären abgetrennt.

19.01.2008: Das Europäische Parlament wirft Ägypten Menschenrechtsverstöße vor. Darauf sagt Kairo den für den 23. Januar geplanten Menschenrechtsdialog mit der EU ab.

18.01.2008: Nach einem Zusammenstoß zwischen israelischen Soldaten und bewaffneten Palästinensern sperrt Israel alle Übergänge in den Gazastreifen.

13./14.01.2008: In Herzliya findet die Konferenz „Ein Abkommen in diesem Jahr“ der Genfer Initiative mit hochrangigen Referenten und Gästen statt 187 .

09.01.2008: US-Präsident George W. Bush trifft zu seinen dreitägigen Besuch in Israel und Palästina ein, bevor er bis zum 16. Januar weiter nach Bahrain, die Vereinigten Arabischen Emirate, nach Saudi-Arabien und Ägypten reist. Bush war 1998 als Gouverneur von Texas zum ersten und letzten Mal in Israel.

03.01.2008: Der diplomatische Korrespondent von „Haaretz” Aluf Benn berichtet von Plänen, die die israelische Regierung dem US-amerikanischen Präsidenten George W. Bush bei seinem bevorstehenden Besuch www.reiner-bernstein.de 183 – Chronologie 2008 unterbreiten will. Danach soll die „Road Map“ des internationalen Quartetts durch eine israelisch-amerikanische Verständigung über die eingeschränkte Souveränität eines künftigen Staates Palästina ersetzt werden. Sie solle dem israelischen Militär die Operationsfreiheit in der Westbank einräumen, Israel die Lufthoheit sichern, die Grenzen zu Jordanien kontrollieren, Palästina vollständig demilitarisieren, eine internationale Truppe in der Westbank stationieren und Israel einen militärischen Zugriff auf das Jordantal sichern188 .

Ehud Olmert stattet dem jordanischen König Abdullah II. in Akaba einen Kurzbesuch ab. Dabei erinnert der Monarch den israelischen Ministerpräsidenten an seine Verpflichtungen von Annapolis im November 2007, einseitige Schritte zu unterlassen, die Fortschritte beeinträchtigen würden. Im Gegenzug diskutiert Olmert die Spannungen mit Ägypten wegen der von den dortigen Behörden zugelassenen Rückkehr palästinensischer Pilger aus Mekka ohne Einschaltung israelischer Sicherheitskontrollen. Bei den Gesprächen wollen Abdullah und Olmert Medienberichten zufolge außerdem Programm und Inhalt des bevorstehenden Besuchs von US- Präsident George W. Bush in der Region abstimmen. Tags zuvor, am 2. Januar, empfing Abdullah den palästinensischen Präsidenten Machmud Abbas.

US-Präsident George W. Bush bezeichnet die israelische Siedlungspolitik als „ein Hindernis“ für die Friedensverhandlungen und erwartet ihren erfolgreichen Abschluss im Jahr 2008 189 .

In Beirut scheitert der zwölfte Versuch, einen neuen Staatspräsidenten zu wählen 190 . Am 12. Januar soll die Wahl endgültig stattfinden, doch wird befürchtet, dass die pro-syrische „Hisbollah (Partei Gottes)“ diesen Versuch erneut hintertreiben könnte.

www.reiner-bernstein.de 184 – Chronologie 2008

Januar 2008: Der Außenpolitische Sprecher der SPD-Bundestagsfraktion, Gert Weisskirchen, berichtet in der Januar-Ausgabe der „Jüdischen Zeitung“ über die erste Tagung der „Organisation für Sicherheit und Zusammenarbeit (OSZE)“ Anfang Dezember 2007 in Tel Aviv 191 .

1 Der Kommentar Ari Shavits wird am 02.01.2009, S. 28 f., von der „Frankfurter Rundschau“ unter dem Titel „’Operation Vergossenes’ Blei“ ist eine Tragödie, aber unvermeidbar“ übernommen.

2 Mitchell Plitnick on Human Rights and Mideast Progress, in „Tikkun”- online 31.12.2008: As your new administration steps into Washington, riding the wave of America’s desire for change, we've heard much speculation about how you will deal with Israel’s conflict with the Palestinians. There are many options on the table. But whichever of them you choose, there is one essential component to any hope for progress, one that has too often been ignored in the quest for peace: an immediate and sustained improvement in the human rights situation on the ground. Ensuring the protection of human rights of both Israelis and Palestinians will not solve the political problems, but it is the only way to make a political solution viable. We have seen in the past that a diplomatic process that ignores human rights violations on the ground is doomed to failure. Thus America must prioritize easing the suffering of civilians in Gaza, lifting the restrictions in Hebron, and bringing some relief to civilians in Sderot. Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza struggle under various Israeli policies that destroy their homes; expose them to daily harassment, humiliation, and violence; strangle their economy by severely curtailing their freedom of movement; hamper their access to farmland, family, water, and medical care; and maintain a separate system of law for them than for Israeli settlers. They are also victims of Palestinian forces that employ arbitrary detentions and torture in the factional fighting between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas. Meanwhile, residents of southern Israel have lived for years with one eye on the nearest bomb shelter, and all too often inside it, while residents of other areas live in fear of the next round of attacks. All of this suffering can be addressed and, at the outset, at least eased a bit by a real focus on human rights. It is time for the United States to stop talking about being Israel’s good friend and start acting like it. That means not only supporting Israeli security, it means helping Israel comply with its commitments and its obligations to international law and to upholding human rights standards. It’s time for a new and more sincere kind of “pro-Israel” president, one who will not allow his friends to follow a path to moral self-destruction any more than he will allow them to face danger without his strong support. And one who recognizes that human rights are universal and equal. But before the United States can wield that influence with regard to other peoples, it must restore its own standing with regard to human rights practices, a standing that has been dreadfully undermined in recent years. www.reiner-bernstein.de 185 – Chronologie 2008

Your promise that the United States will unequivocally refuse to employ torture will help. You can make this declaration really count by signing an executive order banning all torture by any U.S. government agency. If the United States is to demand that Israeli and Palestinian authorities respect human rights and international law, it must lead by example. This means halting illegal detentions in Iraq and Afghanistan and closing the prison at Guantanamo Bay. It is change that you promised, and placing respect for human rights standards at the forefront of American policy in the Middle East is a change that is long overdue. If there is to be hope in this troubled region, it starts with human rights, and that must include systems of law and accountability that guard those rights. If there is to be hope, this is precisely the sort of change you must bring.

3 Vgl. zur Vorgeschichte die Zusammenfassung des Beitrages von Mouin Rabbani „Birth Pangs of a New Palestine“ in „Middle East Report Online“ January 7, 2009, in der Zeitleiste am 07.01.2009 in dieser Zeitleiste.

4 Vgl. dazu den Kommentar „Nach Olmert, vor Livni und Obama sowie das palästinensische Dilemma“ in der Menüleiste „Veröffentlichungen“ dieser Homepage.

5 Vgl. die Eintragungen am 14.12.2008 und am 14.11.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

6 Text of UN Security Council Resolution 1850, 16 December 2008: Reaffirming its support for the agreements and negotiations resulting from the 2007 Middle East summit in Annapolis, Maryland, the Security Council called on the parties, regional States, and other States and international organizations this morning to intensify their efforts to achieve a two-State solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as well as peaceful coexistence among all States in the region. Adopting resolution 1850 (2008) by a vote of 14 to 0 – with Libya abstaining – at the end of a meeting in which four permanent members were represented by ministerial and other high-level officials, the Council declared its commitment to the irreversibility of the ongoing bilateral negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians, and supported “their determined efforts to reach their goal of concluding a peace treaty resolving all outstanding issues…”. Toward that end, the Council called on both parties to fulfil their obligations under the Road Map and to refrain from steps that could undermine confidence or prejudice the outcome of the negotiations. It called on States and international organizations to contribute to an atmosphere conducive to negotiations and assist the Palestinian Authority. At the same time, it urged intensified diplomatic efforts to foster “mutual recognition and peaceful coexistence between all States in the region in the context of achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East”. The Council welcomed consideration by the Middle East Diplomatic Quartet – the United Nations, United States, European Union and Russian Federation – in consultation with the parties, of an international meeting in Moscow in 2009. Before taking action on the text, all Council Members took the floor following the lead of the Quartet principals – Ban Ki-moon, Secretary- General of the United Nations; Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State of the United States; Sergey Lavrov, Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation; www.reiner-bernstein.de 186 – Chronologie 2008

David Miliband, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom; and the representative of France, which currently holds the Presidency of the European Union. Secretary-General Ban asked the Council to act today to help “set us firmly, finally and irreversibly on the path to peace in the Middle East” by passing the resolution, acknowledging that after the Annapolis summit, it had been hoped that by now the world would be marking the conclusion of a peace agreement and turning to implementation. “We all regret this is not the case. And we know we still face many hurdles. But a serious process is under way. We must ensure that what has been started is seen all the way through to its conclusion.” Following Mr. Ban’s remarks, most Council members welcomed the draft resolution, with many stressing the need to maintain the momentum of the Annapolis summit, and others noting that the Council had not acted on the Middle East for nearly five years. Ms. Rice stressed that the text reaffirmed the Annapolis process as the way forward, as opposed to the kind of brinksmanship that had failed in the past. The text described the contours of the negotiations, defined the role of the international community, confirmed the irreversibility of the bilateral negotiations, and endorsed the parties’ efforts. Mr. Lavrov said the call for full implementation of commitments under the Road Map was a particularly important part of the text, as was support for a unified Palestinian position. The summit in Moscow had been proposed with the intention to continue that momentum. Mr. Miliband noted that Council resolutions over the years had laid the groundwork for a political settlement of the situation, and it was important now to express determination to make real progress in 2009. Libya’s representative, however, said Council action had been sparse over the past 60 years, noting that when the 15-member body had pronounced itself, its words had not been translated into deeds. The text contained deliberate ambiguity and did not confront breaches of illegality, which did not serve peace as much as harm it. The aggressor could interpret such texts as acceptance of its practices, and the victim could see them as proof that the international community was biased, thereby promoting further despair and frustration. The situation in the region since the launch of the Annapolis process had deteriorated further, he said, urging the Council to move quickly to protect civilians facing collective punishment, which constituted a crime against humanity. The minimum conditions conducive to a just solution required a condemnation of such Israeli practices and ending them. Members also heard a brief introductory statement by Prime Minister Ivo Sanander of Croatia, in his capacity as Council President. The Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs of China also spoke. Other speakers today were the representatives of Viet Nam, South Africa, Costa Rica, Burkina Faso, Indonesia, Panama, Belgium and Italy. The meeting opened at 11:20 a.m. and ended at 12:50 p.m. Resolution The full text of resolution 1850 (2008) reads as follows: “The Security Council , “Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular resolutions 242, 338, 1397, and 1515 and the Madrid principles, “Reiterating its vision of a region where two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders, “Welcoming the 9 November 2008 statement from the Quartet and the Israeli-Palestinian Joint Understanding announced at the November 2007 www.reiner-bernstein.de 187 – Chronologie 2008

Annapolis Conference, including in relation to implementation of the Performance-Based Roadmap to a Permanent Two-State Solution to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, “Noting also that lasting peace can only be based on an enduring commitment to mutual recognition, freedom from violence, incitement, and terror, and the two-State solution, building upon previous agreements and obligations, “Noting the importance of the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative, “Encouraging the Quartet’s ongoing work to support the parties in their efforts to achieve a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East, “1. Declares its support for the negotiations initiated at Annapolis, Maryland, on 27 November 2007 and its commitment to the irreversibility of the bilateral negotiations; “2. Supports the parties’ agreed principles for the bilateral negotiating process and their determined efforts to reach their goal of concluding a peace treaty resolving all outstanding issues, including all core issues, without exception, which confirm the seriousness of the Annapolis process; “3. Calls on both parties to fulfil their obligations under the Performance- Based Roadmap, as stated in their Annapolis Joint Understanding, and refrain from any steps that could undermine confidence or prejudice the outcome of negotiations; “4. Calls on all States and international organizations to contribute to an atmosphere conducive to negotiations and to support the Palestinian government that is committed to the Quartet principles and the Arab Peace Initiative and respects the commitments of the Palestinian Liberation Organization, to assist in the development of the Palestinian economy, to maximize the resources available to the Palestinian Authority, and to contribute to the Palestinian institution-building programme in preparation for statehood; “5. Urges an intensification of diplomatic efforts to foster in parallel with progress in the bilateral process mutual recognition and peaceful coexistence between all States in the region in the context of achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East; “6. Welcome sthe Quartet’s consideration, in consultation with the parties, of an international meeting in Moscow in 2009; “7. Decides to remain seized of the matter.” Background The Security Council met this morning to consider the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian Question. Opening Remarks IVO SANADER, Prime Minister of Croatia, which holds the Security Council Presidency for December, said he hoped through today’s meeting to recognize “a shared momentum we cannot afford to lose” towards a negotiated settlement of the Middle East conflict that had started with last year’s summit in Annapolis, Maryland. BAN KI-MOON, Secretary-General of the United Nations, said that, after last year’s summit in Annapolis, it was to be hoped that by now the world would be marking the conclusion of a peace agreement and turning to implementation. “We all regret this is not the case. And we know we still face many hurdles. But a serious process is under way. We must ensure that what has been started is seen all the way through to its conclusion.” In the new year, the situation on the West Bank and in Gaza must be stabilized, and all tracks of the process must be intensified, he said. All stakeholders must maintain unity and redouble their efforts – Israelis and www.reiner-bernstein.de 188 – Chronologie 2008

Palestinians, regional countries and the Quartet, including the incoming United States Administration and the Security Council. Reaffirming his deep commitment to the goal of a just and lasting peace based on previous Council resolutions, the principle of land for peace, the Madrid terms of reference and the Arab Peace Initiative, he expressed the hope that the Council would act today to help “set us firmly, finally and irreversibly on the path to peace in the Middle East”. Statements CONDOLEEZZA RICE, Secretary of State of the United States, said the situation in the Middle East was very different now from the time when President George W. Bush had entered office in 2001. At that time, the Camp David process had collapsed leaving Israelis and Palestinians in a vicious cycle of violence. No image better captured those desperate times than the siege of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem. Each time a ray of hope had penetrated the darkness, it had been snuffed out by intolerance. Reforms in the Palestinian Authority in 2003 had inspired hope, yet they had proved to be superficial, and the hope deceptive, she recalled. The Palestinian elections in January 2005 and the Israeli disengagement from Gaza later that year had provided hope that had soon been ended by the election victory of Hamas in 2006 and the war in Lebanon later that year. Finally, after Hamas had usurped power in Gaza in 2007, it had become clear to all that there was no alternative to the Bush vision of a and a State of Israel, living side by side in peace and security. President Bush, building on that new dynamic, had convened the Annapolis Conference, the first major peace conference in 16 years and the only one of its kind on United States soil, she said. Since then, Israeli and Palestinian negotiators had bravely demonstrated their commitment to peace through continuous bilateral and substantive negotiations. They had made the choice to defeat an ideology of hatred with one of hope. The support of the United States and the international community had not been sustained by false hope or an ignorance of the challenges, but by a genuine belief in progress and in the prospects for success if the parties continued down that path. Emphasizing that the United States had a national interest in the conclusion of a final treaty, she said the establishment of a State of Palestine was long overdue, and called for an end to the occupation that had begun in 1967. That was a bilateral process and the two parties would have to conclude a bilateral agreement, but it was incumbent upon the international community to support them. For that reason, everyone was gathered in the Council today to consider a draft resolution sponsored by the United States and the Russian Federation and to chart the way forward. The text described the contours of the negotiations and defined the role of the international community, she said, adding that it confirmed the irreversibility of the bilateral negotiations and endorsed the parties’ efforts. The Annapolis process had advanced under the leadership of both sides and must be built upon; it was not a matter of lip service, but of genuine commitment to turning the two-State solution into reality. The Arab Peace Initiative was a historic proposal, and just as Israel should reach out to the Arab States, so should they reach out to Israel. There could be no turning back the clock; the process must go forward along the chosen path. SERGEY LAVROV, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, said today marked an important stage in the process started at Annapolis. The fact that the parties were considering the important issues made it a www.reiner-bernstein.de 189 – Chronologie 2008

crucial process and the momentum must continue, establishing the irreversibility of the political process. In that context, the call for full implementation of commitments under the Road Map was a particularly important part of the new draft resolution, as was support for a unified position on the part of the Palestinians. Those who would participate in future negotiations would be expected to continue seriously and with the intention of moving forward. The summit in Moscow had been proposed with the intention to continue the momentum and resolve. DAVID MILIBAND, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom, said the Council did not lack a consistent policy on the Middle East; in fact, its resolutions had become the bywords of hopes for a political settlement of the situation. It was important now to express determination to make real progress in 2009. Negotiations had been ongoing but cynicism had grown at the same time. In that context, the Annapolis process may not have delivered a Palestinian State, but its absence would have left the situation much worse off. Stressing that Israelis and Palestinians must lead the process towards actually reaching a solution, he said it was crucial that they have the support of the region in a “23-State solution” – 22 Arab States and Israel, living together in mutual recognition and peace. Those who would make the process fail must not be allowed to succeed, particularly in light of threats by Hamas. The United Kingdom was determined to support the Palestinian Authority in building its institutions, unity and security capabilities. In any case, progress must be made, he concluded. “The perils of inertia are clear.” HE YAFEI, Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs of China, noted that, since Annapolis, the international community had made tireless efforts to promote the peace process, but regrettably, the negotiations had failed to achieve major breakthroughs within the set timetable. At present, the Middle East situation was blessed with opportunities for further improvements, but it also faced uncertainties and risks. It was incumbent upon the international community to ensure that it achieved substantive progress. Today’s meeting would play a positive role in taking up that common challenge. He said he would support adoption of the draft resolution, which called for support for the Palestinians and Israelis in advancing their political negotiations. Those talks represented the sole, viable and correct path towards enduring peace in the Middle East. Under the new circumstances, both parties were expected to work on the basis of the relevant resolutions and the land-for-peace principle, and, through the talks, attain a two-State solution at an early date. As the Secretary-General had said recently, 2009 should be a year of harvest for the Middle East peace process. China had similar expectations, but it realized that the road ahead would be tortuous. The most urgent task was to ensure that both parties implemented their respective obligations in earnest and refrained from taking any actions that would prejudge the outcome. The construction of settlements in the West Bank and the imposition of the blockade in Gaza were not conducive to the creation of an enabling environment for negotiations, he continued. The humanitarian crisis facing the West Bank and Gaza was troubling, and the international community should continue to assist and support the Palestinians in their capacity- building and in speeding up their economic development. A lasting peace in the Middle East would, by necessity, be a comprehensive one, of which the realization of peace between Syria and Israel and between Lebanon and Israel would be integral parts. The Quartet played an important role in www.reiner-bernstein.de 190 – Chronologie 2008

promoting a comprehensive settlement to the Middle East question, but it should exert greater efforts and strengthen its regular communication with the Security Council. China was ready to work with the international community to continue to play a constructive role. GIADALLA A. ETTALHI (Libya) called for a reversal of the Council’s behaviour of recent years on the Palestinian question, which had represented a continuous threat to peace and security for more than six decades. The problem was accompanied by the tremendous suffering of the Palestinian and other peoples of the region, continuous violations of human rights, and unprecedented breaches of international humanitarian law. It had also been characterized by conflicts and cycles of violence. Yet, the Council had refrained for years from taking explicit and decisive action. In cases where it had passed resolutions, they had remained mere words rather than deeds, owing to the lack of genuine political will among some Council members to reach a just solution which respected international legality and rejected occupation and repression. Libya would reject today’s draft resolution in principle, he said, stressing that generalization and deliberate ambiguity, as well as a failure to confront breaches of illegality, did not serve peace as much as harm it. The aggressor and occupier must not interpret such texts as acceptance of its behaviour and policies, nor should the victim see them as proof that the international community was serious, but biased, acting with double standards, thereby promoting further despair and frustration. The situation in the region since the launch of the Annapolis process had deteriorated further, he said. The practices of the Israeli occupation had escalated; killings and detentions had continued; settlement activity had intensified; the siege on the Gaza Strip had worsened; and the number of checkpoints in Gaza and the West Bank had increased. All that made daily life unbearable; the demolition of houses had continued, as had construction of the separation wall, most of it on Palestinian territory. Violence had extended to Arabs within and outside the Green Line, he said, noting that behind aggression by the settlers was a formal acceptance by Israel. There were explicit breaches of the Road Map and of the pledges made at Annapolis, as well as of international law. The Council must move quickly to protect civilians facing collective punishment, which constituted a crime against humanity. Was it not clear that providing the minimum conditions conductive to a just solution required a condemnation of such Israeli practices and ending them, as they could not represent a way towards peace? Disregarding them was an invitation to continue them. JEAN-MAURICE RIPERT (France) recalled that, throughout the past four and a half years of silence during which there had been a lack of resolutions on the Middle East, his country had urged that the Council make the situation a priority. The European Union, of which France currently held the Presidency, would work hard to drive the peace process forward in the year ahead. It would also support talks between Israel and Syria and between Israel and Lebanon. The European Union hoped to work with President Elect Barack Obama on a unified approach. Speaking in his national capacity, he expressed support for the establishment of a sovereign State of Palestine, living in peace with Israel. France called for inter-Palestinian reconciliation for that purpose and for a comprehensive approach to peace negotiations. In that light, the Arab Peace Initiative must be translated into action, perhaps in a phased approach in which confidence-building measures would be essential. There was also a need for rapid and real change on the ground. www.reiner-bernstein.de 191 – Chronologie 2008

Commitments made under the Road Map must be fulfilled and Israel must reciprocate the progress made by the Palestinian Authority, he said, stressing that it was necessary and urgent for that State to end settlement activities. In addition, the International community must mobilize to support the Palestinian Authority. France pledged its continuing support. Absolute respect for international humanitarian law was crucial, including an end to terrorism, the firing of rockets at civilian populations, and collective punishment directed at the population of Gaza and other areas. HOANG CHI TRUNG (Viet Nam) said the Middle East peace process was at a critical juncture, with renewed opportunities and challenges. The current “surge in diplomacy”, amply demonstrated by the continued commitments of both Israel and Palestine to the Annapolis negotiations on final status issues, was heartening. Favourable developments included home-grown efforts by the Palestinian Authority towards statehood and proactive mediation efforts by the Quartet, the League of Arab States and regional countries. Indirect talks between Syria and Israel, and promising steps in the Lebanon-Israeli dialogue were also of note. Those positive developments could eventually crystallize into an enabling environment of mutual trust and peaceful coexistence, from which all nations could share in the peace dividends. Yet, that progress might have diminutive effects unless it was further consolidated through efforts by Israel and Palestine to satisfactorily and peacefully address issues of common interest, he warned. All parties concerned must demonstrate the political will to keep the peace process on track and to avoid the crushing letdowns of the past. At such a defining moment, all parties must exercise the utmost restraint and refrain from any step or statement that might undermine the peace process and prejudice final-status negotiations. More concerted efforts should also be made to achieve more tangible improvements on the ground, on the basis of the relevant Security Council resolutions, the land-for-peace principle, the Madrid Conference, the Arab Peace Initiative, the Road Map and the Annapolis outcome. Viet Nam supported the two-State vision and welcomed yesterday’s meeting of the Quartet and the Arab League, hoping that the coming meeting of the Quartet in Moscow would provide even greater impetus to move the peace process forward on all tracks. DUMISANI S. KUMALO (South Africa) expressed concern over the lack of improvement in the situation in the Middle East, particularly Palestine, since the Quartet Declaration five years ago. Indeed, the illegal occupation of Palestine had intensified and Palestinians continued to face hardships that were compounded by the financial embargo, the expansion of Israeli settlements, the building of an illegal separation wall, and more than 600 roadblocks. The draft resolution before the Council was not perfect, since it ignored many significant issues that the Council must address, including: illegal settlement activity in the Palestinian territories; attacks on Palestinian homes in Hebron by Israeli settlers; and ongoing violence against Palestinian and Israeli civilians. However, South Africa would support the resolution because it recommitted the parties to their previous obligations. After adoption, the resolution would face two crucial tests, he said. The first was whether the parties would implement its provisions, and the second was whether the Council would ensure implementation of its resolution. If the resolution was ignored, that would further erode the Council’s credibility. The 2002 Arab Peace Initiative, noted for its importance in the draft, spelled out clear and specific affirmations expected of both Israel and the Arab countries, and should be considered a serious contribution to www.reiner-bernstein.de 192 – Chronologie 2008

bringing about peace in the Middle East. The Palestinian people had been without a home for 60 years, except for the ghettoes and camps they occupied around the world. In the Gaza Strip, Palestinians continued to live under a complete blockade, with only the bare essentials to keep them alive. Although South Africa would soon leave its Council seat, it reiterated its invitation to the Special Envoy of the Quartet, Tony Blair, to brief the Council in the new year on his efforts in the occupied areas. JORGE URBINA (Costa Rica) said any initiative to promote Middle East peace was welcome, but the proliferation of efforts in that direction did not absolve the Security Council of its responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. While the work of the Quartet was valuable, the majority of United Nations members had received little information about it. Along with other delegations, Costa Rica had repeatedly asked the Quartet to inform the Security Council of its actions with the aim of complementing those efforts instead of the more marginal role the Council had played in recent years. Costa Rica would support the draft resolution despite his preference for the inclusion of a reference to the dramatic humanitarian situation in Gaza caused by Israel’s disproportionate response to the terrorist attacks perpetrated against its territory. There was a close relationship between the political perspectives for peace and the social and humanitarian situation on the ground, and the Council should not ignore it, he said. The accumulation of Israeli actions contravened the Council’s resolutions and the Road Map, hindering progress, as did calls for the elimination of the State of Israel. It was absolutely unacceptable that the Organization’s Member States ignored the statehood of other Member States and their right to exist. Also worrying had been the restrictions on the movement of Palestinians in the West Bank and the increasing number of illegal settlements since Annapolis. Unless that trend was reversed, the efforts of the two sides would not succeed. For those reasons, Costa Rica would have preferred a draft resolution identifying the core issues of the conflict. It would also have hoped that the Council would have pronounced itself on the obligations of the parties. MICHEL KAFANDO (Burkina Faso) said the Middle East situation was one of the most complex on the Council’s agenda and a paradox because, despite the unanimous view that a lasting solution must be found, the parties and the international community found it difficult to evolve an acceptable political solution. It had to be acknowledged, once again, that the goals remained elusive – but not because of a lack of action; there had been the Paris Conference and the initiatives of Egypt and Yemen. Still, there were real obstacles on the road to peace. Israeli settlements continued on occupied Palestinian land, as did the embargo on Gaza, and the firing of rockets into Israel. He said that was why his delegation supported the Council’s initiative to send a message of encouragement and support to the parties by calling on them to “keep alive and well the spirit of the Annapolis process.” To achieve that, the parties should continue their frank dialogue and make bold concessions in order to settle pending issues, strengthen Palestinian unity and provide assistance for Palestinian refugees, among other things. The Council itself had an important role to play, and it must play it. First, the Council must ensure that its resolutions were implemented. The vision of a Palestinian State living side by side with Israel was not utopian or a negation of Israeli security. Rather, it would ensure a just and lasting Middle East peace, and the parties should work towards that goal. Hope had been born in Annapolis during a crucial stage on the road towards a www.reiner-bernstein.de 193 – Chronologie 2008

settlement of the conflict, and hope was still alive “because we and the parties are aware that it is one of the best opportunities to date to resolve the dispute”. Burkina Faso supported the draft resolution to that end. MARTY M. NATALEGAWA (Indonesia) said there was no international issue more important to his country than efforts to find a just, lasting and comprehensive settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Indonesia had consistently supported efforts to achieve such a settlement, and had lauded the two parties’ commitment to the Annapolis peace process. It was unfortunate that the Security Council’s record on the issue had been less than sterling, as the Council had been unable to pronounce itself collectively and with a single voice. “The Council’s silence on the situation in the Middle East, including Palestine, has been deafening,” though today’s meeting was a welcome change. The meeting was providing encouragement to the parties to redouble their efforts to engage in vigorous, continuous negotiations, and to make every effort to achieve a meaningful and result-oriented outcome, he said. The draft resolution before the Council made clear the need to refrain from any steps that could undermine confidence or prejudice the outcome of those negotiations, and it was thus imperative to maintain the cessation of hostilities in the Gaza Strip and southern Israel. It was also essential that Israel lift the closure of the Gaza crossings immediately. The civilian population in the Gaza Strip was enduring unacceptable levels of humanitarian hardship and their plight must be addressed urgently. Also, Israel must immediately end its illegal settlement activities in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. The challenge now was to ensure that there would be no gap between peace efforts and the situation on the ground, he said, noting that improvements in the situation on the ground would reinforce the momentum of negotiations. To that end, Indonesia attached great importance to international efforts to develop and strengthen Palestine’s national institutions, as recognized in the draft before the Council. Indonesia underscored its position that a comprehensive peace in the Middle East would require not only a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but also progress on the Israel-Lebanon and Israel-Syria tracks, based on the relevant Security Council resolutions. The outcome of today’s meeting could help consolidate the peace process and provide a platform for further progress. Not least, it would send a signal that the Council was once again shouldering its Charter-mandated responsibilities. RICARDO ALBERTO ARIAS (Panama) said that, at first glance the text under consideration was lacking in substance, but on closer examination it contained many elements needed for progress. They all reflected the Council’s work on the situation and must be done to end the occupation and establish a Palestinian State. As the text served to provide impetus for the peace process, Panama would vote in its favour. JAN GRAULS (Belgium) said the draft resolution was important as it reconfirmed the Council’s support for the peace process until the desired objective was reached. For the first time in eight years, there was enough momentum to possibly reach a settlement of the situation. The negotiations were significant as they continued despite the efforts of extremists to derail them. He called for international support for the talks, as well as for the negotiation process, in light of the unusually strong support demonstrated in the past year, including by his own country. Belgium welcomed recent confidence-building measures and stressed that progress on the ground was now crucial, including an end to settlement activity and punishment for www.reiner-bernstein.de 194 – Chronologie 2008

settler violence. The situation in Gaza remained a catastrophe, and the firing of rockets into Israel threatened to restart the spiral of violence. ALDO MANTOVANI (Italy), noting that the negotiations were entering a delicate phase, said he supported the parties’ resolve, as demonstrated at the Sharm el-Sheik meeting. It was absolutely essential that they reach a comprehensive agreement in the form of a peace treaty. There were still considerable gaps on core positions, however, but now more than ever, Palestinians and Israelis needed clear and specific solutions and not vague suggestions. The ongoing political process must become irreversible. It was also fundamental to contribute to the strengthening of Palestinian institutions by promoting economic development, as well as institutional and security sector reform. The two-state solution could only be ensured through a Palestinian State with sound institutions that functioned in the setting of the rule of law and good governance. Equally important was the promotion of a constructive approach by all states in the region. Italy encouraged the support provided by the Arab League, both economically and politically. In that context, the Arab Peace Initiative had great potential. Meanwhile, he said he was concerned about the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza. There was an urgent need to restore and maintain calm and to reopen the border crossings. The accelerating construction of Israeli settlements and violence were also causes for further concern. Italy welcomed Israeli efforts to prevent further violence and to liquidate settlements, the expansion of which, particularly in East Jerusalem, did not facilitate dialogue. Rather, it undermined the credibility of Palestinian negotiators in the eyes of public opinion. Action on Text The Council then adopted the draft resolution by 14 in favour to none against, with 1 abstention (Libya), as resolution 1850 (2008).

7 Vgl. die Eintragung am 23.02.2007 in dieser Zeitleiste.

8 Vgl. die Eintragung am 24.01.2009 in dieser Zeitleiste.

9 Vgl. die Eintragung am 14.11.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

10 Vgl. die Eintragung am 30.11.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

11 Vgl. die Eintragungen am 01.06., 12.06., 24.08., 04.12.2008 und am 28.03.2009 in dieser Zeitleiste.

12 „Council Conclusions: Strengthening of the Europan Union’s bilateral relations with its Mediterranean partners”, Brussels 8 and 9 December 2008.

13 Vgl. die Eintragungen am 14.11.2008 und am 21.11.2008 sowie am 04.01.2009 in dieser Zeitleiste.

14 Vgl. dazu meine Rezension des Buches in der Leiste „Rezensionen“ in dieser Homepage.

15 Akiva Eldar: Obama’s ‚Palestinian friend’ laments catastrophic U.S. policy in Mideast, in „Haaretz-Online“ 05.12.2008: No one stopped Rashid Khalidi, the Columbia University professor of Modern Arab Studies, at Ben-Gurion airport. Having just landed after the long flight from New York, the professor was anticipating the traditional www.reiner-bernstein.de 195 – Chronologie 2008

reception from airport security personnel reserved for visitors with "suspicious" names. To his surprise, he entered the airport like anyone else, with no problems or delays. Perhaps word had gotten around at Ben- Gurion that he was the Palestinian friend of United States President-elect Barack Obama. Khalidi, 60, who spent three weeks in Israel and the territories before continuing on to Beirut this week, doesn't like all the fuss surrounding his relationship with the president-elect. Up to now, he had avoided speaking about it publicly, for better or worse. The reason may be, as reflected in my interview with him at his hotel in Jerusalem, overlooking Damascus Gate, his disappointment in his Chicago friend's treatment of the Arab and Islamic community in the United States. Or maybe it's also discomfort with the Democratic candidate's response during the campaign to reports about the ties between them. "He is a respected scholar, although he vehemently disagrees with a lot of Israel's policy," said Obama in a widely publicized comment from a May campaign event, in response to a question about their relationship. His spokesman made certain to add that the president- elect has been "clear and consistent on his support for Israel." "Obama was my colleague at the University of Chicago, a family friend, neighbor and my district representative in the Illinois State Senate," says Khalidi. "Since I moved to New York in 2003 and he moved to Washington a year later, we've had much less opportunity to remain in contact." In April, The Los Angeles Times reported that, at the farewell party at an Arab- American community center, Obama noted that they had shared frequent dinners and interesting conversations, adding, "I'm hoping that, for many years to come, we continue that conversation – a conversation that is necessary not just around Mona and Rashid's dinner table," but around "this entire world." The article further related that Obama said he hoped to give the Palestinians hope with a new American policy in the Middle East. Another one of the guests reportedly likened the settlers in the territories to Osama bin Laden, asserting that both are "blinded by ideology." Republican presidential candidate John McCain and his running mate, Sarah Palin, took the story and ran with it, seeking to score some points with Jewish voters. "Obama is a friend of a Palestinian hater of Israel," proclaimed McCain. Palin attacked The Los Angeles Times for refusing to make public a videotape of the farewell party. Their people "discovered" that, during the 1980s, when the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was considered a "terror organization," Khalidi was the organization's spokesman in Beirut. Khalidi, considered the successor to Prof. Edward Said among the Palestinian intelligentsia, studied and taught for 12 years, until 1983, at the American University of Beirut and the Institute for Palestinian Studies there. While he did maintain connections with foreign reporters, he was never a PLO spokesman. Later on, between the Madrid summit in late 1991 and the Oslo Accords in September 1993, Faisal Husseini got Khalidi added as a consultant to the Palestinian delegation to the Madrid summit and to the bilateral talks with the Israeli team, headed by Elyakim Rubinstein. That was when Khalidi formed his opinion of the coordinator – the U.S. mediator Dennis Ross, who is one of Obama's advisors on foreign affairs. Khalidi alludes to him when he says in the interview that he hopes the new president will not bring back the same people who contributed to the failure of the peace process here. Nor was Khalidi thrilled to hear that Obama has appointed Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. Clinton's courting of Israel during the darkest days of the intifada made her a darling of the Jewish community and distanced her from the Palestinian community. www.reiner-bernstein.de 196 – Chronologie 2008

Obama's campaign went on the counterattack against McCain-Palin: This is yet another attempt, they said, to recycle controversy and divert public attention from the fact that McCain supports Bush's economic policies. Obama's spokesman suggested that instead of berating the media's supposed double standards, McCain ought to explain why, during the time he was chairman of the International Republican Institute, for years it helped fund the Center for Palestine Research and Studies, an organization that sponsored some of Khalidi's lectures and published some of his work. Khalidi, who wanted the black Democratic candidate to win, kept his head down and avoided the media. As the son of a political family, he is adept at swimming in such murky waters. His family tree in Jerusalem on his father's side dates back at least to the 15th century. He says it's quite likely that some of his ancestors, who were Chief Judges in Cairo during the Mameluke period, are buried in the Muslim cemetery in the Mamila area (the designated site of the new Museum of Tolerance). His uncle was the mayor of Jerusalem from 1935 to 1937, until he was deposed by the British Mandate authorities and exiled to the Seychelles. In the 1950s, the uncle was appointed foreign minister of Jordan and, for a brief time, also served as prime minister under King Hussein. Khalidi, who is married and has one grandchild, speaks with eloquence and firmness. He was born in New York in November 1948. His father, a university student at the time, married a woman from Lebanon and developed a diplomatic career as an international civil servant working in the UN Secretariat. After his return from Beirut, Rashid Khalidi earned a place of honor among the Palestinian intellectual elite, alongside professors Edward Said, Walid Khalidi (his cousin) and Ibrahim Abu Lughod. His book Under Siege: PLO Decisionmaking during the 1982 War, was translated into Hebrew and published by Ma'arachot Press. He is the Edward Said Professor of Modern Arab Studies at Columbia University and served as the Director of the Middle East Institute there for five years, before stepping down last year. In 2006, he published his most recent book, "The Iron Cage: The Story of the Palestinian Struggle for Statehood" (Beacon Press). After being around for about two weeks, after quite a long time away, what kinds of changes have you sensed in Palestinian society? "It would be presumptuous of me, after an absence of over two years, and not having been able to go to Gaza, to pronounce myself on this subject. I will give some impressions nevertheless. I sense even greater anger than before in Jerusalem at the systematic choking off of the city from its West Bank hinterland, the unceasing pressure of new settler strongholds and property expropriations, and the denial of a minimal level of basic municipal services to Arab neighborhoods. Just compare the miserable state of the roads or the schools or the parks in East Jerusalem to those in the West. On a broader level, I detect enormous popular frustration and disgust with both wings of the national leadership, Fatah and Hamas. In spite of this crisis at the political level, there is an irrepressible dynamism, ingenuity and vitality in the Palestinian economy and society, whether in the West Bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem or the Palestinian community inside Israel. This is the underlying strength of the Palestinian people: it is like water that cannot be dammed up, but finds a way to get through. This resilience is there no matter what new refinements the occupier devises to torture his captive." Do you believe that the current PLO leadership will be able to cut a deal with Israel on a two-state solution that will be accepted by the Palestinian people? www.reiner-bernstein.de 197 – Chronologie 2008

"The current PLO leadership does not and will not properly represent the entire Palestinian people until it can achieve a historic compromise with the other wing of the Palestinian national movement, and until a renewed, unified leadership can agree on minimal national goals and a strategy, whatever they are. This requires resisting the internal and external pressures that are intent on keeping the Palestinians divided. Only if they are unified do the Palestinians have a chance of achieving their national goals. Thereafter, to be binding and legitimate, any agreement that might be reached would have to be submitted to a referendum of the entire Palestinian people, inside and outside the country." How do you see the future of the Palestinian territories? "Both the occupation regime and the settlement enterprise have gotten constantly stronger since the negotiating process began in 1991 – after being weakened by the first intifada. These twin processes went on steroids after the second intifada started in 2000. If these two bulldozer-like endeavors are not rapidly reversed – not halted, reversed – then there is no possibility whatsoever of a two-state solution. These processes – the consecration of the occupation regime and the expansion of settlements – have been ongoing for 41 years. I suspect that because of them, combined with the blindness of Israeli leaders and the weakness of Palestinian leadership, there is little chance for a two-state solution to be implemented. And anyone who wants to implement a real, equitable two-state solution would have to explain in detail how they would uproot all or most of the settlements. Equally difficult will be overcoming the powerful interlocking complex of forces in Israeli society that have extensive material, bureaucratic, political and ideological interests in the Israeli state's continued control over the lives of 3.5 million Palestinians, a control that is exercised under the pretext of security." As someone who has long been involved with the PLO and Palestinian politics, what can you say about the current Palestinian leadership? "The Palestinian people have certainly not always had the leadership they deserved. Israel worsened this situation by systematically liquidating Palestinian leaders – generally the most effective and intelligent among them – going back to the early 1970s. Several Arab regimes also played a part by assassinating key PLO leaders. Historians have pointed to similar efforts by the Zionist movement in the late 1930s and 1940s. "That said, the current leadership seems to me to be lacking in several respects, and certainly does not seem up to the difficult tasks at hand. It is time for a wholesale renewal of the Palestinian leadership, and the replacement of the few remaining members of the founding generation of the modern Palestinian national movement and their entourage with younger individuals with new ideas. This requires a major effort to confront the failed policies of the current leaders of both major factions, and to find new approaches to the grave problems the Palestinian people face." How do you assess the last eight years of U.S. conduct in the Middle East and specifically in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? "It has been catastrophic. It made a bad situation worse, undermined democracy all over the region by helping to sabotage the results of the 2006 Palestinian elections, played a major role in splitting the Palestinian national movement, and helped Israel dig itself even deeper into the hole of a permanent occupation. The administration's other foolish Middle East policies, like the occupation of Iraq, the 'cold war' with Iran and Syria, and encouraging Sunni-Shi'ite conflict in the region, have all been negative in and of themselves, but they also had a profoundly harmful effect on the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Many American historians say www.reiner-bernstein.de 198 – Chronologie 2008

George W. Bush may have been the worst president in American history, but his impact on this region has certainly been little short of a disaster." What are your expectations of Barack Obama's administration in the Middle East? Do you believe he will stick to his promise to put it at the top of his agenda? "I have no special insight. I do believe that the president-elect takes this problem very seriously, and will give it his attention. Obsessed as we are with our own issues, however, we should not ignore the fact that he faces the greatest American and global economic crisis since 1929, and must necessarily give that priority. "In any case, much will depend on who is chosen for the key positions relating to the Middle East. If some of the unimaginative, close-minded and biased advocates of conventional thinking who bear a major share of the responsibility for the mess we have been in for over 20 years – from the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations to that of Clinton, even before George W. Bush made things even worse – are appointed to important posts, my expectations will be low. I was involved in the negotiations as an advisor to the Palestinian delegation from Madrid in 1991 until June 1993, before Oslo. Those American officials who helped get the Palestinians and Israelis into the mess they are in via a deeply flawed negotiating process, and a cowardly refusal to confront occupation and settlement head-on when it would have been far easier to do in the 1980s and 1990s, do not deserve another chance to ruin the future of the peoples of this region." Can Obama save the two-state solution, or is it too late? What would you suggest he could do in order to accomplish this? "It may well be too late, as I have said. The new administration would have to prevail on the Israeli government to put into reverse the twin bulldozers of occupation and settlement. This would mean removing walls and barriers inside the occupied territories that separate Palestinians from Palestinians and allowing free movement instead of restricting the population to segregated inferior roads. It would mean ending land confiscation and the building of new residential units for settlers all over the occupied territories, and the return to the population of these territories of the land stolen from them on various 'legal' pretexts or without a pretext at all. In sum, it means ending Israeli security control over the occupied territories, and scrapping the whole overarching structure of the occupation regime that has constantly grown more deeply rooted for 41 years. "Doing this would require a lot of the new president's political capital. Despite the immense significance of Barack Obama's victory in terms of American history and politics, I do not think things have necessarily changed in terms of the balance of forces in Washington where Israel/Palestine issues are concerned. This balance of forces is and has long been an obstacle to progress toward ending occupation and settlement and achieving peace." Are you disappointed with Israeli intellectuals and the peace camp? "I respect what many Israeli groups and individuals do. However, their efforts are insufficient in light of the looming prospect of a permanent occupation and the continuation into the indefinite future of what exists today. This is a de facto one-state solution, wherein the State of Israel rules over the entirety of Mandatory Palestine and over more than 5 million Palestinians, most of whom have no rights at all in the polity that takes all the important decisions, the Israeli polity. Although the responsibility of Israel in this matter is paramount, the efforts of Palestinians and of outsiders have been insufficient as well, and we will all be affected by such www.reiner-bernstein.de 199 – Chronologie 2008

an outcome, so we all have an urgent responsibility to act. More immediately, targeting a civilian population of 1.5 million people of the Gaza Strip with hunger, deprivation and effective imprisonment, whatever the nature of their leaders, is criminal and is a violation of international law, as are all attacks on civilian populations, Jewish or Arab – something I have said repeatedly in talks here. That people, whether in Tel Aviv, Ramallah, the Arab countries, or the capitals of the world, can remain silent while Gazans are punished on this scale is beyond belief." What have you learned from the political-media affair in regard to your relations with Obama? "It proved once again that to be of Palestinian origin and to be publicly opposed to the occupation and critical of U.S. policy is grounds for public defamation as a 'terrorist.' It attests to the survival of McCarthyite tendencies in the U.S. media and politics. It also reaffirmed that Arabs, Muslims and Palestinians specifically are still the 'other' in American society. A higher percentage of Arab-Americans voted for Obama than any other ethnic group besides African-Americans, and they voted in record numbers too, I believe, and yet they are still pushed aside, almost literally. For instance, two Arab-American women in hijab were removed from the camera's gaze at one of Obama's rallies during the election. Obama did not visit one mosque or Arab community center throughout the entire two- year campaign, and he never mentioned Arab- or Muslim-Americans in his speeches. Whatever may have been the 'strategic' political reasons for these actions, they show the kind of atmosphere we in the U.S. live in. "This situation is linked to the problematic notion that it is acceptable to create a U.S. Middle East policy which caters to Israel – and specifically to the Israeli right – and to the concerns of powerful forces like the Israel lobby that are allied to the Israeli right, but hardly at all to Arab- and Muslim-Americans. Such a policy is based on the opinions, 'expertise' and allegiances of Washington insiders who are not knowledgeable about all the complex realities of the region, and are mainly sensitive to Israeli concerns. Just as an Obama administration aspires to reflect the entire country in all its diversity, so should its Middle East policy-making reflect a comprehensive set of interests and concerns, and not just one narrow range of them." Do you believe that J-street and Arab-American peaceniks can contain AIPAC and Jewish right-wing organizations? "They appear to have begun to make some headway. They need to convince American politicians, Democrats in particular, that where Israel and Palestine are concerned, leaders of the main institutions of the American Jewish establishment, notably AIPAC, do not represent the views of the majority of the American Jewish community. In fact, the hawkish views of most of these leaders are far closer to those of the 24 percent of that community who voted for McCain than they are to the 76 percent who voted for Obama. "Arab-Americans of course have a long way to go before they have significant influence, although this is already beginning on the local level in some states. This is still largely a first-generation immigrant community, although more and more of the young have been born, brought up, and educated in the U.S., and will play a much larger political role than their elders. Part of the problem is that the range of opinions that is permissible in the United States is far narrower than those voiced in politics and the media in Israel, or anywhere else. And the general level of ignorance in the U.S. about Middle Eastern ealities, in part due to the unceasing propaganda bombardment, is higher than any place in the world." www.reiner-bernstein.de 200 – Chronologie 2008

As an historian – why did Oslo fail and why does it look like our conflict is reaching a final deadlock? "Oslo was doomed to fail for several reasons. It was never an agreement between equals, granting statehood and self-determination to the Palestinians, nor was it intended to allow that outcome, Palestinian illusions about it notwithstanding. It did not deal with the key issues between the two sides – Jerusalem, refugees, land, borders, sovereignty and water – and failed to halt settlement or end the occupation. It was an agreement that in effect allowed one side to continue eating the pie that the two were supposed to negotiate over dividing. Indeed, the decade of negotiations that began with Madrid saw a doubling of the settler population, the implementation of plans to parcel up the West Bank into cantons, and the consecration and strengthening of the occupation regime. The 2000 intifada then gave [former Prime Minister Ariel] Sharon a chance to accelerate those already ongoing processes. "There is no such thing as 'final' in history. The current situation is inherently unstable, with intolerable pressure being put on the Palestinians. This pressure will sooner or later produce a reaction, unless it is relieved. The Palestinian national movement is currently in eclipse, as has happened before. Who can say what will come next, but the past 60 years have shown that Palestinian society, whether the part that remained behind in the Jewish state in 1948, or that currently under occupation, or that in the diaspora, has shown enormous vitality and a remarkable capacity to re-knit itself and resist enormous pressure. Look at the Palestinians in Lebanon, who have suffered and suffer more than any segment of Palestinian society, except the people of Gaza. In spite of the serial atrocities committed against them, the multiple external foes they have faced, and the many terrible mistakes and failures of the political leadership, like the Gazans they manage to maintain their social cohesion in conditions of indescribable difficulty." Vgl. dazu meinen Konferenzbericht „Ein Jahr nach Annapolis“ in der Leiste „Berichte aus Israel und Palästina“ in dieser Homepage.

16 Diese Spekulation hat sich nicht bestätigt. Kurtzer ist „Visiting Professor of Middle East Policy Studies“ an der „Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs” in Princeton.

17 Vgl. die Eintragungen am 31.08.2008 und 23.10.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

18 Vgl. die Eintragung am 14.11.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

19 Im gleichen Sinne hat sich die Politologin Galia Golan bei der Konferenz „Ein Jahr nach Annapolis“ Ende Novmber 2008 geäußert. Siehe dazu meinen Bericht in der Menüleiste „Berichte aus Israel und Palästina“ in dieser Homepage.

20 Vgl. dazu meine Eindrücke auf der Konferenz „Ein Jahr nach Annapolis“ Ende Novmber 2008 in meinen Bericht in der Menüleiste „Berichte aus Israel und Palästina“ in dieser Homepage.

21 Text der Friedensinitiative in der Menüleiste „Ergänzende Dokumente“ in dieser Homepage.

22 Tatsächlich war Ami Ayalon gemeinsam mit Sari Nusseibeh im Sommer 2003 der Autor eines Prinzipienkatalogs für einen israelisch- www.reiner-bernstein.de 201 – Chronologie 2008

palästinensischen Frieden. Als Sympathisant der „Genfer Initiative“ ist Ayalon nicht hervorgetreten.

23 Vgl. die Eintragung am 09.11.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

24 Vgl. die Eintragung am 29.09.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

25 Address of PM Olmert at the State Memorial Ceremony for Yitzhak Rabin on Mount Herzl, 10 November 2008: The Honorable President, Mr. Shimon Peres, Dear Rabin Family, Madam Speaker of the Knesset, Ms. Dalia Itzik, Honorable Supreme Court President, Justice Dorit Beinish, Mr. Tony Blair, Quartet Special Envoy to the Middle East, Government Ministers, Knesset Members, IDF Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, Police Commissioner Dudi Cohen, Chairman of the Jewish Agency, Mr. Ze'ev Bielski, Mayor of Jerusalem, Mr. Uri Lupoliansky, Distinguished Members of the Diplomatic Corps, Ladies and Gentlemen, Thirteen years ago, this autumn day, the 12th of Cheshvan, was marked on the Hebrew calendar for eternity as one of the darkest days in the history of the people of Israel. Like the murder of Gedalia Ben-Ahikam 2,600 years ago by an assassin from among his own people – which has become a national fast day for generations – so is the murder of Yitzhak Rabin. The people of Israel will forever mourn the loss of one of its chosen sons and leaders, a man whose life was devoted to the battle for national revival, to consolidating Israel's military strength and to Israel's defense, protection and wellbeing. Our minds cannot bear the thought that a despicable, contemptible man from among us dared to strike down Israel's Prime Minister and Minister of Defense, the commander of Israel's armies and the liberator of Jerusalem during the Six Day War; that this courageous leader, who made peace with the Hashemite Kingdom in the East and relentlessly strove to find paths to peace agreements with our Palestinian neighbors and with Syria in the North, fell victim to three traitorous gunshots in his exposed back. Now, thirteen years after that dreadful day, I feel the need to say a few words, not about the past, but about the future. Please forgive me, all those who loved Yitzhak Rabin and cherish his memory, if I deviate from the standard statements and touch upon the painful issues, those relating to the very essence of our lives and future in this land. For decades, there has been an increasingly intense and trenchant dispute in Israel over what should be here, in our country. Not only has this dispute not diminished since the murder, it has intensified. The lines of controversy have not become blurred, but have become sharper, more poignant and more decisive. However, the closer we get to the moment of truth, the more we refuse to look at reality as it is and the more we prefer to turn our heads and avoid the need to make a decision, as painful and tormenting as it may be. Yitzhak Rabin did not reach this moment of decision with enthusiasm. We will not do justice to his memory or his life's work if we try to portray the last years of his life as if they were devoid of doubts or skepticism. He was www.reiner-bernstein.de 202 – Chronologie 2008

agonizing before the Oslo Agreement; he had reservations about the agreement and he was full of doubts after it was signed. One did not have to be counted among the small, intimate circle of people with whom a Prime Minister shares his deepest sentiments to know how complex and complicated the reality of our lives appeared to him. He said it in his own language – a language which was often abrasive and blunt, but always candid and direct. It is precisely for this reason that the path he outlined was so brave and inspiring. He did not move forward with illusions or false hope. He understood what more and more people are now ready to accept, with the necessary caution and awareness of all the risks and difficulties: if we are determined to preserve the Jewish and democratic character of the State of Israel, we must inevitably relinquish, with great pain, parts of our homeland, of which we dreamt and for which we yearned and prayed for generations, and we must relinquish Arab neighborhoods in Jerusalem, and return to that territory which comprised the State of Israel until 1967, with the necessary amendments stemming from the realities created on ground. We must return to our familiar places, in the Galilee and the Negev, build them and realize the tremendous potential embodied in the unbounded energies of our people; we must reignite the flame of ingenuity and creation, and nurture a new kind of Zionism – realistic, sober, responsible and bold. There is nothing easier than outlining to the Israeli people the difficulties and risks involved in such steps. They are obvious. We have many years ahead of us before we reach the peace and tranquility of which Rabin dreamt. However, the decision must be made now, without hesitation, before the reality we face changes completely and the narrow window of opportunity to fix the solution in the consciousness of our people and the peoples of the world fades before our very eyes. Waiting unnecessarily to make a decision will change the delicate balance in the international community which currently adheres to the notion of two states for two people, with defined, agreed-upon, internationally recognized borders. If, G-d forbid, we drag our feet, we might lose the support for the idea of two states. The alternative is incomprehensible. Everyone understands it. A new regime may take control of the Palestinian territories and be radical and not open to the negotiation process. The State of Israel will lose the opportunity to bequeath to the world, as a basic fact, the idea of two states, and guarantee, for eternity, with the backing of all international institutions, a recognition of the borders of the Jewish state. This is not an easy decision, but it is vital. Rabin headed there, with hesitation and skepticism, but with a deep inner understanding, for which there is no substitute. He did not phrase it thirteen years ago as he undoubtedly would have today. When I stand here, bowing my head in front of his grave, I have no choice but to say what I believe he would have said today, had he not fallen in battle. I know that there are quite a few people who look at me now and think that they are destined to be standing in this spot and speaking as Prime Minister, and soon the Israeli public will decide who this person will be. I will no longer be here in my political capacity and in this position. Therefore, the only reason and justification for me to be standing here at this point in time, near this small, special plot which Yitzhak shares with his wife Leah, may their memories be blessed, is if I say what this nation truly needs and www.reiner-bernstein.de 203 – Chronologie 2008

not what they want to hear, as stated by our first, and greatest, Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion. The moment of truth has come, and there is no escaping it. We can miss it, we can postpone it, at a heavy price, for many more years of bloodshed and unending agonies. However, we must look at it with integrity, pride and responsibility. Many things can be said about Yitzhak Rabin's legacy and special character, but his memory cannot be honored without speaking this truth, which was the truth of his life and the tragic truth of his death. I swore to myself that I would honor the memory of this leader by saying the only things which, even with the passing of time, give meaning to his murder. The bullets which killed Rabin could not stop the historic course which he led. Even after his death, Rabin will prevail, and so will all those who follow in his footsteps, honor his memory with their actions, decisions and their courage to speak the truth.

26 Secretary General Ban Kim-Monn after the meeting before the press reading the conclusions: Representatives of the quartet met today and heard from Palestinian Authority president, , and Israeli foreign minister, Tzipi Livni, at their request. They were joined by Quartet representative Tony Blair. President Abbas and Minister Livni briefed the Quartet on Palestinian- Israeli negotiating efforts since the November 27, 2007 international conference in Annapolis, Maryland that formally launched bilateral negotiations to bring an end to the conflict by achieving the goal of two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security. The Palestinian and Israeli representatives reaffirmed their commitment, as stated in the Annapolis joint understanding, to vigorous, ongoing, and continuous negotiations in order to conclude a peace treaty resolving all outstanding issues, including all core issues, without exception, as specified in previous agreements. The parties' representatives have found that over the last year they have engaged in direct, sustained, and intensive bilateral negotiations, based on a joint work plan that included the establishment of more than 10 committees. They described how the parties have been actively engaged, not only on core issues, but on an array of other topics necessary to turn the two-state solution into a reality. Without minimizing the gaps and obstacles that remain, the representatives of the parties share their assessment that the present negotiations are substantial and promising, and they have succeeded in putting in place a solid negotiating structure for continued progress in the future. President Abbas and Foreign Minister Livni stated the parties had reached a number of mutual understandings on the principles governing their negotiating process. These include: the need for continuous, uninterrupted, direct bilateral negotiations; the principle that nothing would be considered agreed until everything is agreed; the need to reach a comprehensive agreement addressing all issues, as agreed at Annapolis, rather than just announce agreement on selected items in isolation. The parties' representatives also confirmed that, as stated in the Annapolis joint understanding, the parties remain committed to implementation of their respective obligations under the Roadmap, and to the agreed mechanism for monitoring and judging Roadmap implementation, and that, unless otherwise agreed by the parties, implementation of the future peace www.reiner-bernstein.de 204 – Chronologie 2008

treaty will be subject to implementation of the Roadmap, as judged by the United States. In addition to describing the structure of the negotiations and indicating areas in which progress has been achieved, President Abbas and Minister Livni expressed gratitude for international support provided during the last year, and requested continued support from the Quartet and all members of the international community. First, they asked that the international community support the parties' sustained efforts in the framework of the Annapolis process, and that, in respect, the agreed principles for their negotiations as described to the Quartet. Second, they asked that all states promote an environment conducive to peace, non-violence, and the two-state solution. In this regard, they urge political and economic assistance, especially in relation to institutional and security reform, capacity building, economic development, and the fulfillment of pledges to the legitimate Palestinian government, which has accepted the Quartet principles and respects the PLO commitment. They asked the international community to redouble efforts to confront and deny support for extremism, incitement, terrorism, and intolerance. Finally, the representatives stressed that, absent the joint request of the parties, third parties should not intervene in the bilateral negotiations. At the same time, they confirmed that international support and assistance will be vital, once an agreement is reached, and that they intend to jointly consult members of the international community on this issue at the appropriate time. The Quartet expressed its appreciation for the description by the parties of their joint efforts, which confirmed the seriousness of the Annapolis process, and underscored the determination of the parties to reach a comprehensive agreement. The Quartet reiterated its commitment to supporting the parties' efforts underlined as a commitment to the irreversibility of the bilateral negotiations, pledged to respect the bilateral and confidential nature of the negotiation, and called on all states to adhere to these same commitments. The Quartet endorsed the goals set out by the parties, and called on all sides – all states, to lend their diplomatic and political support to that end, including by encouraging and recognizing progress to date. The Quartet renewed its call on relevant states and international organizations to assist in the development of the Palestinian economy to maximize the resources available to the Palestinian Authority, and to contribute to the Palestinian institution-building program in preparation for statehood, as decided during the Paris, Bethlehem, and Berlin conferences. The Quartet cited Jenin as an example of the success of reforms instituted by the Palestinian government, and of cooperation between the two sides made possible in the context of the Annapolis process. The Quartet further welcomed the recent deployment of Palestinian security services in the Hebron governorate as a sign of the progress that has resulted from increased security cooperation. The Quartet emphasized its determination to continue to work with Israel and the Palestinian government to facilitate access and movement, and an improvement in conditions on the ground, in order to address urgent humanitarian needs, foster economic activity, and improve the atmosphere for the negotiations. The Quartet reiterated its call to the parties to fully implement their obligations under phase one of the Roadmap, including in relation to www.reiner-bernstein.de 205 – Chronologie 2008

freezing settlement activity and the dismantlement of the infrastructure of terrorism. The Quartet emphasized the importance of continuity of the peace process. The Quartet agreed that the spring of 2009 could be an appropriate time for an international meeting in Moscow. The Quartet reaffirmed its previous statements, including the September 26, 2008 statement issued in New York, further welcoming the recent calls for a broader peace. The Quartet offered its support for the expansion of ongoing diplomatic efforts toward regional peace, noted the importance of the Arab peace initiative, and reaffirmed its commitment to a just, lasting, and comprehensive peace in the Middle East, based on United States Security Council resolutions 242, 338, 1397, and 1515.

27 Vgl. die Eintragung am 28.10.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

28 Vgl. die Eintragung am 25.09.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

29 Vgl. dazu die Eintragung am 23.07.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

30 Vgl. dazu die gegensätzlichen Äußerungen Olmerts im Rahmen seines Interviews am 29.09.2008 mit „Yediot Acharonot“ in dieser Zeitleiste.

31 Vgl. auch die Eintragung am 08.09.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

32 Address of President Peres before the Knesset, 28.10.2008: Prime Minister, Mr. Ehud Olmert, Speaker of the Knesset, Mrs. Dalia Itzik, President of the Supreme Court, Mrs. Dorit Beinisch, Head of the Opposition, Mr. Binyamin Netanyahu, Ministers and Knesset Members, Dear Guests, Honorable Ones, This Knesset session is opened against a background of internal and external turmoil which has aroused great concern in the heart of every citizen. The difficult process that ultimately ended the days of this government raises question marks which trouble all of the people of Israel. The confidence in the conduct of the governing agencies was weakened, and furthermore, the public trust in their leaders was damaged. This unpleasant truth must not be hidden or neglected. This is the hour in which the Israeli Knesset and the political establishment are obligated to do some deep soul-searching. It is never too late to make amends. International developments and dynamic trends in our region will have complicated ramifications for Israel internally, and even existential ones. We cannot stand before these difficult challenges when our internal strength is fragile. There is no justification for that. In the coming days, Israel will enter an election period. This is the first and most immediate test that stands before you, Israeli elected officials. It is in your power to make these general elections a turning point, which will signal that the face of the Israeli political establishment is resolved to move towards rehabilitation and healing. It is up to you to conduct legitimate, honorable political battles that do not deteriorate to verbal violence, that do not turn towards baseless hatred, and in which you do not accede to the use of deviant and degrading www.reiner-bernstein.de 206 – Chronologie 2008

propaganda. It is in your hands to highlight before the public the great dilemmas that are before us and to convince them that your path is the best of all the parties. The people will choose both based on a vision and the manner in which the vision is presented. You should conduct a fair, clean, and substantive debate. Do not assume that superficial slogans will win the hearts of the public. One who disparages the intelligence of the public will find in the end that the public disparages him. The Israeli media also has an esteemed role in the democratic process. In order to enable it to do its job successfully, we must ensure that the press enjoys freedom of speech. But the media must also refrain from taking part in narrowness and one-sidedness. We may demand from the media a contribution to the quality of the general elections, just as it is their job to demand from the candidates to present their platforms in truthful speech which should be reported fairly every day. It is not enough simply to criticize the ideas of your opponent. You must present an alternative idea grounded in tangible reasoning. The uniqueness of Israel is found in the free political and democratic processes through which it manages itself. The further the reputation of Israeli politics deteriorates, the more the young generation will refrain from involving itself in politics, and this will create a vacuum in the quality of government in Israel. This is a danger to the core of the democratic system. I call the young generation to view political engagement as an important challenge in the service of the country. Do not be deterred from political life. This is the framework in which decisions are made and through which you will be able to bring real changes to the lives of all citizens. Our best and brightest will be able to bring about the desired change if they join political life with the goal of improving it. We must encourage young people not to turn away from political life. We have to open all of the doors before them. As the quality of Israeli politics is improved, so the decisions that the government reaches will improve, as will the effectiveness of their execution. Members of Knesset, The general elections that are before us will demand from you serious and convincing answers to weighty questions. In my judgment, there are five questions that should populate the agenda leading up to the election: 1. How will we ensure the security of Israel in the face of all the threats that are facing us? 2. How will we bring an end to the Arab-Israeli conflict and bring peace to our people? 3. How will we bring about economic prosperity while safeguarding social justice? 4. How will we keep internal solidarity and the strength of the Israeli community: through the power of law, the integration of minorities, and proper governance? 5. How will we nurture the future of Israel – our young generation? I believe that every political party in Israel should clearly present their stance on these five important questions. They comprise our national agenda. The first question regards the security of Israel. The Middle East is bustling with dangerous developments, like Iran's rush to develop nuclear weapons, the creation of long- and short-range rockets, the threat posed by radical Islam and the cruel terror that it encourages. Israel must be strong and if we are forced to fight, Israel needs to be able to defeat any enemy who comes upon her. Israel's abilities need to match the various challenges developing before us, symmetric and asymmetric. We must also understand that national security is not measured solely by www.reiner-bernstein.de 207 – Chronologie 2008

planes and tanks. It is also affected by the human dimension, the quality of the fighters, the strength and support of the community, and the ability to cooperate with friends and. even former enemies. Peace is the most significant component in the equation of Israeli security. Secondly, we must focus on achieving the peace for which we have yearned. Israel has progressed in the negotiations it has been conducting with the Palestinians and with Syria. The questions that are up for discussion are critical, and to all of us it is clear that the price of peace will be expensive and painful. We must pay heed to the voices of all comers from Arab states and the Muslim world, calling to put an end to conflict in the Middle East and to arrive at peace. The Arab Peace Initiative of 2002 put an end to the unity of the Arab League states around the policy of Khartoum, that is to say, nay to recognition, nay to negotiations, nay to peace. Now the answer of the Arabs is "yes!" Yes to peace with Israel! There is no ignoring the positive change even if we do not accept all of the phrasing in the Arab Initiative. It is fitting that we examine how we can include the whole Arab world in a comprehensive peace process that will be stronger and more credible. The price of a comprehensive agreement, in its conclusion, will not exceed the price that Israel paid or agreed to pay in negotiations in separate negotiations with all the states individually. But the overall compensation will be of great value – the end of the conflict in all of the Middle East, and normal relations with all of the Arab states. In meetings that I have held with Arab and Muslim leaders, I have discovered that most of them will not give in to Ahmadinejad's imperialistic attempt, in the name of religion, to take over the entire Middle East and to subjugate their policies to instructions coming from the ayatollahs in Tehran. The vision of absolute power in the hands of a religious group, flaunting missiles and nuclear weapons and creating terror centers and rebellion, is a disaster for the entire Middle East and for all of its inhabitants, regardless of religion and nationality. Fanatic leadership in Iran poses a danger to the whole world. President Mubarak, like other Arab leaders, including those with whom we do not have diplomatic relations, have told me they do not see any more reason or hope in war or terror, and that the time is ripe for a comprehensive agreement in the Middle East. "An agreement reached between you and the Palestinians will lay the foundation for an agreement with all of us," the President of Egypt told me. Governments of Israel, as is customary in democratic regimes, may be switched, but the desire for peace is shared by all of us, and we must proceed. Never before, and certainly not during hundreds of years of conflict, have we been so close to peace as we are today. Not everything has been solved, but new possibilities have arisen. The hour of truth for a national decision on these weighty matters is nearing. The third question has to do with socio-economic issues. We have to choose a clear socioeconomic path, especially in light of the existing global economic crisis. The Israeli economy has impressed the world with its exceptional technological abilities and its financial management, which was not permitted to run wild without regulations or norms. Israel is not a "business." Israel was and must be a principled country. Accordingly, free economic initiative must also establish social solidarity. As we prevail over our economic and social disparities, the economy will grow and the society will come together. We cannot allow considerations of the profits of a few to overshadow the needs and the welfare of the many. www.reiner-bernstein.de 208 – Chronologie 2008

Creative powers should be rewarded, and punishment should not fall on those who are hurt by the disparities that we created. In Israel, one third of the population does not have a well-paying job. Two thirds of the territory of the country is not properly developed. And half of the young generation does not receive a sufficient education. I do not believe in the "average poverty." There are many that are very poor and a few that are very rich. Between them there is no average, only a gap. A third of the population that does not have an appropriate job, this is comprised of a majority of the religious population, and of the non-Jewish population. There is no reason why Bnei Brak should be the poorest city in Israel's center and Nazareth should be the poorest city in the North. We need to make it possible for the religious population to join the labor force and to pray at the same time. For the Jewish people, not only the Sabbath is holy, but also the six days of the week which are for work. There is no reason that modern business should harm the way of life of religious men and women. Within that population, there is a great deal of spiritual and scientific potential in that can contribute much to the state and raise their quality of life so that they will not have to rely on welfare. The fourth question relates to the internal solidarity and the strength of the institutions of law and leadership. The citizens of Israel felt deep revulsion from the threatening berating and the incitement of a small group of residents of Kiryat Arba towards IDF soldiers and their commanders. I am convinced that this entire house is united in denunciation of this difficult phenomenon, which threatens the rule of law and the strength of the society. The IDF, the police, and the General Security Services do sacred work while risking their lives to protect the security of the state and its citizens. We must be united in the appreciation of our security forces. The mitzvah of "redeeming captives" is a basic principle that expresses the solidarity of our people. I am convinced that any government will do all that it can to bring back Gilad Schalit who is in captivity in Gaza and to resolving the problem of all of the missing IDF soldiers from Israel's battles. A society that wishes to keep its unity cannot make peace with economic discrimination that exists in the non-Jewish sector. It is possible to build industrial parks and technology parks in the Galilee, in the "Arab Triangle" and in the Negev for the Arab population, the Druse, and the Bedouins. The minority citizens of Israel have all the potential necessary to integrate equally into Israeli society to develop in keeping with all the guidelines of modernity without harming their rights to practice their religion. Our strength as a united society, proud and embracing life, in my opinion demands leadership that presents an exciting vision built on great national objectives that can stimulate the imagination: Developing the Negev and the Galilee is one such example. The development has begun but it needs to be executed at a faster pace. If the necessary resources are allocated we will know a Negev that will constitute a new addition to Israel for research and development on a global scale that will be able to focus on two burning issues of our time: alternative energy and innovative water technologies. The Galilee can be a medical center of the highest order while its green beauty and ancient sites draw tourists from all over the world. These developments will be for the benefit of all of the citizens without regard for religion or nationality. Another example is the "Peace Valley vision." Along the entire African Rift from the Katzrin River in the North to Sharm el-Sheikh in the South it is possible to create a joint economic region, respecting national borders, and facilitating the movement of people, consumer goods, and ideas. The ever- www.reiner-bernstein.de 209 – Chronologie 2008

growing tourism along this route requires a war against terror to be undertaken by all invested parties. The Valley of Peace will enable the creation of millions of jobs, draw investors from throughout the world, establish a solar energy industry and desalinate hundreds of millions of cubic meters of water for countries suffering both from a lack of water and a lack of peace. The fifth question regards nurturing and cultivating the young generation of Israel. I believe that the upcoming elections are an opportunity to allocate the necessary resources to education such that there is no child or youth who does not receive an adequate education. Israeli youth is the real treasure of Israel society. Investing in the young generation is the smartest investment for the future of Israel. We must invest a great deal in the education of the youth and put a lot of thought into ways to build an exemplary Israeli society. Israeli youth have great potential. We must place fascinating challenges before them and ask them to join us in these exciting national tasks. Esteemed Members of the Knesset, I am fully aware of the prevailing disagreements affecting our society. We must not allow them to intensify. Democracy is built on freedom of expression as much as it is contingent upon the ability to accept the decision of the majority. The upcoming elections are an opportunity to raise the foundation of Israel and to alleviate its various weaknesses. Though competition will shape the coming months, it is my conviction that an overarching vision of unity should serve to keep the competition constructive. This vision is what the hour demands.

33 Address by PM Olmert, Opening of the Knesset Winter Session (Translation), 27.10.2008: Honorable President Shimon Peres, Madam Speaker of the Knesset, Distinguished Guests, Knesset Members, Traditionally, at every opening Knesset session, the Prime Minister delivers a speech which presents the coalition and opposition members with the Government's goals and the agenda it intends to lead during the months ahead. Due to the unusual political circumstances created and the upcoming election break, I have chosen to deviate from this tradition and settle for a short announcement. Over the past month, negotiations were conducted on the formation of a government. I value and appreciate the worthy efforts made by Acting Prime Minister, Knesset Member Tzipi Livni, to form a government, and I regret the circumstances which led to the failure of the negotiations. Approximately two months ago, I informed the Israeli public of my intention to resign following the establishment of a new government. It was my hope and expectation that such a government would be formed by the winner of the Kadima primary elections, before general elections. Since the die has been cast and it appears that the political system is heading towards elections, I will remain Prime Minister until the formation of a new government after the elections. I will do so with the same sense of responsibility and prudence with which I have acted so far, and thus, the appropriate distance will be maintained between the turbulent politics which characterize the election period, and the need to address the critical matters of state. My friends, Knesset Members, www.reiner-bernstein.de 210 – Chronologie 2008

While the members of our Legislature will soon put their parliamentary lives on hold for a fixed period of time in order to prepare for the elections, life in the State of Israel does not stop and the country's interests cannot be shelved. There are still borders to secure and security challenges to address. The security threats against the citizens of Israel do not wait for the political processes. The fear of terrorism cannot be postponed just because some of us are engaged in an election campaign. Hamas' continued military buildup and the smuggling of weapons in the north and south do not stop just because we're in the middle of an election campaign. Iranian leaders do not sit still, but continue to threaten and prepare destructive weapons – even during an election period in Israel. To all those I highly recommend not to try our patience or put our ability to the test. Children continue to go to school and students want to return to their academic benches at the beginning of next week; there are still burning social issues, and the internal security problems call to us from newspaper headlines every day; the police must protect the citizens and their property – in their homes and places of residence – on a daily basis. Too many citizens are attacked without having anyone protect them properly. Too many road accidents exact a painful price in human life. We cannot abandon this responsibility while waiting for people to take time off from their busy political schedule. Gilad Shalit is still held hostage by his brutal captors in the Gaza Strip and not a day goes by that I do not deal with this issue of the fate of Gilad Shalit. As in the past, I will not go into details, or provide explanations and will not enter into argument with all those concerned about Gilad's fate. I will continue to work quietly, patiently, with determination as I have done until now, even if, unfortunately, his merciless captors still refuse to release him. The sense of a pre-election stalemate is misleading – there are decisions to be made and a nation to run. Decisions will be made and the country will continue to be run. Members of Knesset, Allow me to dedicate a few words to the challenge which can affect the life and future of each and every Israeli citizen – the economic situation. It is no secret that the acute crisis which the global economy is currently undergoing could affect the Israeli economy, particularly if we do not exercise extreme caution. This situation compels both the Government and the Knesset to make preparations, even if the Government is a transitional one and the Knesset is heading towards elections. This is what the public expects, and it is exactly what we, as elected public officials, are committed to doing. In fact, Israel began confronting the global crisis during the years which preceded the outbreak of the crisis, through a number of measured, responsible steps taken by the Government, which have turned the Israeli Shekel into one of the world's most powerful currencies and allowed an unprecedented level of growth in this country. Together with the Minister of Finance and the Governor of the Bank of Israel, we initiated a socio-economic agenda for the State of Israel and acted toward increasing growth, encouraging export and productivity and raising the rate of employment to the highest it has ever been in the State of Israel. Indeed, the recent years have been the best years ever in the history of the Israeli economy. Over the past three years, my Government has acted to ensure that the weaker strata of society would also enjoy the fruits of growth. We have done so primarily through employment. We have worked with those www.reiner-bernstein.de 211 – Chronologie 2008

populations which are not part of the work cycle – the elderly, Holocaust survivors and those which struggle daily with economic difficulties. I have said before and I say it again: the fruits of growth must be used for minimizing social gaps, and also for development. We have no natural resources apart from one major resource – the human resource. It is therefore my intention to solve, within the next several days, the higher education crisis, and to allow the academic year to start as planned. The fact that the situation of the Israeli economy is relatively better than that of other leading economies in the world does not relieve us of the duty to take steps to ensure that the global crisis will exact the minimal possible price from the State of Israel. The global crisis is not over and its shadow still threatens not only stock market investors and large or small companies, but the entire public. Our job as elected officials is to make sure that the public's assets and economic security remain solid. And this is what we will do! It is my intention, to hold consultations together with the Minister of Finance and the Governor of the Bank of Israel, with representatives of the various parties, including opposition members and representatives of various economic sectors, in order to ensure that we can continue managing Israel's economy in the best, most responsible manner and minimize the effects of the global crisis on Israel. Together, we will discuss a series of necessary steps for the coming months, in order to guarantee the stability and strength of the Israeli economy. We will not tolerate recklessness and will continue to exercise strict fiscal discipline. I expect all members of this House to enlist and unite for the sake of this shared interest. Thank you very much.

34 Meron Benvenisti: A monument to a lost time and lost hopes, in „Haaretz“-Online 30.10.2008: Shimon Peres did it in style, as usual. The marking of the 10th anniversary of the Peres Center for Peace was a glittering event, full of international celebrities and famous artists, and of course included the poem written by the principal guest, beginning, "Oh, My Lord, it is time to pray." The high point of the festivities was the dedication of the Peres Peace House in Jaffa, a magnificent building of huge green blocks, which cost $15 million, three times the original estimate. The building is windowless and air-conditioned throughout and blocked off from its surroundings, which are home to a poor Arab population. Its faces the sea, as though its builders were hinting that the chance for peace lies in the West, beyond the sea, and not in the East, where neighbor enemies dwell. The magnificence and elegance cannot, unfortunately, blur the sense of missed opportunity. The events surrounding the establishment of the Peres Center for Peace in October 1997 powerfully demonstrated the political culture that favored peace; that was suffused with confidence in the possibility of achieving peace; and defied the approach of Benjamin Netanyahu, who defeated Peres and did everything possible to torpedo the Oslo Accords. The festivities today cannot hide the fact that the only a meager vestige of the peace camp remains, the peace industry functions by the power of inertia and those involved in it must invent excuses for their activity, and that suggests they are turning peace into a tool for achieving their own personal ends. Only in hindsight are we able to see the fatal damage done by the Oslo Accords, which inspired Peres to establish the center: The accords, instead of bringing about a change in the status quo, have become the pillar of a de facto binational regime (called "the occupation"), which has become www.reiner-bernstein.de 212 – Chronologie 2008

institutionalized as a permanent regime. The Oslo Accords are the legal infrastructure for the division of the West Bank into cantons, which allow for direct Israeli control over 60 percent of the territory (Area C), as well as a constitutional infrastructure for the existence of a virtual Palestinian Authority. The plethora of titles assumed by its leaders and the official uniforms of its soldiers make it possible to maintain the false illusion of the temporary nature of the regime of Israeli control, and thus to perpetuate it. In the activity of the Peres Center for Peace there is no evident effort being made to change the political and socioeconomic status quo in the occupied territories, but just the opposite: Efforts are being made to train the Palestinian population to accept its inferiority and prepare it to survive under the arbitrary constraints imposed by Israel, to guarantee the ethnic superiority of the Jews. With patronizing colonialism, the center presents an olive grower who is discovering the advantages of cooperative marketing; a pediatrician who is receiving professional training in Israeli hospitals; and a Palestinian importer who is learning the secrets of transporting merchandise via Israeli ports, which are famous for their efficiency; and of course soccer competitions and joint orchestras of Israelis and Palestinians, which paint a false picture of coexistence. There is no chance that the activists and administrators of the peace center will participate in the daily struggle of the Palestinian olive pickers; in the frustrating efforts to transport critically ill people via the checkpoints; or to breach the economic siege and sea blockade of Gaza. The Peres Center for Peace does not publish reports about the catastrophic economic situation of the Palestinians and does not warn about Israel's responsibility for this situation; after all, it is not a club of Israel-hating anarchists but one of respectable people, who mostly contribute to peace in the generous funding of glittering events and participation in them. It has always been maintained that the principal, and perhaps revolutionary contribution, of the Oslo Accords did not lie in the "declaration of principles," but in the mutual recognition between the Palestinian national movement and the State of Israel. But this mutual recognition, which turned the Palestinians from a terrorist entity into a legitimate entity in the eyes of the Israelis, was erased in the wake of the suicide attacks and the violence of the Al-Aqsa intifada, after which the pre-Oslo viewpoint returned. Now the Jews are giving the Arabs a bill of divorce, turning their backs on them, imprisoning them behind sealed walls and checkpoints, willingly keeping to themselves and praying that the Mediterranean will dry up or that a bridge will be built that will connect them directly to Europe. This mentality has created two monumental structures in the past decade, whose symbolic significance is greater than their functional value: the separation fence and the new Ben-Gurion International Airport terminal. The former is designed to hide the Palestinians and erase them from our consciousness, and the latter serves as an escape hatch and the basis for an aerial bridge to the West. The third monument that was built in this decade, the Peres Peace House in Jaffa, joins them as a memorial to a time and hopes that have been lost, and the only thing that remains is to join in Peres' prayer: "Then send a Ray of Hope for a new way."

35 Nach bislang unbestätigten Meldungen könnte der 10.02.2009 in Frage kommen. www.reiner-bernstein.de 213 – Chronologie 2008

36 Vgl. dazu meinen Kommentar „Nach Olmert, vor Livni und das palästinensische Dilemma“ in der Menüleiste „Veröffentlichungen“ dieser Homepage.

37 Vgl. die Eintragung am 31.08.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

38 Vgl. die Eintragung am 16.03.2005 in dieser Zeitleiste.

39 Remarks by Palestinian PM Salam Fayyad at ATFP Third Annual Gala, October 13, 2008: Ladies and gentlemen, Your Excellencies, It is really an honor for me to have the opportunity to address such an esteemed audience tonight. Tonight’s event is neatly book-ended by a number of significant events in the on-going Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Last month, we marked fifteen years since the signing of the first in a series of interim agreements. Next month, of course, will mark one year since the renewal of peace negotiations at Annapolis. And, yet, regrettably, we continue to walk the bumpy road to peace that began in Madrid seventeen years ago this month. A lot can be said, and has been said, about the ups and downs of this process. But, what we do know is that we all hoped that we would be a lot closer to peace by now. The Annapolis Conference embodied the hope that we would achieve a comprehensive peace agreement by year’s end. In the meantime, we, Palestinians, had expected an improved economic and security environment to underpin the political track. Alas, few expectations have been met. Settlements pepper the West Bank and continue to grow. Every indicator of settlement activity – from public- and private-initiated construction, to tenders and building permits – shows that rather than stopping, settlement activity has in fact accelerated since Annapolis. … That’s right. Accelerated . Similarly, restrictions on access and movement are tighter than they were before Annapolis. Compare 563 checkpoints and roadblocks before Annapolis to 630 today, not to mention the severe tightening of the siege on Gaza. And land confiscations, home demolitions, military incursions and raids all continued. Needless to say, the quality of life for the average Palestinian has worsened. And if we are honest with ourselves, vague pronouncements that the current peace talks are “on-going” and “serious” mean little on the Palestinian street and, when all is told, are of little relevance to people who are living hand to mouth. As devastating as these developments have been on Palestinians’ fabric of life, the combination of deteriorating conditions on the ground and the lack of a political horizon have had an even worse impact on the Palestinians’ state of mind, which had already been seriously deformed by the erosion in self-esteem, and self- assuredness, prompted by decades of Israeli occupation and oppression. We, Palestinians, have felt this erosion. Those old enough to remember the first Intifada felt it during the second Intifada. We felt the shame of it in June of last year. We felt it last month when twelve of our citizens, including a baby, were killed in Gaza. I have always felt that an understanding of how this sad state of affairs came about was necessary to enable us to position ourselves on a path that could lead to freedom and independence. The truth is: the loss of self- esteem and assuredness had tended to elicit one of two seemingly www.reiner-bernstein.de 214 – Chronologie 2008

diametrically opposed reactions among the Palestinian public, namely, defeatism and belligerence. The painful truth is that neither is constructive. You cannot end the occupation if you are dominated by a “can do nothing,” defeatist kind of attitude. Nor will belligerence get you there, with what may come with it by way of violence and isolationist tendencies. When viewed this way, it becomes clear that the greatest obstacle that has prevented us, Palestinians, from achieving our national goals was not occupation per se or factionalism, not poverty or separation, but that deadly erosion of self-esteem and consequent loss of faith in our capacity to get things done. If this analysis is correct, which I believe it is, it follows that to end the occupation, we, Palestinians, must first rid ourselves of what four decades of Israeli occupation have precipitated by way of fear, skepticism, cynicism, self-doubt, and, yes loss of self-esteem. I believe we can – though I must confess I didn’t always. At one point, the erosion of our esteem seemed to have taken on a life of its own, propelled by its own momentum, becoming almost self-fulfilling … almost. However, I truly believe we can regain our sense of self-assuredness, once we, Palestinians, collectively embrace – consciously embrace – a paradigm that says that, along the way to freedom, defeatism must be defeated and belligerence must be set aside. To me, this is not only emancipation – it is deliverance. Acting on this conviction, and from day one – a day of national tragedy of virtually unprecedented proportions – my government set out to put in place and set in motion mechanisms capable of getting us there. My motto was “building towards statehood despite the occupation”. This involved, in the first instance, building strong, effective institutions capable of delivering services to our people in an effective, expeditious and fair manner, all within the framework of good governance. The effort has already started to bear fruit. In the area of financial management, for example, I am proud to say that we now have a system that truly measures up to the highest international standards and practices. In addition to building up our credibility at home, this has won our government the international confidence necessary to secure much needed aid, including from the United States and the European Union. Indeed, last March the US Administration transferred US $150 million directly to the Palestinian Authority coffers. This transfer was the largest sum of assistance to be transferred to the PA in a single tranche by any donor for any purpose since the Authority’s inception. What is more, the Administration is about to transfer another US$ 150 million to us the same way. Surely this will be another strong message of support and desire to help, which I deeply cherish. What I cherish even more is the strong message of confidence in the integrity of our public finance system which this action by the Administration implies. For, as you know, however strong the desire to help is – and indeed it is – Congress would not authorize a transfer directly into our coffers, of this amount or indeed any amount, were it not for the integrity and the credibility which our financial system and management have come to enjoy. This is but one example of the progress we have been able to achieve over the past year in building towards statehood. There are other important examples, especially in the sphere of security and law and order. Together, these efforts prompted UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon to speak of “an emerging sense of self-empowerment” among Palestinians. I share his assessment. I have had the opportunity to visit most districts in the West Bank this past year – which I hope to be able replicate in Gaza – www.reiner-bernstein.de 215 – Chronologie 2008

and everywhere I have been, I was greeted by a cautious, yet distinct glimmer of the self-respect, pride and resilience that makes me , despite all the obstacles we face, so very proud to be Palestinian. It is there in the streets of Nablus and Jenin, where law and order and, thus, a modicum of normalcy have been restored. It was there in Manger Square in Bethlehem one starry night last May, when a thousand businessmen and dignitaries from all over Palestine and abroad, including Israel, dined together in the open air. It is there every Friday – and has been for the past few years, and will continue to be there – in Bil’in, where villagers peacefully protest against the erection of a despicable wall that threatens their livelihood and, sometimes , their lives, though never their spirit. It was there one sad day when Palestinians walked up a Ramallah hill to bury Palestine’s most highly revered literary icon (Mahmoud Darwish), conjuring up memories of the day our nation mourned the loss of our late President Yasser Arafat. It was there the day when a shipment of Palestinian pharmaceutical products, destined for the first time ever to Germany, made its way through the maze of economic restrictions in the West Bank, to meet the most exacting pharmaceutical standards in the world. And, yes, it was there the day Palestinians welcomed a boat-load of visitors off the shore of Gaza … And it is there , every single day, that a Palestinian child goes to school, that a Palestinian farmer manages to work his/ her land, that a Palestinian mother remains hopeful that her son will be released from Israeli prison, that a rural community begins to benefit from the implementation of one of literally hundreds of community projects being implemented throughout the country, that a Palestinian family chooses – finds a way – to remain on their land for another day. We are approaching a critical mass of positive change – positive facts on the ground, as I like to call them, that are indicative of a most encouraging shift in the mindset of our people, away from doom and gloom towards a distinct sense of possibility and the promise of a better future. When and where possible, with President Abbas’s guidance and support, our government tried to help generate opportunities and create conditions to make these things possible – and, in so doing, to nurture our people’s sense of dignity in themselves. This , more than anything, is what I think our job is about – as we say here tonight, “the courage to persist, the will to build”. And I am unequivocally committed to continuing to do that – now and even after I leave office. Still, there is no dignity in what is happening to us now. And the same is true for the Israelis. There is nothing dignified in Israeli parents having to be afraid while their children are away at school. There is no dignity for the mother of the Israeli soldier who delayed a Palestinian woman at a checkpoint near Nablus, causing her to lose her unborn child. There is also nothing dignified about the world’s fifth largest army subjugating a people with no country and no army. There is nothing dignified in a country that prides itself on being a democracy when it allows itself to be held hostage by a group of extremist settlers who forcibly put their own interests ahead of the will of the majority. Despite this – indeed, because of this – we, Palestinians, remain hopeful – resolute – to reach a peaceful resolution to the conflict between us and Israelis based on a two-state model. Palestinians long to live in freedom like any other people. For, in freedom, there is dignity, as there is in freedom from fear. In fact, we don’t just seek peace; we seek a meaningful and lasting peace with Israel. We seek strong ties with Israel. We seek strong economic ties between the independent states of Israel and Palestine. We seek warm www.reiner-bernstein.de 216 – Chronologie 2008

relations with Israelis. We do not want to simply get to a point where we just accept each other – we want to have warm relations where we both recognize the mutual economic, intellectual, spiritual, and of course security benefits of living and working together. We do not want to erect walls; we want to build bridges. We do not want to close Israelis out of our lives; we want to live with Israelis as our neighbors. However, let it be known that Palestinians are not interested in just any state and not at any cost. It is not just Israel who has a constituency it has to worry about and serve. Let’s not forget the reasons why the results of Palestinian parliamentary elections were what they were in 2006. As one prominent Israeli advocate of peace put it, “There is no Palestinian partner for improving the quality of the occupation – there is only a Palestinian partner for ending the occupation.” When all is said and done, the Palestinian leadership will have to take any agreement it negotiates with Israel to its people. People have an inherent sense of fairness by which they judge any settlement. And that inherent sense of fairness tells them that a peace agreement with Israel must yield a viable, contiguous, independent, potentially prosperous, sovereign Palestinian state on 22% of their historic homeland with East Jerusalem as its capital, and a solution to the refugee issue that honors the refugees and recognizes their legitimate rights and their suffering. That same inherent sense of fairness tells them that a rump state made up of disconnected Israeli throw-aways is not what they have waited so long or sacrificed so much for. It tells them that the great compromise they made back in 1988, when they relinquished claim to 78 percent of their historic homeland, should be acknowledged and respected by the other party. Regrettably, the two-state solution is teetering under the weight of 170 settlements and almost half a million settlers. Time is running out on the two-state solution. With every brick that is laid in a settler house, with every road that is paved for settlers, with every concrete slab that is erected for the wall that snakes in and out of the West Bank, the bond that ties Israelis and Palestinians together, which originates in the fact that we must share the same piece of land, grows just a little bit tighter. That is the great irony of Israel’s settlement enterprise. Prime Minister Olmert recognized this. He said “The day will come when the two-state solution collapses, and we face a South African-style struggle for equal voting rights.” Nevertheless, I remain hopeful that, through negotiations, we can reach a lasting peace between us on the basis of a two-state solution. For this process to be successful, however, we must, again, bring to it dignity and credibility. Oslo stalled because it quickly lost credibility– there was talk of peace while actions on the ground worked against peace. Annapolis risks being the same unless Israel reconciles its behavior on the ground with its stated intentions of peace and creating a viable and independent Palestinian state. And so, if we are to get to where we want to be, we have to treat each other with dignity – lead with dignity. This means behaving like statesmen instead of politicians – thinking of the next generation, not the next elections. For Palestinians, what this means is remaining steadfast not just to our principles for a solution, but to our commitment to non-violence and previous agreements. And we are resolute in this. Make no mistake about it. As I mentioned earlier, I view my role as Prime Minister as one of assisting our people, to the best of my ability, to live just a little bit better than the day before, and to stay on their land for another day … and www.reiner-bernstein.de 217 – Chronologie 2008

another. But we do it – and will continue to do it – through constructive, non-violent means that honor our very noble cause. For Israel, what this means is negotiating an agreement with us as equals, no more and no less. Not bullying Palestinians at the negotiating table with facts on the ground it only erected yesterday – or five years ago, or 10 years ago, or 35 years ago. Saying “no” to the settlers. Not abusing its stature as an occupying power to coerce, for example, by withholding much-needed tax dollars when it disagrees with our legitimate means of diplomatic protest. Not shutting away 1.5 million Palestinians from the world for the unacceptable actions of a few. For the rest of the world, this means showing strength of leadership, and getting tough with transgressors of our commonly-held values, whether friend or foe. The world has been generous with us, backing our state- building efforts with robust financial investment. And it has been tough with us when it felt we strayed onto an undesirable path. We now need it to be equally demanding of our neighbor. We need the international community to hold Israel to its word when it says it desires the establishment of a viable Palestinian state. We need the world to take practical steps to keep the establishment of such a state possible. Wagging its finger at continued settlement activity is simply not enough. With the help and encouragement of this US Administration, we are off to a good start. However, neither we nor the Israelis can afford to wait another four or eight years. We will desperately need the immediate assistance and investment from the incoming administration if we are to make a success of the process begun at Annapolis. This is where the Palestinian-American community can be of great service. To members of this community, let me first say that I am privileged to have lived long enough in this country to appreciate its beauty and understand why you think this nation of immigrants became so great. You are an enormous but enormously underutilized source of strength to the cause of a just and durable peace. We need to work together to create that other state which, one day, you may wish to call home. We are facing many domestic difficulties and challenges, especially those related to the current state of separation. Do not give up on us. We have proposed concrete ideas the adoption of which is capable of reuniting Gaza and the West Bank. These include the formation of a national consensus, non-factional government in the run-up to presidential and legislative elections, and the utilization of Arab security assistance for a transitional period to help with the rehabilitation of our security services and with the provision of law and order in Gaza until our services are rehabilitated. National dialogue on the key political issues can then proceed, but then against the backdrop of a reunified country, in the hope of sorting out our political differences or at least forging a national consensus on how to manage these differences in a civilized, orderly, and non-violent manner. Just as you were not indifferent to the less-than-perfect way in which the PNA managed the affairs of the Palestinian people after Oslo, you cannot, I would submit, be indifferent to the risk of our country – our state-in-the-making – sliding towards backwardness, isolation, repression of freedom, gender inequality, and cultural and religious intolerance. For those who may have crossed that bridge to nowhere, to nothingness, indeed, destructive nothingness, I respectfully ask that you to reconsider. And so, my friends, we are at a crossroads. A lot is riding on the choices we all make. Outcomes are not ordained or inevitable. We must seek to draw the right lessons from our experiences of peace-making since Madrid. Now is not the time to ditch the solution concept which, with President www.reiner-bernstein.de 218 – Chronologie 2008

Bush’s 2002 speech, became a matter of explicit international consensus, namely, the vision of two states living side by side in peace and security. For abandoning that concept would be another escape to destructive nothingness. Instead, we should make adjustments. Since Oslo, the pendulum has swung too far away from what international law and justice prescribes, towards the diktat of practicality, towards what may be seen as acceptable to each of the parties to the conflict. This shift would not have been too problematic had it occurred in a context of parity of influence. However, with us, Palestinians, holding the shorter end of the stick, this disparity has necessarily meant an erosion in our position with each round of diplomacy that did not end with a solution. This structural defect has to be redressed. It is time for the pendulum to swing back in the direction of what international law and justice requires. Back in 1988, Palestinians made the historic and painful compromise that we felt was necessary to secure a solution to the conflict. As our Israeli neighbors think about what they consider to be painful compromises, it is my hope that they will devote equal time to reflecting on the promise that ending the occupation of all Arab territories holds: normalization not just with Arab countries, but with the 57 member states of the Islamic Conference who all endorsed the Arab Peace Initiative. That consideration will no doubt be aided by effective international engagement, with the US leading the way in close partnership with the rest of the community of nations, especially the other members of the Quartet, as well as Arab countries. To me, this is the way forward.

40 Vgl. die Eintragung am 25.09.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

41 Address by FM Livni at MFA Policy and Strategy Conference Jerusalem, 5 October 2008: Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen, Deputy Director General Yossi Gal, Director General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Aaron Abramovich, Deputy, Foreign Minister Majalli Whbee, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Informationof the Palestinian Authority Riyad al-Malki, Former Foreign Minister of Germany Mr. Joschka Fischer, and, of course, Foreign Minister of France, currently President of the European Union, my friend Bernard Kouchner, Members of Knesset of all parties who have come to evaluate the situation with us and to share their positions, foreign ambassadors serving in Israel, Israeli ambassadors serving abroad. This has, indeed, been a special week – a week in which we traditionally do our soul-searching and look ahead to what we want and what we would like the coming year to be like. An evaluation of the situation, by its very nature, is a type of soul-searching, but it is not enough. I do not view the process being conducted here as a kind of academic discussion but rather a first change that is required on the way to making the right decisions. The first change that is required, internally, within the state of Israel, is a change in the way decisions are made. No more shooting from the hip and attempting to address changing situations, but rather seeing the changes, the trends, what is happening in the region and around the world, and not just seeing the change in trends but rather incorporating them into the decision-making process. www.reiner-bernstein.de 219 – Chronologie 2008

This year the Foreign Ministry decided to rise above the ordinary course of events, to evaluate this situation in a serious, in-depth manner, both inside and beyond the Foreign Ministry, and also to hear what the world has to say about us, to hear what academia has to add – all of which is intended to be part of the decisions made by us, by the decision-makers in the State of Israel. And for that, I would like, first of all, to thank Director General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Aaron Abramovich for his ability to understand and create something that is the first event and the start of a legacy that will accompany not only the Foreign Ministry, but also the Israeli decision makers. This is the proper interaction between the professionals and the decision-makers. The role of leadership in the State of Israel is to create the vision that is meant to accompany us in making decisions. That is the writing that is supposed to be on the wall in the rooms where the decisions are made. But ultimately, we must derive the immediate decisions from the vision that is already written on the wall, from our worldview and also from a realistic evaluation of the situation which the professional bodies can provide for us, the decision makers and leaders of this country. We cannot observe from the sidelines. We cannot allow ourselves that luxury. We must also identify the trends, identify whether there are opportunities that we can utilize in our favor, and if the trends are such that they create a problem, we must act to change the trends. We must also understand that, in our decisions, we have the ability to change the trends and certainly to change the trends in the region. I am a big believer in activism. Passivism has a price. When we are passive and the State of Israel does not make a decision, the world does not stand still and wait for us to make our decisions. The processes continue. So I believe that time must be utilized to create decisions and advance processes, because time does not serve those who belong to the group to which Israel belongs by definition, according to its values, according to its essence and according to its vision – the group of the moderate and pragmatic elements in the region – as opposed to the extremists who are trying to change the processes, those who foster the extremist religious ideology that has nothing whatsoever to do with a national conflict and justified demands, but is based completely on hatred. I believe that promoting diplomatic processes is in the interest of the State of Israel and stagnancy does not serve it. I suggest to those who think otherwise not only that they criticize, but also that they propose an alternative process because, as I said, not doing anything carries a price. The vision of the State of Israel has been clear to me from the day of its inception and even before that as the national homeland of the Jewish people, a Jewish and democratic state in which these values are intertwined, a secure state in the land of Israel, a state that lives in peace with its neighbors. Of course, this vision has ramifications for our domestic decision making and also for our decisions on foreign policy. But Israel is not, nor can it be, a nation apart, ignoring what is happening around it because part of our existence, part of what we are, is our part in the international community, in the free world with which we share the same values. It is a changing world. A world in which, unfortunately, borders no longer stop such things as terrorism, a world in which countries sometimes display less and less responsibility, a world in which international organizations exploit democracy in order to overpower states from within, a world in which those organizations take advantage of open borders in order to enter and cause harm. These are some of the challenges with which we www.reiner-bernstein.de 220 – Chronologie 2008

must contend. Israel can contend with them, together with the international community. I would like to talk about three global challenges. The first, which is on our doorstep, is the economic challenge. When we talk about the lack of borders – on the problematic side we are talking about terrorism but on the positive side we are talking about globalization. Today, however, after globalization has benefited us and turned the world into a global village, what happens in various places around the world also impacts on what is happening domestically in our country, and in all countries individually. Here I am proud to say, first and foremost, that the Israeli economy is strong. It is an economy that, until now, despite extremely problematic processes that are occurring outside our borders, expresses our robustness. This is a country whose economy has also withstood wars and continued to grow. The future here will depend, among other things, on the conduct of the Israeli leadership. We must maintain economic stability. In order to do so, we must also maintain political stability. The rapid establishment of political stability is required, not for political reasons but actually in order to maintain economic stability and to enable us to contend with external challenges, economic and otherwise. The policy of the government, any government, must continue to be responsible. It cannot and must not be governed by a political situation. It cannot and must not be governed by coalition processes. It must continue to maintain the frameworks and continue to convey the message to the Israeli public that there is a responsible government here which will maintain stability, a government that rises above the immediate political needs of some of the parties with which I am now conducting coalition negotiations. Every citizen must know that he need not contend alone with his concerns about what is happening outside, which he reads about in the newspapers, but rather that there is a responsible system here that understands and prepares, and that even if it believes in the free market, knows that sometimes, when the market fails, intervention is necessary. Alongside the economy, we also have political challenges and security challenges that are common to Israel and to the free world. Part of the concept that we are talking about here, and part of the political vision, is the ability to identify the common interests of Israel and its neighbors, together with the international community, and to translate this into action. The more we anticipate and have shared knowledge of the challenges that face us, the less surprised we will be and the more we will know how to cope with them together. Iran is not just a problem for Israel, it is not just a problem for the region. It is not just a problem for its neighbors – though it is a problem for its neighbors, for the region and for Israel – but it is also an international problem and it must be handled at the international level. It has absolutely nothing to do with the Israeli-Arab conflict, except for one fact – Iranian ideology and leadership will try to prevent us from resolving the conflict through support of terrorism, whether it is support of Hizbullah in Lebanon or support of Hamas in the Gaza Strip. The world must know that in a joint war against Iran, even if we win, and I hope and believe that we can, resolving the Israeli-Palestinian, Israeli-Arab conflict – this ideology will not change. This ideology exists, it does not depend on what we do here, so we must address it as such. We must act together. We cannot satisfy it. We must fight it. I know that, today, there is a common understanding in the world about the threat and about the ways that we must act to stop this threat. www.reiner-bernstein.de 221 – Chronologie 2008

Unfortunately, there is still not a sufficiently firm translation into action by all the countries that understand the threat. It is important for the world leadership to understand that only by combining the knowledge that all the options are on the table with the effective use of the political and economic sanctions that are in place today, can we obviate the future use of force and lead to an Iranian decision in time. But for that, it is not enough to understand the threat, it is not enough to talk about it, it is not enough to confer, it is not enough to condemn the intolerable and unacceptable words of Iran's leaders, which cannot continue to be heard in the United Nations that was established, after the Second World War under the banner of "never again". All this is important and necessary, it is a necessary condition, but it is not sufficient. All these understandings must be translated now and must be sufficiently effective, so that the difficult decision will not rest on our desks but rather on the desk of the Iranian leadership. Another mutual interest of Israel and the international community is, of course, the peace process in the region. I hope that we have passed the stage in which Israel must still prove that we want to achieve peace with all our neighbors. Israel wants to achieve peace with all its neighbors, including the Palestinians, the Syrians and the Lebanese. Israel wants to achieve peace and normalization with all the Arab countries. This desire exists; we have proven it, not just by entering into the processes but also by leaving Gaza. I want to clarify that, at least from my standpoint, my attitude towards our neighbors is not based on hatred, or on anger, or on frustration, or on the inability to speak, but rather on understanding, among other things, of the processes that are occurring in the region, on an understanding of the reality, on an understanding of the struggle that must be waged between the pragmatic and the extremist elements. It is not a matter of overcoming emotions; the real matter is not just to understand for ourselves, the citizens and leaders of Israel what concessions are required. We have one more responsibility, and that is to conduct the process correctly. The State of Israel dreams of peace, but our path leads us through a very complex and complicated reality. In these processes, we must act on both these levels. I would also like the international community to be involved, not just in understanding the situation, but also in the correct way to advance these processes. We are at various stages of the processes, which must continue. I believe that the continuation of these processes serves, first and foremost, the national and security interests of the State of Israel, and I believe that it also represents international interests. We must continue to conduct them, and as long as the manner in which we conduct them represents the interests of Israel, which I believe are also international interests and Palestinian interests and the interests of Syria and Lebanon and the entire Arab world. But on the way, we must also change the reality, part of which is now changing. What is now happening on the Palestinian side, step by step, is only part of the required change in reality. A change in reality is required, not as a kind of excuse for why we cannot achieve a settlement but precisely because I believe that peace is not just a dream, it is not just a word, it is not just a piece of paper, but rather peace must change the future reality. After we have identified the processes in the region, after we have finally understood that the Israeli- Palestinian conflict is not the reason for extremism, though it perhaps makes it more difficult for us to achieve a solution, we must act on two levels: both promote the peace process with the pragmatic and moderate elements and continue to fight extremism. www.reiner-bernstein.de 222 – Chronologie 2008

We cannot achieve a genuine peace that changes the reality if we act only on one level. It is not enough to talk peace with one side or to strike at the other side. We must deal with both the extremists and the pragmatists. And the pragmatists, too, our partners in the processes, must insist on their positions within their own public. The very existence of a peace process is not sufficient if it is not translated in Palestinian society or any other society into an understanding that there is no other choice, and that terrorism and force cannot achieve any kind of political outcome. Neither can weakness, which sometimes exists on the pragmatic, moderate side, serve as an excuse to give in to terrorist demands. Ladies and gentlemen, the extremists do not need that excuse. Terrorism does not need excuses. It has no justifiable reason and terrorism is terrorism is terrorism, and therefore we must act on these two levels. These are not conditions meant to create another obstacle on the path to peace, but rather the conditions that are required so that peace will not end with a piece of paper and that will only create disappointment in the future, because we cannot allow ourselves another disappointment in the future. We must work together on both levels, as we agreed at Annapolis. And Annapolis will continue. On the one hand, we will strive to achieve an agreement that will constitute the end of the conflict and, simultaneously, we will continue to work to change the reality so that when an agreement is finally reached, we will know that we have ended the conflict and that the reality has changed. The Palestinian foreign minister addressed this conference, and he spoke a great deal about the negotiations. These negotiations must continue as determined in Annapolis, out of the desire and the belief that we can achieve an end to the conflict and, concomitantly, any understanding that we achieve is dependent on the complete and full implementation of a change on the ground – implementation of the Roadmap, the war against terrorism, everything that is necessary. But I would like to return to the agreements that we reached at the beginning of the negotiations with the Palestinians. The first thing that we agreed on was that nothing was agreed until everything would be agreed. We agreed that the negotiations would be conducted in the negotiating rooms and not through newspaper headlines, and that is how the negotiations must continue. We agreed that we would continue to negotiate until we reached a situation in which the two sides are satisfied that each of the parties has achieved what it needs. I believe that an agreement can be achieved only if both parties feel that it is a deal in which each one of them can go to their people and say, "Yes, I made concessions on some things, but we also safeguarded the vital national interests of each of the two nations." We will continue to negotiate until the understandings are sufficiently detailed and provide an answer to the interests of each of the nations. I want to say now, when we are at the end of the term of office of the Israeli government and the American administration, when the Hebrew year has just ended and the Gregorian year will be ending in another few months: Let us not allow random dates or political changes to stand in our way. Let us not halt a process of indescribable importance or, alternatively, be led to places that will not conclude the process but only to incorrect processes. This temptation exists and, believe me, no one wants peace more than the citizens of the State of Israel. But if we do not conduct it correctly, if we leave the negotiating rooms, look at the calendar or think that a government is changing or an administration is changing and think that now we must achieve something partial, something that does not provide a response to the genuine demands of both the Palestinians and the Israelis, www.reiner-bernstein.de 223 – Chronologie 2008

we will achieve a paper that will remain afterwards as a paper and a disappointment. That would be a mistake that we cannot allow ourselves – neither the Israelis nor the Palestinians nor the entire world. This is why we told the world at Annapolis and since then we reiterate in our talks, that these are bilateral negotiations, both parties want to conduct them. We want to achieve agreements that will bring about an end to the conflict, we want to change the reality. We must ignore the elements that are extrinsic to the process itself, because otherwise we will not genuinely succeed in creating the result that is also the correct result for both peoples. Bernard, you said that I usually begin the dialogues with what we do not agree on. So then I thought that maybe now we can actually begin with what pertains to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – the Palestinian Foreign Minister is also here – we can begin with what we do agree on, or, alternatively, what we should agree on. Our guiding principle is, of course, Israel's vision of two nation states. I think that we can agree on that. Israel was established as the national homeland for the Jewish people and, from the moment of its inception, called to the entire Jewish people to come here, absorbed all the refugees who arrived from Europe after the Holocaust, absorbed the refugees who were forced to leave the Arab countries, and since then has viewed immigrant absorption as a substantive part of the raison d'etre of the State of Israel. And just as we realized our national dream and Israel is a state we can be proud of, we are now conducting negotiations out of the understanding that the Palestinians also want to realize this dream, which the UN decided upon in 1947 and which has still not been realized. Provided that the concept is to end the conflict by establishing two nation states, and that the establishment of the Palestinian state will constitute the full and complete national solution for the Palestinian people. I believe in this. But only if you not only believe in it, but also act on it and say that the establishment of the Palestinian state is the full and complete solution for your people – only then will we all be able to realize the common dream upon which I am sure we all agree: two nation states each of which provides the solution for its people. Absolutely elementary. And just as you, the Palestinians, want to determine the borders of the Palestinian state, we are working to ensure that your borders will also be our borders, and accepted by both sides. And as I believe and hope that you do not want to live in a state that is all terrorism and extremist hatred, because we are talking about your lives and the lives of your children, we want to know what the nature of that Palestinian state will be. Unfortunately, we must confront reality, and the very fact of the establishment of a state does not ensure peace. We are determined and we are conducting a process to achieve the establishment of a state with which we will be able to live in peace. Let us ensure together the nature of the future state, for your good and for our good. We have the same interests. The establishment of a terrorist state or the establishment of a backward state, or the establishment of a state that is based entirely on extremist Islamic ideology which does not accept the existence of the State of Israel, certainly cannot be the dream shared by the entire international community because that is not the dream of two countries that exist side by side in peace. And therefore ladies and gentlemen, it is not enough to understand and to be partners in that vision, and it is not enough for Israel to convince, and I hope that we have convinced the international community, that we are not seeking to control the lives of the Palestinians; but rather we are seeking to www.reiner-bernstein.de 224 – Chronologie 2008

live our own lives. We want you to be partners in the understandings that are the basis for any stable peace settlement between us and the Palestinians. If you are with us in this understanding, and I think that I have now expressed something with which the entire world must agree, only then will we really be able to translate this, as I am trying to do today in the negotiating rooms, not only onto the paper of the peace agreement, but also to genuinely change the reality and end the conflict. Because we cannot just throw a key to the other side and hope for the best. We are full of hope, but we must also ensure that the other side has an effective government and that it will be a government that accepts the Quartet conditions as determined by the international community – a government that recognizes Israel, that is fighting terrorism. The situation in Gaza is not encouraging and the situation in Gaza is not just a problem for Israel. Gaza is now controlled by Hamas which is still holding Gilad Shalit, but this is a shared problem and the way to resolve the problem is not just by entering the negotiating room with the moderates who share our vision of two states. I look at the international community and hope that today, more than ever, the world understands not only that we have a common vision, but also the right way to implement that vision. Only then we will really be able to translate our vision into reality. Here the Arab world has a pivotal role to play. We have spoken about sides, about processes, about the region, about moderates, about extremists. Israel does not need to choose sides. Israel, by its very nature, belongs to the moderate and pragmatic world according to our values. But every state, every part of the world that surrounds us in the Middle East, must choose a side not only in words but also in deeds: by supporting any agreement that we, Israel and the Palestinians, achieve; by supporting the moderates, by continuing to delegitimize the extremists. Only in that way will we truly be able not only to analyze the trends in the region, but also to impact on them. Israel recognizes its responsibility for the future of the Middle East. We, the Israeli leaders, recognize our responsibility for the future of coming generations here in Israel and in the region, and we can create the partnership that will bring about the change in reality. Unfortunately, in the short period of time in which we are all speaking we have been dealing mainly with the Israeli-Arab conflict and, in closing, I would like to say, in a few words, that Israel is far more than the conflict. It saddens me that when people speak of Israel it is always perceived through the lens of the conflict and sometimes that lens is warped, and sometimes the image is what is portrayed in the picture of the Israeli soldier and the Palestinian child. People do not see what we want to achieve, they do not understand our desire to achieve peace, they do not understand our domestic needs. They do not know what is obvious to us – that Israel is, indeed, a marvelous creation that is celebrating 60 years under almost impossible conditions, with an amazing economy, with amazing human resources of which it is proud. Israel wants to be a partner not only in changes in the Middle East or in the peace process or in battling the challenges that face us at the immediate political and security levels, but also in contending alongside the rest of the world with processes unrelated to the region – whether this involves climatic changes, technological changes or the food crisis. We are part of the international community. Israel wants, and will continue to contribute in these aspects. Israel, first and foremost, is a state which prides itself on its values. Israel is a Jewish democratic state, and those values are intertwined. They are values that we are proud of and with that www.reiner-bernstein.de 225 – Chronologie 2008

understanding I would like every citizen of Israel, and also the citizens of the free world, to begin the coming year. Thank you very much.

42 Ilana Curiel: Olmert: Israel’s future does not lie in West Bank, in „ynetnews“ 30.09.2008. Zu den konfligierenden Interessen zwischen Olmert und Abbas s. Menachem Klein: Israel-Palestine from Border Struggle to Ethnic Conflict. London 2010, S. 23 f.

43 Nachum Barnea and Shimon Schiffer: „Ich habe mich geirrt. Ich werde mich nicht dafür rechtfertigen, was ich 35 Jahre lang getan habe.” Interview mit Ehud Olmert, in Wochenendbeilage von „Yediot Achronot” 29.09.2009, S. 3-9 (englische Auszüge): “... We have an opportunity that is limited in time—a time so short as to cause terrible distress—in which we may be able to take a historical step in our relations with the Palestinians and a historical step in our relations with the Syrians. In both cases, the decision we have to make is a decision that we have been refusing for 40 years to look at open-eyed. “We face the need to decide, but are not willing to tell ourselves, yes, this is what we have to do. We have to reach an agreement with the Palestinians, the meaning of which is that in practice we will withdraw from almost all the territories, if not all the territories. We will leave a percentage of these territories in our hands, but will have to give the Palestinians a similar percentage, because without that there will be no peace." Including in Jerusalem? “Including in Jerusalem,” said Olmert, “with special arrangements that I can envision on the topic of the Temple Mount and the sacred and historical sites. Whoever talks seriously about wanting security in Jerusalem and not wanting tractors and bulldozers to crush the legs of his best friends, as happened to a close friend of mine (Jerusalem attorney Shuki Kramer), who lost a leg because he was run over by a terrorist on a bulldozer, has to give up parts of Jerusalem. Whoever wants to hold on to all of the city’s territory will have to bring 270,000 Arabs inside the fences of sovereign Israel. It won’t work. A decision has to be made. This decision is difficult, terrible, a decision that contradicts our natural instincts, our innermost desires, our collective memories, the prayers of the Jewish people for 2,000 years. “I am the first who wanted to enforce Israeli sovereignty on the entire city. I admit it. I am not trying to justify retroactively what I did for 35 years. For a large portion of these years, I was unwilling to look at reality in all its depth." Do you think, we asked, that had you continued in your post you could have reached agreements? "I think that we are very close to reaching agreements…I am not talking in terms of a terrible war, I am talking in terms of priorities. When there is no peace, the chances of war are always greater. As a person who sits on this seat, you have to ask yourself where you direct your efforts, do you direct the effort at making peace, or at constantly becoming stronger, stronger, and stronger in order to win the war. And I say, we are strong enough as we are. The strength we have today is great, and it is sufficient to face any threat. Now we have to see how we use this infrastructure of force in order to build peace and not to win a war… We know full well that my governmental term is short, but the governmental term of others is also short. We don’t know, for example, what will happen in the Palestinian Authority after January 9, 2009. It may be that by some manipulation, which I hope will be successful, Abu Mazen will remain in www.reiner-bernstein.de 226 – Chronologie 2008

power. But we believe that there is a very great danger that there will be a bloody clash, which will thwart any possibility of continuing negotiations and perhaps will force us to be involved in the confrontation, with bloodshed, with everything that could happen as a result. The timetable I am talking about is not my personal affair: I resigned, and I hope that Tzipi will succeed in forming a government as quickly as possible. The question is what will happen in the meantime in our immediate surroundings, with the partners that we can now talk to—and I am not talking only about the Palestinians. Arik Sharon spoke about painful prices, and refused to detail them. I say, there is no choice but to elaborate. In the end, we will have to withdraw from the lion’s share of the territories, and for the territories we leave in our hands, we will have to give compensation in the form of territories within the State of Israel at a ratio that is more or less 1:1. What I am saying to you now has not been said by any Israeli leader before me. The time has come to say these things. The time has come to put them on the table. I read the words spoken by our retired generals, and I say, how is it possible that they have not learned anything and have not forgotten anything. Someone once said to me, a very senior official in the Israeli administration, they are still living in the War of Independence or the Sinai campaign. With them, it is all about tanks and land and controlling territories and controlled territories and this hilltop and that hilltop. All these things are worthless… The real threat that we face today in the north, the south and the east is missiles and rockets. We will have to give a response to them, but we will not reach a response by bargaining over 200 meters. The goal is to try to reach for the first time the delineation of an exact border line between us and the Palestinians, where the whole world—the United States, the UN, Europe—will say, these are the borders of the State of Israel, we recognize them, we anchor them in formal resolutions of international institutions. These are Israel’s borders, and these are the recognized borders of the Palestinian state. “It is possible that the implementation of the agreements will take time. It may take many more efforts to ensure that there will be no terrorism from there and no threats. We all understand this. But first let’s reach agreements. Why the fear? Whom are we afraid of? Who thinks seriously that if we sit on another hilltop, on another hundred meters, that this is what will make the difference for the State of Israel’s basic security? We can go inside another two kilometers and the range of the rockets will be another 10 kilometers. As is happening in Gaza, which we evacuated down to the last meters, and the threat still exists. I am not saying this to say that we erred in leaving Gaza. It is good that we left Gaza. I reject the self-flagellation of all the politicians who say that we should have stayed there, just as I reject the view posed by those who say, we should make a renewed assault on Gaza and take control of it. The prices we will pay for this matter are not worth any benefit that we will derive. Is the fact that an arrangement has not already been reached between us and the Palestinians a result of Israel’s insistence? No. Let there be no doubts on this score. Unfortunately, the Palestinians do not have the necessary courage, the power, the inner determination, the will and the enthusiasm. If we do not reach an arrangement, I will by no means be willing for the blame to be cast on Israel. It will be cast, first and foremost, on the other side… www.reiner-bernstein.de 227 – Chronologie 2008

Should I tell you that reaching peace is easy? I agree with you that it is difficult. Should I say that there are complexities? Without a doubt. That there are sensitivities? Undoubtedly. Should I tell you that there are uncertainties? There are uncertainties. Should I say that there are things that could go wrong? There is no doubt that things could go wrong. I want to learn from my own mistakes. I did not see it then, I am not trying to justify myself. Exactly 30 years ago, when Menahem Begin came back from Camp David, I spoke against and I voted against. I admit it, I am not hiding it, I am not obfuscating on the matter. What was the greatness of Menahem Begin, which is not spoken about? Menahem Begin sent Dayan to meet with Tuhami in Morocco, and before the negotiations started, before he even met with Sadat, before he knew whether Sadat would smile one way or the other, whether he would say one thing to him or the other, Dayan told Tuhami on Begin’s behalf, we are willing to withdraw from all of Sinai. He started from the end. He first of all told him, I am willing to withdraw from all of Sinai. Now let’s negotiate.“

44 Walid Salem and Nabil Shalabi: The Two-State Solution: Israel and Palestine. About the Need for a New Approach for the Alternatives. Jerusalem 2012.

45 Menachem Klein: The Shift. Israel-Palestine fromBroder Struggle to Ethnic Conflict. London 2010, S. 24, zitiert Aluf Benn: Olmert’s Plan for Peace, in „Haaretz“ 17.12.2009, anders als Benn selbst. Dieser schrieb: Olmert wanted to annex 6.3 percent of the West Bank to Israel, areas that are home to 75 percent of the Jewish population of the territories. His proposal would have also involved evacuation of dozens of settlements in the Jordan Valley, in the eastern Samarian hills and in the Hebron region. In return for the annexation to Israel of Ma'aleh Adumim, the Gush Etzion bloc of settlements, Ariel, Beit Aryeh and settlements adjacent to Jerusalem, Olmert proposed the transfer of territory to the Palestinians equivalent to 5.8 percent of the area of the West Bank as well as a safe- passage route from Hebron to the Gaza Strip via a highway that would remain part of the sovereign territory of Israel but where there would be no Israeli presence.“

46 US Defense Security Cooperation Agency, 30 September 2008: WASHINGTON–On September 26, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Israel of F- 35 Joint Strike Fighter Aircraft as well as associated equipment and services. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $15.2 billion. The Government of Israel has requested a possible sale of an initial 25 F- 35 Joint Strike Fighter Conventional Take-Off and Landing (CTOL) aircraft with an option to purchase at a later date an additional 50 F-35 CTOL or Short Take-Off and Vertical Landing (STOVL) aircraft. All aircraft will be configured with either the Pratt and Whitney F-135 engines or General Electric-Rolls Royce F-136 engines. Other aircraft equipment includes: Electronic Warfare Systems; Command, Control, Communication, Computers and Intelligence/ Communication, Navigational and Identification (C4I/CNI); Autonomic Logistics Global Support System (ALGS); Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS); Flight Mission Trainer; Weapons Employment Capability, and other Subsystems, features, and Capabilities; F-35 unique infrared flares; unique systems or sovereign requirements; reprogramming center, www.reiner-bernstein.de 228 – Chronologie 2008

Hardware/Software In-the-Loop Laboratory Capability; External Fuel Tanks; and F-35 Performance Based Logistics. Also includes: software development/ integration, flight test instrumentation, aircraft ferry and tanker support, support equipment, tools and test equipment, spares and repair parts, personnel training and training equipment, publications and technical documents, U.S. Government and contractor engineering and logistics personnel services, and other related elements of logistics and program support. The estimated cost is $15.2 billion. Israel's strategic position makes it vital to the United States' interests throughout the Middle East. Our policy has been to promote Middle East peace, support Israeli commitment to peace with other regional Arab countries, enhance regional stability, and promote Israeli readiness and self-sufficiency. It is vital to the U.S. national interest to assist Israel to develop and maintain a strong and ready self-defense capability. This proposed sale is consistent with those objectives. Israel needs these aircraft to augment its present operational inventory and to enhance its air-to-air and air-to-ground self-defense capability. Israel will have no difficulty absorbing these aircraft into its armed forces. The proposed sale will not affect the basic military balance in the region. Implementation of this proposed sale will require multiple trips to Israel involving U.S. Government and contractor representatives for technical reviews/support, program management, and training over a period of 15 years. U.S. contractor representatives will be required in Israel to conduct Contractor Engineering Technical Services (CETS) and Autonomic Logistics and Global Support (ALGS) for after-aircraft delivery. The prime contractors will be: – Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, Fort Worth, Texas – Pratt & Whitney Military Engines, East Hartford, Connecticut – General Electric/Fighter Engine Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. There are no known offset agreements proposed in connection with this potential sale. There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale. This notice of a potential sale is required by law; it does not mean that the sale has been concluded.

47 Vgl. die Eintragung am 25.09.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

48 Quartet Statement, New York, 26 September 2008: Representatives of the Quartet – U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union Javier Solana, European Commissioner for External Relations Benita Ferrero-Waldner and French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner – met today in New York to discuss the situation in the Middle East. They were joined by Quartet Representative Tony Blair. The Quartet reaffirmed its support for the bilateral and comprehensive Israeli-Palestinian negotiations and commended the parties for their serious and continuous efforts since the Annapolis Conference. The Quartet recognized that a meaningful and results-oriented process is underway and called upon the parties to continue to make every effort to conclude an agreement before the end of 2008. It noted the significance of this process and the importance of confidentiality in order to preserve its integrity. The Quartet underlined its commitment to the irreversibility of the negotiations; to the creation of an independent, democratic and viable Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, living in peace and security www.reiner-bernstein.de 229 – Chronologie 2008

alongside Israel; and to an end to the conflict. The Quartet expressed its desire to see the continuation of the solid negotiating structure, involving substantive discussions on all issues, including core issues without exception, in order to ensure the fulfillment of the Annapolis goals. The Quartet reiterated its previous call for all Palestinians to commit themselves to non-violence, recognition of Israel, and acceptance of previous agreements and obligations. Restoring Palestinian unity based on the PLO commitments would be an important factor in this process.

The Quartet emphasized the need for a renewed focus on improvements in the situation on the ground and stated that visible and tangible progress must accompany the negotiations. The Quartet commended the Palestinian Authority for the encouraging results of its efforts to reform the security sector, to confront militias and terrorism, and to enforce the rule of law in areas subject to its security control. The Quartet commended recent measures by the Israeli government to lift restrictions on access and movement and encouraged further steps to ease conditions for Palestinian civilian life and the economy. The Quartet called on the parties to re-double their cooperative efforts on security to ensure that both Israelis and Palestinians live in peace and safety. In particular, the Quartet urged the parties to continue cooperation in order to expand the success observed in Jenin to other major centers in the West Bank and called on the international community, including regional partners, to support these efforts with targeted and coordinated assistance and through the continued efforts of Quartet Representative Blair. The Quartet called for speedy implementation of the outcome of the Berlin conference and invited all donors to fulfill the pledges made at the Paris conference in line with the Palestinian Reform and Development Plan. It welcomed the September 22 statement of the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee and recalled the importance of equitable burden-sharing.

The Quartet discussed the status of the parties’ obligations under the Roadmap as an integral part of Annapolis follow-up. The Quartet expressed deep concern about increasing settlement activity, which has a damaging impact on the negotiating environment and is an impediment to economic recovery, and called on Israel to freeze all settlement activity, including natural growth, and to dismantle outposts erected since March 2001. In this regard, the Quartet reiterated that the parties must avoid actions that undermine confidence and could prejudice the outcome of the negotiations. Quartet Principals condemned the recent rise in settler violence against Palestinian civilians, urging the enforcement of the rule of law without discrimination or exception. The Quartet also condemned acts of terrorism against Israelis, including any rocket attacks emanating from the Palestinian territories, and stressed the need for further Palestinian efforts to fight terrorism and dismantle the infrastructure of terror, as well as foster an atmosphere of tolerance.

The Quartet commended Egypt for its endeavor to overcome Palestinian divisions and to reunite Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza under the legitimate Palestinian Authority. The Quartet welcomed the continuing calm between Gaza and southern Israel, which has largely persisted for over three months and expressed its hope that this calm will result in further relief for the civilian population of Gaza, including the regular opening of the crossings for both humanitarian and commercial flows, and sustained peace on Israel’s southern border. The Quartet stated its expectation that www.reiner-bernstein.de 230 – Chronologie 2008

movement of persons and goods will be normalized in the coming months, as foreseen in the Agreement on Movement and Access, and expressed its strong support for the immediate resumption of stalled UN and other donor projects in Gaza. This will facilitate economic activity, reduce dependence on humanitarian assistance, and restore links between Gaza and the West Bank. The Quartet welcomed the offer by the EU to resume its monitoring mission at the Rafah crossing point.The Quartet called for the immediate and unconditional release of Israeli Corporal Gilad Shalit.

The Quartet welcomed efforts toward comprehensive regional peace and stability, including Turkey’s facilitation of indirect Israeli-Syrian negotiations. It expressed hope for an intensification of these talks with the goal of achieving peace in accordance with the Madrid terms of reference.The Quartet noted the importance of the Arab Peace Initiative as a major element in moving the process forward and re-affirmed its support for a just, lasting, and comprehensive peace in the Middle East based on U.N. Security Council Resolutions 242, 338, 1397, and 1515.

The Quartet expressed its intention to work closely with the parties in the important period ahead. The Quartet agreed that the spring of 2009 could be an appropriate time for an international meeting in Moscow.

The Quartet noted with appreciation the parties’ suggestion to brief the Quartet on their ongoing negotiation process, with due regard for the confidential and bilateral nature of the discussions. The Quartet expressed its interest in coordinating such a meeting for a mutually accepted time.

49 Vgl. die Eintragung am 25.02.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

50 Interview mit Ari Shavit in „Haaretz”-Online 08.03.2008.

51 PRESIDENT OF ISRAEL SPOKESPERSON'S OFFICE, September 22, 2008: Announcement of the President of the State following the round of consultations: Good evening, With the power vested in me by the Basic Law: The Government, and after having consulted with all of the factions of the Knesset, I have decided to bestow the task of forming the next government on Knesset Member Tzipi Livni. Knesset Member Tzipi Livni has agreed to take this task upon herself. Since the resignation of the Prime Minister, I have held conversations with all 13 factions of the Knesset, and I have asked to hear their stances. In these meetings I came to recognize the desire of all of the factions to bring, as quickly as possible, stability and leadership, and to allow the government that will arise to confront the challenges that stand before the state. I would like to note with great appreciation the respectful manner in which the representatives of the delegations honestly and clearly presented their recommendations, each one according to his perspective. This was proof that it is possible to hold public deliberations while maintaining a respectful and statesmanlike demeanor. According to the law I am obligated to bestow the responsibility for forming the government on a member of the Knesset. After consulting with the delegations, it has become apparent that among the Knesset members, one candidate has been recommended to me. Therefore I have decided to www.reiner-bernstein.de 231 – Chronologie 2008

bestow this task on Knesset Member Tzipi Livni. A portion of the factions of the Knesset have called for early elections and there were some who refrained from suggesting a candidate. Approximately an hour ago, I spoke with Ms. Tzipi Livni and she has made clear to me her awareness of the heavy responsibility with which she has been charged. I wish her the best of luck and I hope that this task will be quickly accomplished, and the Israeli democracy will prove once again its vitality. Happy New Year to all the citizens of the State of Israel.

52 Address by the President of the State of Israel, Shimon Peres at the United Nations General Assembly, 23 September 2008: Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen, Over Sixty years have passed since the United Nations General Assembly voted on the historic resolution that would have put an end to the Arab- Israeli conflict. Resolution 181 called for the establishment of a Jewish and an Arab state. Its title was: "Plan of Partition with Economic Union". It envisioned two states for two peoples, each fulfilling a distinct national aspiration. The Jewish people adopted the resolution and established the State of Israel. The Arabs rejected it and led to war. What happened in the ensuing years is much different from the resolution's original intent. While much has changed, the ironies of history summon similar circumstances today. Today, again, we are the middle of the lake. There is no sense in rowing back. Continuing forward will show how near we are to the shore of peace. Mr. President, A year prior to Israel's declaration of statehood, its first Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion, called me, a young man from a Kibbutz, to serve in our national defense. Since then, I participated in Israel's dynamic realities: the building of security, striving for peace. So, I need no book to learn the history. I witnessed its miraculous unfolding.We went through seven wars. All have paid heavily. Tears still flow down the faces of bereaving mothers. Remembrance Days fill the air with silent prayers of widowed families who lost young boys and girls in battle. They are, today, at the same age, but lifeless. Israel turned military victories to a peace process, knowing that the cost of life renders imperfect peace superior to perfect victories. We have also achieved two peace agreements. The first with the largest Arab country, Egypt. The second with the Hashemite kingdom of Jordan. All the land, water, and natural resources that fell in our hands through war, were repatriated after peace was signed. Our countries can now offer remedies to other disputed areas. But for peace, the call in our region is to repair the damaged environment and wounded land leading to poverty. If we shall not overcome the desert, the thirst, the pollution – they will overcome us. Joint ventures can meet this call. Nature does not carry a national passport. With the Palestinians, we negotiate full peace. Both parties agreed to building a Palestinian State side by side with Israel, living in peace, security and respect. We tried to conclude the negotiations this year. It will take longer. But, I believe it can be accomplished within the next year. We agreed to progress in spite of possible changes that may take place in the leadership. Gaps have been narrowed through negotiations. Particularly the territorial ones. But, peace is not just a matter of territorial compromise. www.reiner-bernstein.de 232 – Chronologie 2008

Rogue politics reject peace even where territorial dispute was resolved. In Lebanon, we implemented resolution 425. Yet Hezbollah paralyzed the country and cut the road to peace. From Gaza, we withdrew completely and dismantled our settlements. Hamas responded with a bloody takeover and turned the strip into a basis of rocket fire. These militants carry no positive alternative – but the agonies of Jobe. They added kidnapping to bombings, bringing strife for innocent families. From this important stage, I call for the immediate release of Gilad Shalit. The son of Aviva and Noam. A peace-loving family. This honored assembly should make his release top of its agenda. Holding a hostage in Gaza determines its isolation and further deterioration. Mr. President, At the center of this violence and fanaticism stands Iran. It built a danger to the entire world. Its quest for religious hegemony and regional dominance divides the Middle East and holds back chances for peace, while undermining human rights. Iranian support for Hezbollah divided Lebanon. Its support for Hamas split the Palestinians and postpones the establishment of the Palestinian State. Yesterday, on this very stage, the Iranian leader renewed the darkest anti- Semitic libel – the protocols of the elders of Zion. An attempt to bring to life one of the ugliest plots of history. Their despicable denial of the holocaust is a mockery of indisputable evidence, a cynical offense to survivors of the horror. Contradictory to the resolutions adopted by this assembly. Iran continues to develop enriched uranium and long range missiles. They introduce a religion of fear, opposing the call of the lord in respect of life. The Iranian people are not our enemies. Their fanatic leadership is their problem and the world's concern. Their leader is a danger to his people, the region and the world. He is a disgrace to the ancient Iranian people. He is a disgrace to the values of Islam. He is a disgrace to this very house, the United Nations, its basic principles and values. His appearance here is already shame. The Jewish People have known, throughout history, to stand firm at the face of evil. Alongside the enlightened humanity we shall know to enable good and freedom to prevail. Tehran combines long-range missiles and short-range minds. It is pregnant with tragedies. The General assembly and the Security Council bear responsibility to prevent agonies before they take place. Israel has shown that democracies can defend themselves. We do not intend to change. Terrorism did not solve a single problem. It never has, and never will. They will make the world ungovernable. If small groups of violent killers are allowed to threaten innocent masses, the world will be without order or security. A hopeless battleground. The free world must unite to combat it. Israel, on its part, shall continue to seek peace. We suggest immediate peace with Lebanon. Israeli prime ministers indicated to Syria that for peace, we are ready to explore a comprehensive compromise. In order to gain trust, and save time, we have suggested face-to-face meetings with President Assad: "Follow the successful example set by President Sadat and King Hussein". We still await an answer. I know there is a growing concern that peace is far away. My life-long experience provides me with a different point of view. True, I have seen stagnation and regression in our journey. But, today, I can identify a road leading to the right direction. In addition to the peace agreements, a series of summits took place – Madrid, Oslo, Wye, Camp David, Sharm and Annapolis. Their accumulated sum encourages a clear direction. In fact, Israelis and Arabs are marching www.reiner-bernstein.de 233 – Chronologie 2008

towards peace. After a long internal debate, Israel accepted the two state solution. The Arabs replaced the three NOs of Khartoum (no peace, no negotiation, no recognition) with a peace initiative, inaugurated by King Abdullah Abdul Aziz Al Saud. I call upon the king to further his initiative; it may become an invitation for comprehensive peace, one to convert battlegrounds to common grounds. I invite, respectfully, all leaders to come and discuss peace in Jerusalem, which is holy all of us. Where we all pray to the same lord, as offspring of the same father. Israel shall gladly accept an Arab invitation at a designated venue where a meaningful dialogue may take place. Mr. President, We are facing a serious economic crisis. Maybe it has happened because we are rich and light with funds and poor and heavy with ideas. While we live in an era where science, not land, is the basis of economy. Science does not stop at borders. Is not disturbed by distance. Wisdom is not conquerable by armies. Knowledge diminishes discrimination because it operates through good will and transcends race, nationality and gender. The Global dangers unite and divide us at the same time. The dangers are the deterioration of environment. The shortage of water. The lack of renewable energy. The spread of terrorism and the increased poverty. Divisions of the free world will increase them. Unity offers the potential of alternatives. It will direct global investments to new areas and demanding challenges like health, security, education and environment. The future is not in the hands of oil or gold. Intellectual assets, new inventions and superior education hold the key to our future. In our region, border areas can become open economic zones. Enabling free movement of people, commodities and ideas. They may encourage tourism and build High Tech incubators. They will cultivate advanced agriculture. Economic zones will provide a million jobs and produce billions of cubic meters of desalinated water. We started to do so. The first steps are promising. The 21st century calls for pioneers. It is an opportunity to provide our children with peace and knowledge. Strength and friendship. It is their right. It is our moral obligation. Mr. President, The Jewish people are celebrating a new year. I would like to end with a quote from Rabbi Nachman of Breslav: "May it be thy will to remove war and bloodshed from the world and perpetuate the wonders and greatness of peace. All the inhabitants of the world shall recognize and know the truth: that we have not been placed on this earth to wage war and not for hatred or bloodshed. " Amen. Shana Tova. Thank you, Mr. President

53 Address by Mr. Aaron Abramovich, Director-General of the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs to the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee on Israeli Measures to Assist the Palestinian Authority, New York, 22 September 2008: The host of this meeting, Secretary General Ban, Distinguished Chairman, Prime Minister Fayad, Quartet Envoy Tony Blair, Colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, First of all let me share with you the very best wishes of Israel's foreign minister Tzipi Livni for a successful meeting, and her apologies for not being able to be present due to current political events in Israel. Mr. Chairman, www.reiner-bernstein.de 234 – Chronologie 2008

The people gathered here share a common interest. We all seek the establishment of responsible, functioning and vibrant Palestinian state that can be the homeland of the Palestinian people, and a peaceful neighbor to Israel. This is a vision shared by Israel, embraced in the Road Map and charted in the process we launched last year at Annapolis. This vision has always comprised two core elements: The first is the elaboration of an alternative future in the context of a bilaterally negotiated comprehensive peace agreement that ends the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The second is the creation of alternative present so that any agreement can take root and be implemented and the two State solution can become a reality. This forum addresses the economic challenges associated with achieving this second core element – building the foundations of a Palestinian State. But, with your permission, I would like to say a few words about the first core element – the political negotiations that are underway. Since negotiations were launched ten months ago, the parties have engaged in an intensive, confidential and serious bilateral dialogue to resolve the issues between them and create a blueprint for the two-state solution. These talks take place at both the political and professional level, with committees that have been established to address all aspects of a future agreement. When we launched this process, we were not naïve enough to believe that the negotiations would be easy. Gaps remain and difficult decision lay before both sides. But we know also that the alternatives to a negotiated solution are worse for both of us. We know that the confidentiality of the talks – so necessary to maximize the chances of success – is also a potential source of frustration and skepticism. We believe that progress has been made and that we have succeeded in creating a forum for genuine dialogue and a negotiating framework that can produce results. We remain committed to uninterrupted negotiations with the context of the Annapolis process until we reach agreement and we ask the international community to help us preserve this process until its goals are achieved. Mr. Chairman, No political agreement is reached in a vacuum. Changing the reality on the ground is not less important than designing a common vision for the future. It is both a condition and a catalyst for success. This present meeting of the AHLC allows us to make an assessment of our joint efforts to advance this goal. Building the Palestinian economy, while at the same time managing a budget, is a complex and challenging endeavor, especially under present conditions. I wish to commend the efforts of President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad for the success of the Palestinian Finance Ministry in preparing the 2008 budget and for its advances in the process of reform and development. We also welcome the effort to expand the scope of income of the Palestinian treasury by collecting fees for services provided by the government to its citizens. We also support the spirit and culture of responsibility that the present Palestinian government is beginning to advance. We hope that the Palestinian government intensifies these efforts to develop effective and accountable governance, including through the enforcement of the rule of law, countering terrorism and incitement and preparing the basis for co-existence and economic progress throughout Palestinian society. We also hope, while ensuring humanitarian welfare, www.reiner-bernstein.de 235 – Chronologie 2008

that Gaza can be rid of terrorism and restored to the control of the legitimate Palestinian government so that genuine reform and economic development can be possible there as well. Neither Israelis nor Palestinians, nor the international community can afford a terrorist State in the Middle East. Mr. Chairman, Israel's status in this forum is a special one. We are not here as a donor state, but we are aware of our responsibilities and our influence on this process, as we are aware of the impact the success or failure of this process will have on us. Israel has acted and will continue to act, both in direct dialogue with the Palestinian Authority and together with the representatives of the international community led by the Quartet envoy, Tony Blair, to strengthen the Palestinian economy. Israel stands by its commitments to the government of the Palestinian Authority that has accepted the Quartet principles to an ongoing monthly transfer of tax revenues collected within the joint customs framework. Israel is also committed to assisting and supporting Palestinian security reform in accordance with the Road Map, which is critical for success. We look forward to the day when we can hand over the responsibilities over security to the PA security services in more areas. We are acting in this regard in direct cooperation with the PA, as well as with General Dayton and the EUPOL COPPS, whose team has recently been expanded to include 20 additional advisers. It is also important that we work to implement the decisions of the Berlin Conference on civil security and the rule of law and Israel stands ready to assist in this regard. In recent months Israel has carried out a series of steps to ease the situation on the ground, enhancing a model for regional development in Jenin area, a model that relies on two pillars: security and economy. Among the measures that have been adopted in order to renew civil security: 17 police stations (out of 20 that were agreed) have been opened, civil security forces have been trained in Jordan and a list of required equipment has been approved. In order to boost the economy, the number of permits to work in Israel has been increased, and where possible, checkpoints (7) and roadblocks (122) have been removed in order to facilitate the movement within the West Bank. Israel is currently considering further steps in other areas as well. We were pleased that we could help facilitate the successful convening of the Bethlehem conference which provided an important opportunity to attract investments from the private sector and we are willing to cooperate in follow up activities. The Israeli-Palestinian Joint Economic Committee (JEC) now meets frequently to discuss a wide range of economic subjects in order to advance common economic objectives and projects. Led by two professional teams, the JEC aims to facilitate a variety of infrastructure requirements for the planned industrial parks, discuss labor issues such as an increase of working permits, address local real-estate initiatives in the West Bank, and deal with many other issues that call for consultation and elaboration. We are encouraged by the positive trend reflected in some economic indicators, which show an improvement of the economic development in the West Bank. This is seen in the increase in tourism to Bethlehem and Jericho, and the increasing movement in the marketplaces. Also, the permit granted the operation of a second cellular communications network www.reiner-bernstein.de 236 – Chronologie 2008

"Wataniya" is an important catalyst both for the Palestinian Authority budget as well as a source of employment for many. These signs of progress are not a cause for complacency but a call to further action. We are aware that much more needs to be done and we especially understand the importance of further easing access and movement in the West Bank to allow for economic growth. The challenge here is a difficult one. As Minister Livni has said, Israeli security and Palestinian welfare are not competing interests they are interconnected ones. We must seek ways to facilitate further economic development, but at the same time we cannot afford the setback of renewed violence and terror. One need only look at the situation in Gaza, since Hamas seized control, to understand the threats we face and the fragility of the situation. Regrettably, the motivation to launch terror attacks in the West Bank still exists, and we must continue to confront that threat. At the same time, and to the extent that the security situation allows, Israel is committed to promoting and expanding measures to improve access and movement. Mr. Chairman, Strengthening the Palestinian economy will not be possible without the active and continued involvement of the international community including regional states. It is particularly important for Palestinians and Israelis to know that the Arab states of the region are ready to share the burden of Palestinian state building. Many of these states have made strong statements of concern for the Palestinian economy, and of readiness to make tangible contributions to its development. There is no better time than the present to turn words into action and to share the risks entailed in establishing the foundations for lasting peace. We commend the great effort being exerted by members of the donor community. There are few short-cuts in the developing sound economic foundations, and it continues to be vital to ensure a continuous, permanent and stable transfer of the donors' funds into the Palestinian Authority's budget, including the fulfillment of existing pledges. To the extent that there will be greater coordination there will be an improvement in the ability of the international community to more effectively support the strengthening of the Palestinian economy. The reconvening of the Joint Liaison Committee (JLC) in its original form will be an important step in this direction. We also believe that this forum, the AHLC, can be used more effectively to coordinate between the various actors in the field of financial and development assistance to the PA. I hope my colleagues in the Israeli delegation will have an opportunity to raise some practical suggestions in this regard during the afternoon panel sessions. Ladies and Gentlemen, we are confronted by an enormous challenge, yet, I believe it is a worthy one. I do not think we should minimize the progress that has been achieved, just as we should not minimize the distance still before us. In several respects, the West Bank of 2008 is a better place than the West Bank of 2007, even if it is not yet the place we all want it to be. Further progress is not guaranteed, and present progress is unfortunately both fragile and reversible. The potential for genuine change and lasting success exists. But it requires the concentrated efforts of all those inside this room and many outside it will be required to achieve it. Thank you. www.reiner-bernstein.de 237 – Chronologie 2008

54 Uri Avnery: Fly, Tzipora, fly! 20 September 2008: THE POLLS were wrong, as usual. And in a big way. As usual. Instead of winning by a huge margin, as predicted until the very last moment by all the polls, she just squeaked through. Of the 72 thousand or so registered Kadima members, only 39,331 troubled themselves to go to the polls, and among these she defeated Shaul Mofaz by just 431 votes. But a majority is a majority. Tzipi Livni was duly installed as Kadima chairperson. What does that say about the Israeli public? FIRST OF ALL: this is the victory of a person without a military background over someone with almost nothing apart from a military background. On the advice of his right-wing American political strategist, Stanley Greenberg, Mofaz emphasized the word "security" on every occasion, almost in every sentence. A popular talk-show turned this into a parody: Security, security, security, security. Well, it did not work. T-h-e general, the chief of Staff, the Defense Minister, was beaten by a mere woman devoid of any military experience (even if she did serve for 15 years in the Mossad.) That does not mean that Tzipi Livni may not turn out to be a warmonger, like Elisabeth I, Catherine the Great, Margaret Thatcher and Indira Gandhi. But fact is fact: the Kadima voters have preferred a non-general to a general. MOREOVER, KADIMA is a party of the center. The very center of the center. Its members are not fervent about anything, neither on the right or the left, they have no strong convictions of any kind. So their decision can be regarded as a reflection of the general mood. Mofaz presented himself not only as Mr. Security, but also as a genuine right-winger, a man who opposes both peace with Syria and peace with the Palestinians, a leader prepared to set up a coalition with the Right, even with the extreme Right. He was the declared exponent of open-ended-war. Tzipi Livni presented herself as the personification of the peace effort, the woman who conducts the negotiations with the Palestinians, who prefers diplomacy to war, who points the way to the end of the conflict. All this may be sleight of hand, pure deceit. Perhaps there is no difference at all between the two. But even if this is so, that is not the most important aspect. The important fact is that the Kadima voters, the most representative group in the country, accorded victory – well, a tiny victory – to the candidate who at least pretended to favor peace. In his "The Second Coming", the Irish poet W. B. Yeats describes utter chaos: "Things fall apart, the center cannot hold". The metaphor is taken from military history: in bygone days, armies drew up for battle with the main force in the center, and lighter forces defending the two flanks. As long as the center held, everything was fine. In Israel today, the center is holding. The centrist party voted for the woman of the center. It can also be described otherwise: in Israel, 2008, the forces are divided equally between the "Right" and the "Left", and the "Left" won this time by the smallest possible margin. I REMEMBER the elections nine years ago. In May 1999, Ehud Barak won a decisive victory over the incumbent, Binyamin Netanyahu: 56.08% against 43.92%, a difference of 388,546 votes. The public was just fed up with Netanyahu. The response was overwhelming. The general feeling in the peace camp was of a release from servitude to freedom, from an era of failure and corruption into an era of peace and well-being. Without any proclamations, without anybody planning it, masses of people streamed into Tel-Aviv's www.reiner-bernstein.de 238 – Chronologie 2008

Rabin Square, the place where a Prime Minister had been assassinated four years earlier. I was among them. In the square, the atmosphere was intoxicating. Delirious people danced, embraced each other, kissed. Tel Aviv had not seen anything like it since November 1947, when the United Nations General Assembly decided to establish a Jewish (and an Arab) state. I experienced a similar scene in April 1948, when I was part of the force that brought a huge relief convoy into beleaguered and starving West Jerusalem. A similar atmosphere was captured by film of Charles de Gaulle entering liberated Paris. Barak promised to be a second Rabin, only more so. He promised to make peace with the Palestinians within months. A rosy future was warming the horizon, "the dawn of a new day". A year and a half later, nothing of all this remained. Ehud Barak, the hero of peace, brought on us the greatest disaster in the annals of the struggle for peace. He came back from the Camp David conference, which had taken place on his express demand, with a declaration that was to become a mantra: "I have turned every stone on the way to peace / I have offered the Palestinians unprecedented generous terms / Arafat has rejected everything / We have no partner for peace." With 20 Hebrew words Barak destroyed the peace camp and brought about a public mood which even Netanyahu could not create: that there is no chance for peace that we are condemned to live with an everlasting conflict. Therefore, no one got excited about Tzipi Livni's victory. The masses did not stream into the square, did not dance and did not embrace – and not only because this was just a party-internal election. The general reaction was a sigh of relief and a shrug of the shoulder. So Kadima has voted. So it has a new chairperson. So there will be a new Prime Minister. Let's wait and see. SO WHAT to expect, after all? There are already jokes circulating about "Tzipi and the Tzipiot" (a Hebrew word-play, "tzipiot" meaning expectations), a new rock-band which is about to take to the road. Nobody really knows what kind of a Prime Minister she will be. Strong or weak. Determined or open to pressures. Tough or compromising. Warmonger or peace-seeker. One can only point at her background, as I hinted last week, and perhaps go into some detail. On the eve of the elections, in one of those vapid questionnaires the media are so fond of, she was asked who was her hero. Her answer: Jabotinsky. That was the most predictable answer there could be. Tzipi Livni grew up in a Revisionist household. She is a Revisionist, model 2008. What does that mean? Her father, Eitan, who was born in Grodno (a town that has belonged variously to Lithuania, Poland, Russia and now Belarus), came to this country at the age of 6 and joined the Irgun underground in 1938 (the same year as I did), when he was 19 years old. He lived all his life under the influence of Ze'ev (Vladimir) Jabotinsky and his teachings. Eitan Livni, as I knew him, was not a brilliant or exceptional person, but rather solid, loyal, as his name suggests. (In Hebrew, "eitan" means strong, steadfast). A person one could rely on. He served in the Irgun as an operational officer, and among other operations he took part in the daring break-out from Acre prison, where he was being held. As a Knesset member for the Herut Party, the predecessor of today's Likud, he was rather inconspicuous and supported Menachem Begin through thick and thin. www.reiner-bernstein.de 239 – Chronologie 2008

In order to understand Tzipi, one has to go back to Jabotinsky. His many enemies have often called him a Fascist, but that is inaccurate. He was born in the 19th century, and was a nationalist in the 19th century mold. Born in Odessa, he lived for some years as a young man in Italy, and his heroes were the leaders of contemporary Italian nationalism: the ideologue Giuseppe Mazzini and the fighter Giuseppe Garibaldi. Jabotinsky wanted, of course, all of Palestine to become a Jewish state. When he founded his party in the 1920s, he named it according to this vision: the demand was for a "revision" of the British decision to separate the land west of the Jordan river from the land east of the river, today's Kingdom of Jordan, then called Transjordan. In her youth, Tzipi sang Jabotinsky's most famous song: "Two banks has the Jordan – this one belongs to us and that one, too." But Jabotinsky was also a real liberal, and a real democrat. He entered the political arena for the first time when he formulated the "Helsingfors (Helsinki) Plan", which demanded human and national rights for the Jews and the other minorities in Czarist Russia. A PERSON educated according to these values is faced today with a tough dilemma. Years ago, the Revisionists used to tell this joke: rewarding David Ben- Gurion for founding the state, God promised to grant him one wish. Ben- Gurion asked that every Israeli should be honest, wise and a Labor Party member. "That's too much even for me to grant," God replied, "but every Israeli can choose two of the three." So a Labor member can be wise but not honest, a Labor member can be honest but not wise, and somebody who is wise and honest cannot be a Labor member. Something like this is now happening to the Revisionists themselves. They ask for three things: a Jewish State, a state that encompasses all of historic Palestine and a democratic state. That is too much even for God. So a Revisionist must choose two of the three: a Jewish and democratic state in only a part of the country, a Jewish state in all the country that will not be democratic, or a democratic state in all the country that will not be Jewish. This dilemma has not changed over the last 41 years. Tzipi Livni, an honest to goodness Revisionist, has announced her choice: a Jewish and democratic state that will not encompass the whole of the country. (We leave open here the question of whether a "Jewish" state can be democratic.) In up-to-date Hebrew, we differentiate between "national" and "nationalistic" attitudes. A national view recognizes the importance of the national dimension in today's human society, and therefore respects and recognizes the nationalism of other peoples, too. A nationalistic view says "we and no others", my nation ueber alles. It seems that Tzipi, like her hero Jabotinsky, adheres to the national view. Hence her emphasis on "two nation-states for two peoples". She speaks about a Jewish nation-state and is ready to sacrifice Greater Israel on this altar. That may not be an ideal basis for peace (what would be the status of Israel's Arab citizens in this Jewish nation-state?) but it is realistic. If she has the power to implement her ideas, she can make peace. If. REACTING TO the election results, Gideon Levy wrote that the heart wants to hope, but the brain cannot. That is an understandable reaction. Since Tzipi, short for Tzipora, means bird, one wants to cry out: Fly, Tzipora, fly! Fly to heaven! After your election as Prime Minister, lose no time! Set up a government coalition with the peace forces, use the first few months of your term to achieve peace with the Palestinians, call new elections and submit yourself and the peace agreement to the public test! www.reiner-bernstein.de 240 – Chronologie 2008

As Livni herself phrased it in her direct way: "There is no time for bullshitting!" That is what Ehud Barak should have done in 2000. He did not take the chance, and therefore he lost. Will Tzipora the bird reach these heights? The heart hopes. The brain has its doubts.

55 Rundbrief von Reuven Kaminer: Tzipi and the Generals, Jerusalem, 23 September 2008. Kaminer ist der Autor des Buches “The Politics of Protest. The Israeli Peace Movement and the Palestinian Intifada. Sussex (U.K.) 1996.

56 Government of Israel, Cabinet Communiqué 14 September 2008: Prime Minister Ehud Olmert referred to recent events in northern Samaria: „As you know, there was a terrorist attack at Yitzhar in which a terrorist infiltrated the community. A young boy was wounded and there was an attempt to perpetrate a more serious attack. This was a serious and harsh thing and our security forces are dealing with these issues and will reach those who were involved and will do what needs to be done, as they do so admirably throughout the year. However, the residents of Yitzhar and nearby places responded by assaulting Arab residents in a nearby Palestinian village. They used live weapons and wounded Palestinian residents even though there was no basis to assume, and no knowledge to the effect, that these residents were at all connected, whether directly or indirectly, to the terrorist attack in Yitzhar. This phenomenon of taking the law into one's hands, of violent disturbances, of brutality by Jewish elements living in communities in Judea and Samaria, whether in recognized communities or in illegal outposts, is intolerable and will be dealt with sharply and harshly by the law enforcement authorities of the State of Israel. There will be no pogroms against non-Jewish residents in the State of Israel. We have law enforcement authorities. We have police. We have security services. First and foremost, we have a military that knows how to deal with incidents in which Jews are attacked and to fight terrorists, and it will not lend a hand to those who take the law into their hands and attack innocents as was done over the weekend in the gravest manner. There have been incidents in which this violence and this brutality have been directed against not only those whom the settlers suspect to be terrorists but also against Israeli soldiers and commanders. An IDF company commander's hand was broken by settlers. This is intolerable and I instruct the security elements in the territories to act strongly in order to prevent such events from recurring and to bring those responsible to justice, pure and simple." Prime Minister Olmert also said: "I must also comment on the statement that was made over the weekend regarding publications in foreign newspapers about Israeli activities, whether they actually took place or not. Over the past year, we have taken care not to comment on, respond to, confirm or deny, and to act with the necessary restraint and responsibility, regarding security issues of the highest order. It is inconceivable that somebody – for whatever reasons, be they political or personal – allows himself to say things that I unequivocally reject."

57 Vgl. dazu die Rezension „Sorge um Israel – Frieden in Nahost” in dieser Homepage. www.reiner-bernstein.de 241 – Chronologie 2008

58 Prime minister: The ‘Greater Israel’ idea is over, in „The Jerusalem Post” 14.09.2008: Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said Sunday that the 'Greater Israel' idea was over. "'Greater Israel' is finished. There is no such thing as that anymore. Whoever talks in those terms is only deluding himself," said the prime minister at the weekly cabinet during which Vice Premier Haim Ramon's evacuation-compensation bill was discussed. "It doesn't help Israel. The international community has changed its perspective ahead of the possibility of Israel becoming a bi-national state. We can prove that we were always the initiators and were more creative and that it was the other side that was more stubborn. However, as usual, we are winning the argument but are gradually going to lose the most important thing," he said. Olmert explained that although excellent justifications could be brought as to why talk of of concessions to the Palestinians should be postponed, time was "not ticking in Israel's favor." Olmert admitted that he had changed his mind on the subject. "I admit that I didn't always have this opinion. I thought and I also said to [Defense Minister] Ehud Barak that the concessions he offered at Camp David were exaggerated. I believed that the land from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean was all ours since in every place there that is excavated, there is evidence of Jewish History. "But finally, after a lot of suffering and misgivings, I came to the conclusion that we need to share the land with whom we are residing if we don't want to become a bi-national state." The prime minister emphasized that Israel was the strongest country in the region. "We are strong like no other country in the region, no entity can overcome us," he said. "The strategic threats don't come from questions of where the borders are. We can argue over every small detail but we will then have no peace partner and no international backing. We will just feel that we were right, as we have done for the last 40 years." According to Ramon's evacuation-compensation bill, NIS 1.1 million will be given to each family that voluntarily moves from isolated areas of the West Bank to the Negev. Ramon's bill would give a 25 percent increase in compensation offered to settlers who leave the West Bank for the Negev and a 15% increase to those who move to the Galilee. Ramon told ministers that 18% of the settlers east of the security fence (over 11,000 individuals) were prepared to leave of their own accord. The evacuation of residents living in the West Bank, insisted Ramon, was "an inevitable step for those who believe in the two-state [solution], who are the majority of the Israeli public. The government's assertion, that Israel is not prepared to continue to control areas east of the [security] fence, will strengthen Israel in its negotiations with the Palestinians and with the international community. This program will also strengthen the settlement blocs west of the [security] fence and leave the area under Israels sovereignty." Ramon also said that Israel and the Palestinians weren't close to reaching even a scaled-back version of a peace agreement, further diminishing hopes of any significant strides by the end of the year. "Right now, we don't see reaching a shelf agreement or a declaration of principles on the horizon," he said. www.reiner-bernstein.de 242 – Chronologie 2008

Meanwhile, Public Security Minister Avi Dichter criticized the bill, saying that "the current discussion is a mistake in its essence and also in its timing," he said, adding that it was "putting the cart before the horse." "Even if houses that should be destroyed are destroyed, legislation preventing them from being rebuilt is problematic, full of difficulties and may even provoke violence," he continued. "Voluntary evacuation will only weaken, not strengthen Israel." Transportation Minister and Kadima leadership candidate Shaul Mofaz also seemed to oppose the bill, but was more tempered in his reservations. "Evacuation compensation in a reality that lacks an agreed upon framework, will only raise the Palestinians' demands and cause damage," Mofaz said during the meeting. AP contributed to this report.

59 Zur Rivalität zwischen der „alten” und der „jungen Garde” in „Fatah“ s. besonders Khalil Shikaki: Palestinians Divided, in „Foreign Affairs” January/February 2002, S. 89 ff.

60 Gideon Levy: Last call for Kadima voters, in „Haaretz”-Online 14.09.2008: This is the last call for passengers boarding the Kadima train: Do not vote for Shaul Mofaz. Vote for Tzipi Livni or Meir Sheetrit – preferably not Avi Dichter – anything but Mofaz. True, a lot of you became Kadima members in the first place only because the chairman of your work committee instructed you to sign up to support the transportation minister, who is good to your workplace. True, your vote contractor pledged that you would put the "right" slip in the ballot box, you and your families. But you can break your pledge. In fact you cannot just break it – it is your duty to do so. If something beyond wheeling and dealing is dear to you; if you consider matters beside the work committee, the clique, the clan and your workplace important; if you care about the country, society, the army and even, excuse the expression, our morality – you cannot vote for Mofaz. If Mofaz becomes your candidate for prime minister of Israel on Wednesday, it will be a black day, on which an unworthy, invalid, almost illegitimate candidate was chosen. Ehud Olmert's sins, which you are now trying to expiate, will appear as white as snow compared to Mofaz's escapades as chief of staff and defense minister. This man – a man of force and violence whose way is one of force and violence – must not head the government of this country, particularly at this dangerous time. You handful of Kadima voters are not an easy bunch to persuade. Most of you became members of this nothing-party only to serve personal interests. Why else would you sign up for Kadima? Because of its non-existent ideology? Its lofty ideas and admirable leadership? A good many of you simultaneously became members of one or two other parties, just to be on the safe side. They have placed the votes you pledged in sealed containers. They are counting on your blind obedience to your boss and the local party hack. This is the time to prove that this is not you, that there is another thing or two beyond your personal advancement and the job that was promised to your relative that's making you loose sleep. Prove that beyond your urge to take revenge on the Arabs, to punish, pulverize, strike, kill, arrest and starve them, you are also willing to think about tomorrow. Show us that you believe Israel is more enlightened than your candidate; prove that you do not want force to become the sole language of the country in which you live. If you choose Mofaz, it will be. www.reiner-bernstein.de 243 – Chronologie 2008

In a properly-run country, Mofaz would be considered an outcast, persona non grata. "I think we must strike very hard," he told the members of the Winograd Committee examining the conduct of the Second Lebanon War, encapsulating in a few words his wretched worldview. That is the way he has always expressed himself and that is the way he always acted. Strain your memory: Did Shaul Mofaz ever express a single intersting idea? Was there ever a single opportunity when he did not support yet another military operation? This is the time to remind you: Mofaz was one of the cruelest defense ministers to ever hold that office here. None was more cruel. He always saw the Arabs through the sights of a gun, an Apache, a tank and a plane. He never even considered another way. He is a serial refuser to making peace. Mofaz never really supported any diplomatic move that went slightly beyond the battlefield he knows so well. Formerly Sharon's contractor for assassinations, as chief of staff Mofaz opposed the withdrawal from Lebanon as well as the partial withdrawal from Hebron, for which he was almost fired. As defense minister he first opposed the disengagement and then supported it, on condition that the remain in the Gaza Strip "as a bargaining chip," after he hurriedly and opportunistically toed Sharon's line. Mofaz is the eternal supporter of the "major action" in Gaza, opponent of the cease-fire, and now of a withdrawal from the Golan Heights. In his role as head of the parliamentary caucus in favor of assassinations, or at least deporting Yasser Arafat, surely you remember his voice, as chief of staff, caught by chance on a microphone, calling for Arafat to be deported – a scandal in its own right. On his orders Israel demolished the mechanisms of Fatah's government in the territories; the bitter outcome of that foolish policy can now be seen in Gaza. The Mofazes who neutralized Arafat aided Hamas' rise to power. Your Mofaz is also one of the Israelis who generated the second intifada. Do you want him to bring upon us a third one, and perhaps most terrible of all, the bombing of Iran? If there is one figure who represents no other way but force and violence, it is he. During his term as defense minister Israel killed 1,705 Palestinians, 372 of whom were children and teens, six times more than the number of Israelis who were killed during that same bloody period. This is the only thing Mofaz knows how to do – the father of the assassination school of thought – the only school of thought named after him. You will most certainly recall how he came to you: at the last minute, only after realizing that he had no chance in Likud. This, therefore is your last call: Do something momentous this week. The alternatives do not promise much, but remember there is Mofaz – and there are all the rest.

61 Aluf Benn: What Happened on September 15 [2008]?, in „Haaretz“ 15.07.2009.

62 Akiva Eldar: Abbas to Haaretz: We will compromise on refugees, in “Haaretz”-Online 13.09.2008: RAMALLAH–Perhaps it was the daytime fast and abstention from smoking during the holy month of Ramadan, and perhaps it was the conversation about the exhausting negotiations with Israel that caused Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) to press the white button at least three times in the course of last Wednesday's interview. Sa'id, his personal assistant, enters without a word, pulls out the packet and lights a cigarette for the president. Abu Mazen's relaxed mood does not hint at all the troubles bombarding him from inside and out. www.reiner-bernstein.de 244 – Chronologie 2008

He dismisses the threats of colleagues, including the chairman of the Palestinian negotiation team Ahmed Qureia (Abu Ala) and rivals such as Prof. Sari Nusseibeh, to replace the negotiations over two states with a demand for equal rights between Israelis and Palestinians in one state. He also promises that, just as he opposed the second intifada, he will not support a third one. The message is almost self-evident: Don't miss your opportunity with me. You won't have a partner like me. But on one point he is insistent: the right of return. Israel will have to absorb refugees in its territory, he emphasizes, following negotiations regarding their numbers. He is aware of the arguments in Israel about his political weakness. "It's a good excuse for Israel not to fulfill its obligations," he says with a bitter smile. "I'm still reading in your newspaper that it won't be possible to reach a peace agreement because your prime minister, Ehud Olmert, is accused of corruption and I'm too weak. But even senior Israeli officials now admit that we are doing an excellent job." Even Amos Gilad, the head of the diplomatic-security headquarters in the Defense Ministry, and a sharp critic of the PA? "Even Amos Gilad. We have restored order to the West Bank cities, we are taking steps against anyone who tries to undermine security and stability, whether it is Hamas, Islamic Jihad or even Fatah. In Israel and in the United States they are well aware that the Palestinian security forces have prevented many attacks. We even dismantled Fatah's Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades. Today there is one armed force and one authority in the field." Abbas' situation in public opinion surveys conducted in the territories is better than ever. The chaos that reigned in the cities of the West Bank has been replaced by the Palestinian police. The security systems are garnering praise from those very senior Israeli officials who in the past leveled penetrating criticism against their functioning – including the head of the Shin Bet security service, the defense minister and generals in the Israel Defense Forces. The economic situation in the West Bank is also improving. And nevertheless, Abu Mazen knows that without a diplomatic agreement, all these achievements will evaporate and the Palestinians will return to Hamas' embrace. Do you remember that Saturday, September 13, is the anniversary of the Oslo Accords? "Unfortunately." Why unfortunately? "Because it didn't succeed. Fifteen years have passed since then, and we are still far from an agreement." Olmert is about to resign. What do you feel on the personal level? "I admire him very much and for over a year we've been working together. Now he is about to leave and we will honor what the Israeli public decides. We will conduct negotiations with any prime minister elected in Israel, and bid farewell to Olmert. But I intend to conduct negotiations with him until his last moment in the job." It is evident that the elections for the leadership of Kadima are a source of great concern to those sitting in the Muqata, the PA's seat of government, in Ramallah. Abu Mazen's advisors are busy not only with issues related to Hamas and Fatah, but also with the attempt to guess who will win: Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz or Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni. On this subject, as on others, MK Ahmed Tibi (Ra'am-Ta'al), who was present at the interview, serves as a guide for the PA president. In addition, Abbas makes sure to keep abreast of reports from the Israeli media. www.reiner-bernstein.de 245 – Chronologie 2008

Olmert said that we have never been so close to an agreement. Had he remained in the job would that have changed anything? "I cannot say that 'an agreement is near' or 'not near' is the correct term to use, but it is doubtful whether we could have completed an agreement by the end of 2008 [as the sides promised at the Annapolis conference], even had he remained in the job. So far there has been no achievement in the negotiations. There are various proposals regarding borders and the refugee issue, but they have remained proposals only and all six central issues of the final status agreement [Jerusalem, borders, refugees, security, settlements and water] have remained open. I cannot say that there has been an agreement on a single issue. The gap between the sides is very large. We presented our ideas and demands regarding the six issues, and have yet to receive any answer from the Israeli side." Jordan's King Abdullah said recently to a French newspaper that he is not convinced that Israel wants to solve the conflict, due to the absence of a long-term vision. Do you agree with that statement? "I tend to agree with King Abdullah. We can reach an agreement because the outline is known, and it is not clear to me why there is no progress. Perhaps because of internal political disputes in Israel. I can say that the Americans continue to play a central role, and are even eager for us to reach an agreement by the end of the year. They are convinced we are capable of that." We have heard many different versions about the percentage of the area of the West Bank Israel is willing to transfer to the Palestinian state. Could you tell us the exact percentage? Abu Mazen smiles. "We have been presented with more than one proposal. I can tell you that, among other things, we raised the demand to conduct negotiations over no-man's land and not only over the entire West Bank." [One example is the Latrun area.] Have you told the Israelis that they have to refer to previous documents, to previous negotiations like those conducted in Taba in 2001? "Israel now claims that those talks were conducted by other teams. 'It's not us. It's Yossi Beilin,' they say." Abbas looks very excited when he mentions the 2002 Arab peace initiative, in which 22 Arab countries agreed to normalize relations with Israel if Israel withdraws to the 1967 boundaries. He asks his secretary of many years, Intisar, to bring the version of the Arab initiative adopted by the Islamic summit conference. The paper is decorated with the flags of various Islamic countries, including Iran. "Yes, yes, even Iran agreed at the time [2002 – before Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's era] to the principles of the Arab initiative, and never regretted it," he says. "I presented this paper to Olmert, who didn't react to it. Unfortunately, to date there has been no discussion of the initiative in the Israeli government. You should remember that this is the first time even the king of Saudi Arabia, who is the guardian of the places holy to Islam, enlisted for the sake of solving the conflict." Is it clear that on the issue of the right of return, the refugees will return only to the areas of the Palestinian state? "Not at all. This issue is not at all clear. There are today five million Palestinian refugees whose forefathers were expelled from the area of Israel, not from the West Bank and Gaza. We understand that if we demand of you that all five million return to Israel, the State of Israel would be destroyed. But we must talk about compromise and see to what numbers you can agree. www.reiner-bernstein.de 246 – Chronologie 2008

"We have to talk about Israeli recognition of its responsibility for the refugee problem, and then discuss the right of return in practice. The Palestinians who don't return to Israel can return to Palestine. If they decide to remain in the countries where they are living, they will receive compensation, as will the countries that absorb them. There is a central issue that Israel tends to ignore: the assets of the absentees. That is a very important issue, almost the basis of the problem. "We intend to hold talks with Israel about the number of refugees who will return to its area. I am criticized for not demanding the return of all five million, but I say that we will demand the return of a reasonable number of refugees to Israel. The Arab peace initiative also discusses that – a solution to the refugee problem has to be agreed upon with Israel, according to UN General Assembly resolution 194 [from 1948]." Foreign Minister Livni said that when the Palestinians erase the word "nakba" from their lexicon [the "catastrophe," the expulsion and flight of the Palestinians in 1947-1948], there will be peace. "Can I forget the nakba, which happened to so many people and even to me? [Abbas is a refugee from Safed.] That is our memory. Just as I can't ask you to forget your national memory, you can't demand that of me." President Shimon Peres claims you said that you would oppose the participation of Hamas in the January 2010 elections, if it does not recognize agreements with Israel and international decisions. "Let's put it differently. If we want to establish a unity government of professionals, according to the Arab League's proposal, it must honor all the commitments and agreements that we have signed, like the road map. We cannot agree to any initiative that does not accept that. And of course, you have to accept the Arab peace initiative." When does your term end? Hamas claims in January 2009 and not in January 2010, as you claim. "I think that the elections for parliament and the presidency should take place together, in January 2010. We will decide, and issue a presidential order accordingly. And we will definitely demand that the elections be held in Jerusalem as well." Will you run in the next elections? "I don't know yet. It's too early to talk about that." Was it a mistake to allow Hamas to participate in the 2006 elections? "No, it was a good test as far as we're concerned. Had we rejected its participation we would have rejected a large part of the Palestinian people. Now, after the nation has come to know and experience Hamas, it will have to decide who to vote for." Do you see a possibility of reconciliation between Hamas and Fatah, and unity between the West Bank and Gaza? "Gaza and the West Bank must unite, otherwise there will be no Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital. But we will not use force to do that. There are contacts for reconciliation being conducted by the Egyptians, and in the end an Arab proposal will be presented, with the support of the Arab League." Are you aware of the fact that if Israel releases the Hamas members of parliament as part of a deal to release [kidnapped IDF soldier] Gilad Shalit, there is a good chance that the Palestinian parliament will not extend your term? "Yes, but without any connection to my term, I'm not opposed to their release. I have even demanded of Olmert more than once to release the speaker of the parliament, Aziz Dweik of Hamas. There is no reason to www.reiner-bernstein.de 247 – Chronologie 2008

leave them in prison, and we have made it clear to Israel that in the context of any peace agreement, all the Palestinian prisoners will be released." What do you think of the rise of Al Qaida in Gaza? "I was the first to warn about it, and we are opposed to it. But you must understand that you have to remove the siege of the Gaza Strip in order to stop the strengthening of these extremist factors. You must open the trade crossings to the Strip, because distress will only strengthen organizations like Al Qaida." What do you think of the calls by senior Palestinian officials, in light of the failure of the negotiations, to dismantle the PA, transfer responsibility to Israel and establish one state for two nations? "That is an issue that came up in the Arab League, too. But in my opinion, we should stick to implementing a solution of two states for two nations. That is the best proposal. But you must not prevent this solution and push people into a corner. A continuation of your dangerous policy in the West Bank – construction in the settlements, the roadblocks, the raids on West Bank cities – will only distance the two-state solution." "We don't want one state for two nations, and various people who are doing that, including Abu Ala, are doing it out of despair. You must treat the Palestinians with respect, as full partners, human beings like you. If you believe in occupation and the Palestinian partner becomes irrelevant, no Israeli will feel secure." Did you make a mistake in the second intifada when you turned to violence? "I have said this in the past. We made a mistake when we turned the intifada into an armed struggle, and I will do everything possible so that there won't be a third, armed intifada. But you mustn't push people into acting violently." The interview takes place mostly in English. Occasionally MK Tibi whispers into the ear of the rais and the conversation continues. The secretary of the PA, Tayeb Abed al-Rahim, one of people closest to Abu Mazen, is present at the interview and adds his comments. When will you meet with U.S. President George W. Bush, and what will you tell him at your last meeting? "I'll be meeting with him on September 26, and I'll listen to what he has to say. I admire him very much. He did very good work, and nevertheless we did not succeed in reaching an agreement. It's not his mistake, nor mine. As far as he is concerned, he made the required effort." Did you think that 15 years after Oslo we would still be sitting here and talking about the chances for a peace agreement? "It's unbelievable, it's beyond any imagination that we haven't succeeded in reaching an agreement until now. But even today, I'm convinced that I would have signed the Oslo Accords. I risked my life for peace and if I have to pay for it with my life, that's a negligible price. I don't regret the Oslo Accords. Twenty years before the agreement I believed in peace with the Israelis, and I still believe in it."

63 Ari Shavit: Facing the storm, in „Haaretz”-Online 12.09.2008.

64 Yossi Beilin: The season for decision making, in „Haaretz“-Online 11.09.2008.

65 Zwischen 1958 und 1988 sind von der Knesset elf „Basic Laws” verabschiedet worden: „Parlament”, „Grund und Boden”, „Staatspräsident”, „Staatswirtschaft”, „Militär”, „Hauptstadt Jerusalem”, „Rechtswesen”, www.reiner-bernstein.de 248 – Chronologie 2008

„Staatskontrolleur”, „Menschenwürde und Freiheit”, „freie Berufswahl” und „Regierung”:

66 Der Beitrag kann abgerufen werden via www.hagalil.com:80/archiv/2008/09/avnery.htm .

67 Jörg Bremer: Das israelische Jerusalem wächst, in „Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung“ 11.09.2008, S. 5.

68 „Al-Ayyam“ 11.09.2008: American consul general in Jerusalem Jacob Wallace said that American Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told the Palestinian and Israeli parties during her recent visit that what is being negotiated is based on the 1967 borders, which include the West Bank and Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem and parts of the Dead Sea. Adjustments to the border must be agreed upon between the parties. Wallace stressed in a special interview with Al Ayyam that the U.S. does not seek a transitional solution before the Quartet Committee in New York meets late this month and said: "Do not look for transitional solutions that can be reached in September. Our aim, as I said, is to reach agreement at the end of the year and the month of December. " The American consul general tried to dispel fears of Palestinian officials of the possibility that U.S. President George W. Bush may present his ideas for a solution and said: "I do not want to talk on behalf of President Bush, or pre-judge what can be done to decide, but we have said to both parties that we do not intend surprises, and we do not intend to do what cannot help the process." He added: We see our role as a facilitator, and if the parties think that there is something we can do to help that's fine, but we do not intend to carry out things that of one or both parties thinks does not help. This clearly would not be done. Wallace acknowledged that there have been many Israeli settlement expansions after the Annapolis conference and said: We have seen a very slight progress towards the removal of outposts... He added: We would like to see more efforts in the Israeli side on the issue of transit and movement of the Palestinians, and this not only helps the daily lives of Palestinians, but is an important factor for economic recovery – a goal shared by Israelis and also this is why we would like to see more action taken on.

69 Der Text der Initiative befindet sich in der Menüleiste „Begleitende Dokumente“ bei www.genfer-initiative.de .

70 Alexandra Senfft: Pionier des Dialogs, in „Jüdische Allgemeine“ 11.09.2008, S. 13.

71 Die HSFK trauert um Prof. Dr. Dan Bar-On. Der 1938 in Haifa geborene israelische Psychologe und Publizist verstarb am 4. September 2008 in Tel Aviv. In Deutschland ist Dan Bar-On, der aus einer Familie stammte, die 1933 aus Hamburg nach Palästina ausgewandert war, insbesondere durch seineBemühungen um Gespräche zwischen den Kindern von Nazi-Tätern und Nazi-Opfern bekannt geworden. Dan Bar-On weitete sein Dialogmodell des "Storytelling" später auf andere Konflikte aus. In den letzten drei Jahren engagierte er sich in einem Dialog-Trainings-Programm mit Teilnehmern aus verschiedenen Kontinenten bei der Körber-Stiftung, Hamburg. www.reiner-bernstein.de 249 – Chronologie 2008

Dan Bar-On stand viele Jahre mit der HSFK in enger Verbindung. Er war gemeinsam mit dem palästinensischen Erziehungswissenschaftler Sami Adwan Gründungs- und Co-Direktor des 1998 auf Initiative und mit Unterstützung der HSFK in Beit Jalah gegründeten Peace Research Institute in the Middle East (PRIME). Dieses Institut stand und steht für die grenzüberschreitenden Friedensbemühungen zwischen Israelis und Palästinensern. Ein besonders innovatives Projekt von Dan Bar-On und Sami Adwan war das gemeinsam mit israelischen und palästinensischen Lehrern entwickelte Geschichtsbuch, das die verschiedenen historischen Narrative beider Völker einander gegenüber stellte. Dazwischen ließ es Platz, um Schülern beider Seiten zu ermöglichen, auch die Sicht ihrer eigenen Familie auf die Vergangenheit aufzuschreiben. Dieses Buch, das in mehrere Sprachen übersetzt wurde, dient auch als Modell für die Aufarbeitung anderer Konfliktgeschichten. Dan Bar-On war ein großer Wissenschaftler und eine starke Persönlichkeit. Sein Engagement für den Frieden war konsequent und unbeirrbar. Für die wissenschaftlich abgestützte Friedensarbeit im Nahen Osten wird Dan Bar-On fehlen.

72 Vgl. die Eintragungen am 14.02.2008, 30.05.2007, 13.03.2007, 19.12.2006, 14.02.2006, 20.10.2005, 12.10.2005, 24.03.2005 und 14.02.2005 in dieser Zeitleiste.

73 Der vollständige Text der Ansprache Bsirskes ist auf der Homepage des Aachener Friedenspreises veröffentlicht.

74 Vgl. die Eintragung am 02.09.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

75 Siniora weist darauf hin, dass Spenden mit einer Kreditkarte online via www.ipcri.org/donate.html überwiesen oder per Scheck an IPCRI, PO Box 9321, Jerusalem 92092 / Israel, geschickt werden können.

76 Dan Wischnitzer wurde in Gablonz (Sudentenland) geboren und war zwischen 1960 und 1992 hauptamtlicher Mitarbeiter von „“, davon die letzten zehn Jahre als Sekretär des „Israel Peace Committee“. Vgl. seinen Beitrag „Die Barriere – Annexion geht vor Sicherheit“ in der Menüleiste „Berichte aus Israe und Palästina“ in dieser Homepage.

77 Aluf Benn: Shas chief: Olmert has no authority to decide the fate of Jerusalem, in „Haaretz“-Online 31.08.2008: Hours before Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was to suggest international involvement in negotiations over Jerusalem in a meeting with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Shas Chairman Eli Yishai said Sunday that the prime minister has no legal or public authority to make a deal with the Palestinians, and certainly not to decide the fate of Jerusalem. "The leadership of the Palestinian Authority is virtual," Yishai said. "Any agreement with them will be the basis for more terror. It is clear to everyone that Jerusalem's fate cannot be negotiated like it was a currency, and certainly not with international participation." The Olmert-Abbas meeting, scheduled for Sunday in Jerusalem, will likely be their final session before the Kadima primary on September 17, after which Olmert will step down from his post. Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni also commented on the expected talks Sunday, saying "I support negotiations, but a final agreement has to explicitly reflect Israel's interests. We can't allow time constraints to rush us into making grave mistakes in trying to bridge gaps that are too big in a way that will www.reiner-bernstein.de 250 – Chronologie 2008

bring about a clash, nor can we compromise on critical issues only for the sake of results. This is not how I operate in negotiations." Olmert was expected to try convincing the Palestinian leader to accept an agreement of principles on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that will represent a framework for a two-state solution. As far as Olmert is concerned, the talks with Abbas have entered the "final straight" and there are about two weeks left to reach an agreement before the prime minister steps down. However, veteran Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said Saturday that he does not expect the two sides to conclude a joint document during September. Erekat made the comments Saturday following various reports that the Bush administration would like to present a joint document of understandings between Israel and the PA before the UN General Assembly in September. Central in Olmert's proposal to the Palestinians is that the talks on sovereignty and control over the holy sites in Jerusalem be held under an international umbrella, where governments and other interested parties will be able to contribute their views. The negotiations will be held directly between Israel and the Palestinians, and international parties will not be able to impose their views on a solution. The role of the international parties would be to bolster the agreement that the two sides will agree upon in direct negotiations. According to Olmert's proposal, a five-year timetable will be set out for completing a settlement on Jerusalem. Olmert's proposal, which was discussed in recent talks with Abbas, is meant to bridge his promise to coalition partner Shas that Jerusalem will not be raised during the current round of talks, and the Palestinian demands that any agreement between the two sides would include mention of "all the core issues" – borders, security, refugees and Jerusalem. The solution offered by the prime minister is to agree to a mechanism for discussing the issue of Jerusalem, and delay the substantive talks on the subject to the future. This is the first time that Israel has proposed involving international parties on the Jerusalem issue, even if their role will be limited to a consultative one. The idea was raised during the Camp David talks of 2000, when Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat argued that he does not have a mandate to decide the future of the holy sites – which are important to the entire Muslim world – and rejected the offer of then-prime minister Ehud Barak to divide Jerusalem. Olmert's proposal was meant to gain broad backing for the Palestinian leadership's decisions, and prevent any collapse of the agreement because of opposition from other countries and religious groups. Olmert is probably planning to include in the negotiations members of the international Quartet (the U.N., U.S., EU and Russia), as well as Jordan, Egypt, the Vatican and possibly the king of Morocco. From Israel's point of view, broadening the international, inter-faith element only increases the chances of finding an acceptable agreement, even though there is risk in involving parties who are opposed to Israel's sovereign control over the holy sites in Jerusalem. The prime minister presented his detailed proposal to the Palestinians to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice during her visit to Jerusalem last Tuesday. Rice told Olmert that "it is a very generous plan" for the Palestinians and discussed it with Abbas, with whom she met several hours after her talks with Olmert. Olmert told Rice that he presented his plan to Abbas a month ago, but the PA president had still not given him a final answer. www.reiner-bernstein.de 251 – Chronologie 2008

In the past few weeks, Olmert sent a number of emissaries to Abbas and his aides, in an attempt to convince them to adopt the plan. Among the emissaries were Vice Premier Haim Ramon, MK Yossi Beilin and U.S. businessman Daniel Abraham, a personal friend of the prime minister. Abbas and his closest aides presented Olmert's emissaries with a series of reservations, and argued that they were being offered a "partial agreement" of the kind that will weaken Abbas. They also said that "the timing is not good for an agreement at this time." In response, Olmert's emissaries said that an agreement will allow Abbas to present an achievement ahead of the PA presidential elections scheduled to take place in January 2009.

78 Daniel Abraham ist der Stifter der nach ihm benannten S. Daniel Abraham Professur „Middle East Policy Studies“ am Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. Im Studienjahr 2008/09 wird sie von Daniel S. Kurtzer innegehabt (vgl. Reiner Bernstein: „Our Middle East“ in dieser Homepage).

79 Zur wechselvollen politischen Biographie Nathans s. Tom Segev: 1967. Israels zweite Geburt. Berlin o.J. [1967], S. 22 ff.

80 Remarks With Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas Secretary Condoleezza Rice, Ramallah, August 26, 2008 via www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2008/08/108921.htm : PRESIDENT ABBAS: (Via interpreter.) In the name of God, the merciful and the compassionate, again, we welcome Dr. Rice and thank her for her repeated visits, unprecedented level of visits – number of visits, unprecedented in the history of the region. These visits, if they indicate anything, they indicate basically the will and the determination of the American Administration to reach a solution for the core issues that are contested, which are the main core issues that we always remind the people of, which are Jerusalem refugees, borders, settlements, water and security. And therefore, this visit comes in this context and in this determination that we appreciate highly for the American Administration, President Bush personally and Dr. Rice. Yesterday, 198 Palestinian prisoners were released and this means that joy has overwhelmed all the Palestinian people, particularly in the West Bank. And we hope that efforts continue in order to release all the prisoners. And we understand that once we reach an agreement, that the issue of prisoners would be one of the issues of the main issues that will be addressed, and that have to be cleared and have to be solved by the final solution. Today, we have exchanged conversation about these issues. We have focused on these issues. And we have focused also on the settlement activities that continue, that are ongoing, and that are undoubtedly an obstacle, a main obstacle in the road of the peace process. And as you all know, we reject all the settlement activities in principle because they contradict with the agreements and the Roadmap plan and the objectives of Annapolis that have started one year ago – almost one year ago. We have also discussed the situation in Gaza Strip and the urgent need to alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people and opening the doors and the crossing borders – points for the people and for the goods, so that life can continue in the Gaza Strip, despite the fact that there is a truce in Gaza Strip and we have supported this truce and we have provided all support to this truce – yet the situation in Gaza Strip is intolerable, unbearable. www.reiner-bernstein.de 252 – Chronologie 2008

And I would like to add here that we are seeking reconciliation, Palestinian- internal reconciliation based on the Yemenite initiative and the initiative by – that was endorsed by the Arab League in Damascus. And we are ready for the national dialogue that is being conducted in Cairo and that is led by the initiative of Egypt, which is exerting huge efforts in this context. We have also discussed the issues related to the importance of reaching complete, comprehensive solutions, not partial solutions, and not postponing any of the main issues. The solution should be comprehensive, and as we have worked relentlessly throughout this peace process in order to achieve the aspirations of the – our people and their dream in having an independent Palestinian state on the 1967 borders with its capital, Jerusalem, within the framework of the Palestinian fundamental principles. And we here – we will continue our efforts with the Bush Administration, President Bush's Administration, in order to reach the solution. And we hope that – we have to exert all efforts, ongoing efforts, relentless efforts in the coming period, and we should not leave any opportunity and should not miss any opportunity or waste time. And this is our policy and this is our willing, because it is in the interest of our people and the interest of Israel and the region and the world as a whole that we reach a comprehensive and genuine peace agreement. Finally, I thank Dr. Rice again for all her efforts and I thank her for coming here in this repeated manner and this space of visits, which is unprecedented. And I reiterate here that it indicates, really, the willingness and the determination to reach a peace solution. You're welcome, Dr. Rice. SECRETARY RICE: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Thank you very much for welcoming me here. I've had a series of very good discussions here, also earlier today in the trilateral with the chief Palestinian negotiator, Abu Ala and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni. We have discussed the progress that the parties are making in the negotiations toward a two-state solution. We've also had discussions of how to move other aspects of the Annapolis process forward, including improving life for Palestinians, the Palestinian people on the ground, as well as the Roadmap obligations. General Fraser is here and, in fact, as the Roadmap monitor, and General Fraser will stay on for a couple of days to continue the work on the Roadmap implementation. Mr. President, I want to thank you for your continued dedication to the Annapolis process and I believe that with will and with effort, we can reach the goals of Annapolis. And so, again, thank you for having me here and I think we are ready for your questions. QUESTION: (Via interpreter.) Mr. President, you said that the American Administration wants to reach a solution and is determined to reach a solution. But the American Administration has failed so far to stop settlement activities. How do you think that they will help in achieving a solution? Dr. Rice, you are talking about an opportunity that there might be progress in the peace process. Where is this opportunity and what kind of progress that you are talking about? PRESIDENT ABBAS: (Via interpreter.) I can say that the American Administration is exerting genuine efforts to reach peace – a peace agreement and is exerting genuine efforts to implement the first article of the Roadmap plan, which Dr. Rice have implied and indicated, particularly in the presence of General Fraser, who is working towards this objective. Since things have not succeeded so far, it does not mean that we have failed. It means that there is more determination and more willingness to find a solution for all these issues. www.reiner-bernstein.de 253 – Chronologie 2008

SECRETARY RICE: Yes, on the settlement issue, I think I've made very clear the U.S. position that the settlement activity is not conducive to creating an environment for negotiations, yet negotiations go on. We continue to press the Israelis about their Roadmap obligations and to work with the Palestinians on their Roadmap obligations as well. As to progress in the peace process, I would just like to remind everyone that this time last year, we, of course, didn't have a peace process. And perhaps it's well to go back to when President Bush came to office in 2001, in the midst of the breakdown completely of the peace process with the second intifada underway, with the election of Prime Minister Sharon who explicitly did not come to power intending to be a part of the peace process. And so President Bush has worked tirelessly over the last years – last seven years of his Administration to lay a foundation for this peace process, to declare the importance of a two-state solution not just to Israel and to Palestinians, but to the United States as well, and to support the establishment of the institutions of a Palestinian state, including the Roadmap monitoring role, including the date and mission on training and equipping of Palestinian forces, including the fact that the United States, for the first time, transferred directly to the budget of the Palestinian Authority American taxpayer resources. And so I would just like it understood that President Bush has been a tireless advocate of the establishment of the institutions, and ultimately, the establishment of the Palestinian state itself. We still have a number of months before us to work toward the Annapolis goal and we're going to do precisely that. But again, this is not easy. If this had been easy, somebody would have solved it a long time ago. And it has fallen to us to try again to find a solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. God willing and with the goodwill of the parties and the tireless work of the parties, we have a good chance to succeed. MR. MCCORMACK: Matt Lee of AP. QUESTION: Hi. Madame Secretary, Mr. President, I'm – I have to apologize because I have to ask two things that are a bit further – SECRETARY RICE: I've already told the President you weren't going to ask about – QUESTION: – further afield. SECRETARY RICE: – the Palestinian issues. (Laughter.) QUESTION: – which I apologize for. Madame Secretary, this morning, we've had several rather significant developments: one, the North Koreans have announced that they are going to – they have suspended their disablement because you have not yet removed them from the state sponsors of terror list. I'm wondering what your reaction is to that and how you think that will affect the process. And then secondly, just within the last hour or so, President Medvedev has signed a decree recognizing the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. He's done this despite strong warnings from yourself and from the Bush Administration, as well as others. How does this square with the ceasefire that he signed and what does it mean for U.S. policy? Thank you. SECRETARY RICE: First, on North Korea, look, we have made very clear – we made clear at the Six-Party ministerial that we were awaiting a verification mechanism that could assure the accuracy of the statements that North Korea made in its declaration or – and/or gave us ways to verify those – the accuracy of those statements. So I assume that North Korea recognizing that it – recognizes that it still has obligations. I would just note that the Chinese President and the South Korean President reaffirmed just – I'm not sure on the timing, because of the time changes, either yesterday www.reiner-bernstein.de 254 – Chronologie 2008

or today – that the work ahead is to get that verification mechanism and therefore, to proceed with denuclearization. We actually are in discussions with the North Koreans. And I think we'll just see where we come out in a few weeks. Now, as to the matter of the Russian apparent or intention to recognize two parts of – two regions that have been in conflict, but are clearly within the internationally recognized borders of Georgia by multiple Security Council resolutions, I think it is regrettable. It puts Russia, of course, in opposition to a number of Security Council resolutions to which it is party as member of the Security Council, as member of the United Nations, and most appallingly, as a member of the P-5. The ceasefire also talked about the importance of moving forward to an international way to deal with these zones of conflict. And so to preempt those international discussions is extremely unfortunate. Not only has the United States warned about this, but so has Europe. It simply means that the Russian President continues not to honor the commitments on – that the Russians have signed onto. But I want to be very clear: Since the United States is a permanent member of the Security Council, this simply will be dead on arrival in the Security Council. And therefore, in accordance with other Security Council resolutions that are still enforced, Abkhazia and South Ossetia are a part of the internationally recognized borders of Georgia, and it's going to remain so. Thank you. MR. MCCORMACK: (Inaudible.) SECRETARY RICE: Oh, I'm sorry. There's another – QUESTION: (Via interpreter.) Mr. President, do you believe that the American Administration has done enough in order to reach a peaceful agreement with the Israelis? And what do you expect from the new American Administration? (Back to English) Madame Secretary, you've said earlier today that you're still hopeful that the sides can reach to a peace deal before the end of this year. How can you convince, first of all, President Abbas that this is doable? And how can you convince the critics that the timeline is very short, since already eight months have passed without achieving anything? Thank you. PRESIDENT ABBAS: (Via interpreter.) As we are – we know, the peace process since Camp David has stopped. And consequently, since the beginning of the – Mr. Bush's Administration until before Annapolis conference, there were no contacts whatsoever, or efforts from any party towards the peace process, and particularly from the United States. And when President Bush announced his call for a meeting – for an international meeting in July 2007 and then after that, the Annapolis conference, from that time, since then, the real efforts – the American efforts have started towards the peace process. And when I mentioned earlier that Dr. Rice have visited us more than 12 times now as well as President Bush, who also visited us, I think this is towards – it shows the keenness and the efforts by the American Administration towards the peace process. And therefore, I am fully convinced of the credibility and the genuine efforts of the American Administration in terms of the peace process. What do we want of the new administrations? That they will continue with the peace process. If we fail to reach an agreement, at least we should not waste – seven years should not be wasted and should – to find new solutions. And therefore, we should focus now on the coming period, regardless of how short this period of time is. At least we should exert all the efforts. It's important not to waste time. It's to benefit from the time that – and what is important is that everyone is very serious and committed. And if we reach an agreement, then it's very good. If we do not www.reiner-bernstein.de 255 – Chronologie 2008

reach an agreement, then we wish for the new administration, that it will continue what we have already started and where we've reached today. SECRETARY RICE: As to convincing the critics, I'm not going to try. It's not actually my concern. As to discussing this with President Abbas and with Prime Minister Olmert, with Abu Ala, with Tzipi Livni, I see people who are committed to trying to achieve this goal. And so that is my role, is to help them work to achieve this goal. And again, the parties made a very wise decision early on that they were not going to go to the microphones every time they met and talk about what they have or have not achieved, because they have a principle which is very important, that they don't want a partial agreement, that they understand that there are – these major issues are interconnected and therefore, until everything is agreed, you can't have an agreement. And so I don't think you should expect that they're going to come out and talk about any partial progress that they have made, because it would only harm the process to do so. What I can tell you is that it is a very serious negotiating process. They are dealing with all issues before them. No issue is off the table. This is the most intensive discussions that have been there at least since Camp David and, in some ways, they've employed new mechanisms to deal with these issues that were not even there in 2000. And so this is very, very hard. I just want to repeat, if there had been an easy solution to the establishment of two states living side by side, it would have been done a long time ago. But obviously, there are many, many interlocking problems. But I can tell you again, when we go into these trilaterals, I am impressed by the work that they have already achieved in between, the work that they're still trying to do. And my job is to help them find ways to – ways of convergence and ways to get greater convergence and to do whatever the United States can to mobilize the international community in supporting them. MR. MCCORMACK: Last question (inaudible). QUESTION: Yes. For both of you, it's Madame Secretary's seventh visit here since Annapolis. Can both of you at least give us some measure of the progress you've made in those seven visits on the core issues? SECRETARY RICE: Look, if it took two visits or 22 visits, I think that it would be worth it to see the Palestinians and the Israelis engaged in as serious a negotiating process as they are engaged in now. The fact of the matter is these issues are very hard. And just like they're not going to give you a partial update on what they've done, I'm not going to give you a partial update on what they've done. Their job and ours is to keep the momentum going, to keep working at the issues, to keep finding solutions when there is a road that seems not open to find another road to address the same issue. And that's the kind of work that they do. And so this isn't a matter of a scorecard, that after one visit we've achieved one- tenth of a solution, and after another, we've achieved two-ninths of the solution. That's not the way that this works. But I can tell you that they are very seriously working. They have a very serious process despite, by the way, a lot of odds against them, whether it is a lot of complications politically which are always – always seem to be here in this region, some understandable and undeniable bitterness about Roadmap applications, implications about settlement activity and so forth. Despite all of that, they continue to press forward. And that's what I'm here to do, is to help them continue to press forward. MR. MCCORMACK: Thank you. RESIDENT ABBAS: (Via interpreter.) In one word, briefly, I would like to say that these efforts that have been exerted were not wasted, were not done in vain. If they – we felt it was done in vain, then we would have www.reiner-bernstein.de 256 – Chronologie 2008

stopped. So we feel that we are exerting efforts and that there is – there are benefits inevitably from these efforts. And hopefully, in the future, you will see these results.

81 Meron Benvenisti: Moot argument, in „Haaretz“ 21.08.2008.

82 Akiva Eldar: Sari Nusseibeh: We are running out of time for a 2-state solution, in “Haaretz”-Online 16.08.2008: At the end of my conversation with Sari Nusseibeh at the American Colony Hotel in Jerusalem, the highly respected president of Al-Quds University – and cosignatory of “The People’s Choice” [together with Ami Ayalon in summer 2003] a peace plan that he formulated with former Shin Bet chief Ami Ayalon – told me he wouldn't be surprised if one of the Palestinian residents of the city ran for mayor in the municipal elections in November. The candidate would not run as a representative of Jerusalem per se, Nusseibeh stressed. Rather, he would be running on behalf of all Palestinians in the occupied territories. "Why don't you do it?" I blurt out. The 59-year-old son of Anwar Nusseibeh, a Jordanian government minister, does not smile. "It's possible," says the professor of Islamic philosophy, who briefly replaced Faisal Husseini a few years ago as the top Palestinian official in East Jerusalem. "Anything is possible," he adds without batting an eyelid. Nusseibeh's previous contention that the Oslo "house of cards" had begun to collapse was further confirmed by this week's report in Haaretz regarding Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's latest peace offering (Israel would annex 7 percent of the West Bank and compensate the Palestinians with territory in the Negev, which would be equivalent to 5.5 percent of West Bank land; an agreement on the future of Jerusalem would be postponed to a later date; there would be no right of return for Palestinian refugees to Israel; and the entire plan would be implemented after Hamas is removed from power in the Gaza Strip). Nusseibeh says he knows full well what happens during negotiations – or, to be more specific, what does not happen. For over 20 years the Palestinian leadership has been trying to persuade their people to agree to a state along the June 4, 1967, lines, while Israel has been destroying that option, Nusseibeh explains, adding: "You cannot negotiate anything about final status if you don't talk about Jerusalem. Final status consists primarily, I believe, of Jerusalem and refugees. If you want to postpone Jerusalem, you postpone refugees. Really, you are not dealing with the problem. You have to discuss these issues, and that is exactly where the trade-off has to be made." Is Sari Nusseibeh, the secular Palestinian, the symbol of moderation, Ayalon's guy, burying the two-state solution? "I still favor a two-state solution and will continue to do so, but to the extent that you discover it's not practical anymore or that it's not going to happen, you start to think about what the alternatives are. I think that the feeling is there are two courses taking place that are opposed to one another. On one hand, there is what people are saying and thinking, on both sides. There is the sense that we are running out of time, that if we want a two- state solution, we need to implement it quickly. "But on the other hand, if we are looking at what is happening on the ground, in Israel and the occupied territories, you see things happening in the opposite direction, as if they are not connected to reality. Thought is running in one direction, reality in the other." www.reiner-bernstein.de 257 – Chronologie 2008

Nusseibeh says the struggle for a one-state solution could take a form similar to some of the nonviolent struggles waged by oppressed ethnic groups in other places. "We can fight for equal rights, rights of existence, return and equality, and we could take it slowly over the years and there could be a peaceful movement – like in South Africa," he notes. "I think one should maybe begin on the Palestinian side, to begin a debate, to reengage in the idea of one state." 'Jerusalem is out' "We have failed in the last 15 years," Nusseibeh continues, "to create the world we wanted to create. We were supposed to be very clever; we convinced ourselves that we were going to be very democratic and clean, a model for the rest of the Arab world. And Jerusalem was supposed to be our capital. That's what we believed. But then it turned out that all of this was total rubbish. Jerusalem is out, all we have is Ramallah. And we lost Gaza. There is corruption and inefficiency. This is not what we vouched for when we sat back in the early 1980s and ideologized the two-state solution. "It so happens that Fatah, in particular, the mainstream party and the only viable alternative to extremes on the left or on the right, now needs a strategy, an ideology. Because the ideology that Fatah has adopted over the last 15 years – a two-state solution – seems to be faltering, and with it, Fatah is faltering. So it is time maybe to rethink, to bring Fatah around to a new idea, the old-new idea, of one state. " The recent "bulldozer terrorism" in Jerusalem did not highlight the difficulties inherent in a binational state model? "These are isolated incidents, but they do reflect a major sickness in our Jerusalem Arab society. A sickness that has resulted in pressure, schizophrenia, the fact that these people speak Hebrew, and listen to Hebrew songs, go out with Israeli girlfriends while at the same time they live in Arab neighborhoods and under the influence of Muslim culture. There are contradictory forces pulling at them. "What is the driving force behind a two-state solution? The fact [is] that it seems more acceptable to a majority of people on both sides and therefore more applicable. The primary motivation is to minimize human suffering. This is what we should all be looking at. If there will be a one-state solution, it will not come today or tomorrow. It's a long, protracted thing, not the ideal solution. Unless, in an ideal world, people really want to be together, then it is the ideal solution. The best solution, the one that causes the least pain and that can actually be instrumental to a one-state solution, is to have peace now, and acceptance of one another on the basis of two states." Is this an ultimatum? "That's an ultimatum. Unless a major breakthrough happens by the end of this year, in my opinion we should start trying to strive for equality. Back in the 1980s, before the first intifada, I was saying there was schizophrenia in the body politic of the Palestinian people. It was like the head was going in one direction, which was the direction of seeking independence, national identity – but the body was slowly immersed in the Israeli system, and I said it can't last because it looks like it will snap. Either the body will join the head so that there will be a civil disobedience campaign, or the head will have to join the body, so that there will be a civil rights campaign, to become part of the Israeli system. "Fifty, 100, 200 years down the road there will be some kind of conclusion. Sometime in the future – however far away this future is – I believe we'll be living at peace with one another, in some way or another. I am not sure how, whether in one state or two states, or in a confederation of states, but www.reiner-bernstein.de 258 – Chronologie 2008

people finally will come to live at peace. In the meantime, we will simply cause pain to one another. It's tragic. It is very tragic, because we know we can do it now. That today it is possible with some guts, leadership, vision, we can make it happen today, we can reach a peaceful solution today. [The Arab Peace Initiative proposed in 2002] is a fantastic chance. The Palestinians have adopted it, they'll go with it all the way. It is a perfect chance. It doesn't even mention right of return. It is even better than the Ayalon-Nusseibeh plan, but I am willing to accept it." 'Dead money' Asked why he – who realizes so well how complicated it will be to reach a fair and logical solution regarding Jerusalem – is opposed to Olmert's idea of postponing discussion on that issue, Nusseibeh says he hopes that the prime minister is not repeating the same mistake made by Ehud Barak at Camp David, and that the idea of postponement was broached strictly for public relations purposes. "Because for Israel, however important Jerusalem may be, the primary factor is the Jewish character [of the state]. And however important the refugees might be, what is more important for the Palestinians and Muslims is Jerusalem. It is the issue over which the most extremist of refugees will be willing to make a sacrifice. Let's hope this is not where [Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas] are disagreeing. If that is what they're disagreeing about, then there's no hope. We have to do everything now, we have to put everything on the table. "The facts on the ground are making [the situation] irreversible," Nusseibeh warns. "Take the Clinton parameters [of December 2000] – Palestinian neighborhoods are Palestinian sovereignty, Jewish neighborhoods are Jewish sovereignty. They are acceptable in principle, but with realities on the ground, like the expulsion of Arab families from their homes in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood, and the inhabitation of those areas by Jewish settlers, it's going to be unacceptable on a practical level. That's why we don't have time." You ruffled some feathers among the Palestinian leadership when you recently asked the Europeans to halt financial aid to the Palestinian Authority. Someone even wondered whether you would be willing to give up the aid provided for Al-Quds University. "Ramallah's reaction was a bit worried. They called me a few times, a bit worried." Nusseibeh adds that the PA is still dogged by corruption – different from the corruption of which Olmert is accused – whereby donor states subsidize thousands of salaried employees at nonprofit organizations. This creates what he sees as an unhealthy dependency on foreign entities. "We have a terrible situation. Our political bible, our platform, our moral values –- we need to be brought together again. If [it is] not for creating a state, then [it is] for our own sanity and for own values as a people. Apart from in Ramallah, everybody is living under very bad conditions. The occupation is terrible. The siege is everywhere. Pressure. As it is, the Europeans are financing the occupation. And the Europeans are happy, because they feel they're doing something, it cleans their conscience. And the Israelis are happy because they're not paying for it. And the Palestinians are happy because they are getting their wages paid. It keeps the economy going, and people are getting complacent about it. It's dead money [going] after dead money." Nusseibeh mentions the recent meeting he had with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown at the British consulate in Jerusalem, together with four other Palestinians, during which the premier stated he would like to www.reiner-bernstein.de 259 – Chronologie 2008

assume a role in the peace process more central than that of a cash register. "I said, I want to tell you what you can do to transform yourself from a payer into a player: Make your money payments conditional on tangible progress in the peace process." Not long ago, the professor continues, "I was in Brussels. I gave a talk and I said to the Europeans: If you want to pass on money, do it only on the condition we build a state, in which case it makes sense for you to spend money to build us an international airport. But if in the end there isn't going to be an independent Palestinian state, why waste your money? Waste your money, if you need to, on integrating us into Israeli society. Makes more sense. Pay the money for us to become part of Israel, to have equal rights. Raise our level of education, bring our standards of living up. But to have the PA taking all this money, creating all this debt, makes no sense. Maybe the Europeans should link the aid they are giving us to real progress in peace talks, so that both the Israelis and the Palestinians will be shocked out of their complacency, or lack of commitment." What do you make of the growing support among Palestinians for the dismantlement of the PA? "The PA has no use. If we fail to reach a peace agreement by the end of this year, I believe it would be best to go back to the period when we were living happily under occupation. We had a small civil administration, they were paying back some $20 million a year to the Israeli treasury, so they were making money off us. Today, we are creating, year after year, bigger deficits. We are spending billions, we have 160,000 employees, half of them are security personnel, who give us no security whatsoever, we are spending masses of money on guns, which we only use against each other and which provide us no security. The whole thing is a mess." Nusseibeh says that to this day, the Palestinians have opposed taking part in the Jerusalem municipal elections because they feared doing so would sever the link between Jerusalem's Arabs and the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. Now, given the diminishing likelihood of a two-state solution, perhaps it is time for the Palestinians to reconsider. "People in Jerusalem – why should they attach themselves to the Muqata, to Ramallah? There is no reason. There's nothing. The municipal election in Jerusalem [could serve as a launching point for seeking equal rights in a binational state]. We begin with Jerusalem, not as a separate part, but as a spearhead of the entire Palestinian body. Why not? Why not turn the weakness into a strength? Are you disappointed by the Israeli peace camp? Did your partner, Ami Ayalon, who joined the same government you now accuse of distancing itself from your proposal, betray you? "I respect Ami Ayalon. He is a very honest person, that is something that has always attracted me to him. It is not a betrayal of me personally. I look upon it as the ultimate submission by the individual to the wheels of history. You reach the point where you feel no longer able to do what you want, to steer the wheels in the direction you want them to go. And you submit, and become a part of the machine. So it's not really a betrayal. It's rather an expression of weakness. I am sad more than surprised. I recognize it as part of human weakness. "I was still hoping because, before he went to the Labor Party, he came and spoke to me. I like this about him. I knew what he was doing. People were pushing him for a long time, trying to get him into the system, and he resisted. But then at one stage, I think he made up his mind: 'Maybe I can lead the Labor Party, and then this is the best place for me to be.' I said, fine, do it. I was unhappy that ... he became marginalized as minister www.reiner-bernstein.de 260 – Chronologie 2008

without portfolio." Nusseibeh says he lost touch with Ayalon since the latter became a minister. Asked if Abbas would be able to muster Palestinian support for an agreement like "The People's Choice," Nusseibeh says both the Palestinian president and Olmert need to courageously take on their respective opposition camps. For instance, if Abbas "would come to the Palestinian people and say, 'I initialed such a document. I want to dissolve the legislative council and run for election and this is going to be my political platform. Not only for me as a president, but also as leader of Fatah.' Let us assume that he does this and then he creates a debate in our society. It will be a very far-reaching, democratic debate, in which he will be looked upon as presenting his project. [This would] mark the beginning of a process, of a struggle. "I believe that on Israeli side, Olmert could do the same. We don't know whether both leaders will be reelected, but it's worth doing, even if they're not, because at least we know we've given this peace agreement a chance." Ami Ayalon says, in response: "I agree with Sari Nusseibeh that time is running out for the two-state solution. He voices the frustration and desperation of the Palestinians, and we have to consider that. If a man like him, a son of a Palestinian refugee who relinquished his right of return and was bodily attacked because of it, comes to the conclusion that the two- state solution is no longer an option, it means that the whole pragmatic Palestinian approach is crumbling. "I share his view that Olmert missed a chance to get an agreement due to efforts to insure his own political survival. The Labor Party will not succeed in getting back in power by attacking the other parties, but only by raising the common banner of security and political agreements."

83 Eine ausführliche Auseinandersetzung mit diesem Papier erfolgt in Kürze in der Menüleiste „Rezensionen“ in dieser Homepage.

84 Abu Rdeineh: Olmert's Reported Proposal Rejected, „Wafa“ [PLO News Agency] 12.8.2008: Presidency spokesperson, Nabil Abu Rdeineh, said on Tuesday that the Palestinian Leadership rejects a reported Israeli peace proposal because it does not provide for a contiguous Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital. Abu Rdeineh told WAFA said the proposal did not fall in line with requirements of the Road Map and the Annapolis understandings that the borders of the future Palestinian state should correspond with Israel's pre- 1967 borders. The Presidency spokesperson was responding to a report in the Israeli daily Haaretz on Tuesday that said Israel had made the proposal, which included land compensation and an offer of a corridor that would connect the Gaza Strip with the West Bank. 'The Israeli proposal is not acceptable,' he said. 'The Palestinian side will only accept a Palestinian state with territorial continuity, with holy Jerusalem as its capital, without settlements, and on the June 4, 1967 boundaries.' According to the Report, Israel would maintain large blocs of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Jerusalem. It also says that the proposal rejects the Palestinian demand for what Palestinians call the right of return for Palestinian refugees. The report said Jerusalem was not included in the proposed agreement and was postponed until a later date, because of internal Israeli political considerations. Under the proposal, Israel would return to the Palestinians www.reiner-bernstein.de 261 – Chronologie 2008

some 92.7 percent of the occupied West Bank, plus all of the Gaza Strip, according to Western and Palestinian officials briefed on the negotiations. In exchange for West Bank land that Israel would keep, Olmert proposed a 5.3 percent land swap giving the Palestinian side a desert territory adjacent to the Gaza Strip. Abu Rdeineh commented that the Palestinian side would not accept any land swap unless it was acceptable in both 'size and quality.' He affirmed that just peace can only be achieved through implementing the national and international principles, pointing out that 'if Israel seriously seeks peace, it should abide by the resolutions of the international legitemacy, the Road Map and the vision of the US President George Bush.'

85 Über die Konferenz s. den Reisebericht von Reiner Bernstein in der Menüleiste „Berichte aus Israel und Palästina“ in dieser Homepage.

86 Yitzhak Benhorin: Livni: We'll continue to push for peace deal by year's end, in YNET 31.07.08, www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L- 3576205,00.html : In first public appearance after PM Olmert's announcement that he will step down after Kadima primaries, foreign minister says she has been striving to reach agreement with Palestinians this year and will continue to do so, calls on all parties to unit behind agenda of Israeli security and peace process. WASHINGTON – Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni said Thursday that she will continue to push for a peace deal with the Palestinians this year, despite the uncertainty of the domestic political situation. In her first public appearance since Prime Minister Ehud Olmert announced that he would step down after the Kadima primaries, the party premiership candidate said she had been striving to reach an agreement with the Palestinians this year. "We continue to do so," she said. I am here as the foreign minister of the Israeli government and I can assure you that I plan to represent the State of Israel's interests in the future as well, Livni said. Speaking to reporters after meeting with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki- moon in New York, the foreign minister said that the internal political procedures in Israel did not change the security problems or the need to work for kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit's return. All candidates are committed to the same interests of the State of Israel, she said. "Moreover," she added, "I believe that the internal division we are used to, and the thought that there are extreme differences in agendas and ideologies between the various parties, is an issue of the past and is no longer true. "There is a common agenda which can be represented by any party, both in terms of the diplomatic issues and in terms of the ability to deal with the threats." The foreign minister also conveyed a message to all Israeli parties, in an attempt to create an atmosphere of stability and prevent the need for general elections. She said all parties should unite behind the agenda of Israeli security and the peace process. "I will continue to call any party that can be a partner to this agenda to put aside all these internal calculations and create unity inwards and outwards," she said, adding that all parties' main goal was "to restore the public's trust in Israeli politics." In her meeting with the UN chief, Livni and Ban discussed the Iranian threat, Hizbullah's activity in Lebanon and Hamas' activity in Gaza, as well www.reiner-bernstein.de 262 – Chronologie 2008

as the efforts to secure Shalit's release. Reuters and AP contributed to this report.

87 Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR), Press Release, 30 July 2008: PCHR Gravely Concerned over the Deterioration of the Human Rights Situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. PCHR is gravely concerned over the continuous deterioration in the human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory caused by Palestinian security services in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, including attacks against civil society organizations, political arrests campaigns and attacks against journalists. PCHR calls upon the two Palestinian governments in Gaza and Ramallah to stop such human rights violations and to ensure respect for the Basic Law and international human rights standards. Security services of the government in Gaza have continued their attacks against civil institutions belonging to Fatah movement in the Gaza Strip. The latest of such attacks was on Tuesday, 29 July 2008, as security services ordered the closure of Rafah Service Club in Rafah for the second time in 2 days, and Sharek Youth Forum in Gaza City. It is worth noting that Palestinian security services in Gaza and the 'Izziddin al-Qassam Brigades (the armed wing of Hamas) launched on 26 July 2008 a campaign against civil society organizations belonging to, believed to be close to, or even not linked at all to Fatah movement throughout the Gaza Strip. According to PCHR's documentation, the number of civil society organizations that have been attacked throughout the Gaza Strip since 26 July 2008 has increased to 152. Over the past few days political arrest campaigns escalated in the West Bank and Gaza Strip at the hands of security services of the governments in Gaza and Ramallah. In the West Bank, Palestinian security services resumed arrests of Hamas supporters over the past few days. PCHR's documentation indicates that the arrests campaign that started on 26 July has targeted more than 100 detainees, many of them academics, religious leaders, school principals, community figures, university students, and elected municipality officials from the pro-Hamas change and reform party. In Gaza, Palestinian security services continued to detain Fatah supporters in prisons or detention centers. These arrests are part of a campaign launched by these security services on 26 July against dozens of Fatah supporters. Over the past several days attacks by security services on freedom of expression escalated in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The Center's preliminary investigations indicate that the latest violation occurred in the Gaza Strip. At approximately 1:00 on Wednesday, 30 July, a Police Force arrived at the house of journalist Emad Eid (36) in Tal El-Hawa Quarter in Gaza City. Eid is the Director of Maan News Agency office in Gaza City and the correspondent of Al-Manar Satellite Station. The Police asked him to accompany them to El-Abbas police station in Gaza City to discuss a news item published by Maan News Agency on 29 July. He was released half an hour later. In the same context, the Palestinian Police in Gaza city banned the entry of three daily newspapers (Al-Quds, Al-Ayyam, and Al-Hayat) into Gaza for the third consecutive day. The agents for the three newspapers headed to Beit Hanoun (Erez) crossing on 28 and 29 July to receive the newspapers. However, Policemen near the crossing prevented them from receiving them and confiscated the 28 July editions. www.reiner-bernstein.de 263 – Chronologie 2008

At approximately 21:30 on Saturday, 26 July, agents of the Internal Security Apparatus in Gaza raided the WAFA News Agency offices in El- Aydi building in Tal El-Hawa Quarter in Gaza City. They confiscated all belongings and carried them in trucks to undisclosed locations. An Internal Security Apparatus force is still stationed at the entrance of the WAFA office. At approximately 3:00 on Saturday (26 July), masked gunmen from the Internal Security Apparatus in Gaza detained the journalist Sawwah Abu Seif (41), the correspondent of German TV, from his residence in the Journalists' Building in Tal El-Hawa Quarter in Gaza City. They took him to an undisclosed location. The Internal Security Apparatus confiscated his laptop computer. Abu Seif's fate remains unclear till now. In the West Bank, a force of the Preventive Security Apparatus raided the Arabi Media Center in the town of Durra southwest of Hebron, at approximately 21:30 on Tuesday (29 July). They detained the Center's Director, journalist Awad Ibrahim Mohammad Rjoub (31), who is the correspondent of Al-Jazeera Net and other news agencies. He was taken to the Preventive Security Compound in the town. Awad's brother, Mu'ath, informed PCHR's fieldworker that the force confiscated two computers, a cellular phone, and documents belonging to his brother. In the morning of Tuesday (29 July), Palestinian security forces detained the journalist Farid Hammad (35) from the town of Silwad northeast of Ramallah. He works in the editorial section of Al-Ayyam newspaper. Farid's wife informed PCHR's fieldworker that two days ago her husband received a summoning order from a Palestinian security service she did not identify. He went to the headquarters of that security service and did not return home or call his family since then. In the evening of Saturday (26 July), the Palestinian General Intelligence Service detained the free-lance journalist Mustafa Ali Sabri (41) from his house in the town of Qalqilya. He was taken to the General Intelligence compound in the city. Sabri informed PCHR's fieldworker that General Intelligence operatives threw him on the ground, beat him, and used derogatory language against him. He was released on Sunday (27 July) without charges. At approximately 12:10 on Tuesday (26 July), several photographers were covering a demonstration for the Islamic Liberation Party in Hebron. Two Palestinian security officers in military attire asked the photographers to stop shooting. And Immediately afterwards they snatched the camera of journalist Jusri Mahmoud El-Jamal (32); and one of them started pounding the camera against a car, destroying the camera. El-Jamal works for Reuters. It is noted that Palestine and Al-Resala newspapers, close to Hamas, have been banned from distribution in the West Bank after Al-Ayyam Printing House declined to continue printing them in the West Bank since 16 June 2007 after receiving a threat from anonymous parties on 14 June 2007. On another front, PCHR has documented additional attacks by members of Izzedeen El-Qassam Battalions, the armed wing of Hamas, which included shootings, severe beatings, and torture against people and raids against houses. The Center's preliminary investigation indicates that the most prominent of these violations are the shooting of persons after being abducted by Izzedeen El-Qassam Battalions. In Gaza City, El-Qassam masked gunmen in a vehicle abducted Emad Ahmad El-Sheikh Khalil (28) in the afternoon of 26 July. They abducted him from his neighborhood of El-Twan in Jabalia as he was walking near his house. Later during the same day, an unknown caller contacted Emad's brother using Emad's www.reiner-bernstein.de 264 – Chronologie 2008

cellular phone and informed him that Emad is injured and is near El- Nawras resort west of the town. Emad's relatives headed to the area and found him injured by several bullets in the pelvis and legs. They took him to Shifa Hospital where his condition is listed as serious. In the town of Bani Suhaila, east of Khan Yunis in southern Gaza, members of Izzedeen El-Qassam Battalions abducted 9 members of Abu Sa'da clan at approximately 21:00 on Sunday (27 July). They took them to the El-Qassam outpost in the town. The gunmen fired pistol shots at one of the abductees, Abd El-Hamid Suliman Abu Sa'da (32) inside the outpost. He was injured by 4 bulletss in his right hand and right leg. They other abductees were beaten and humiliated by El-Qassam members. In Jabalia refugee camp in the northern Gaza Strip, members of Izzedeen El-Qassam Battalions abducted Zeyad Hasan Abu Samak (35) at approximately 1:00 on Saturday (26 July). He is a construction materials trader from the refugee camp. They took him to an undisclosed location. Approximately 1.5 hours later, people found him near Abu Obaida School in Beir El-Na'ja area in a bad health condition as a result of severe beating. They took him to Shifa Hospital in Gaza City where sources said he was suffering from concussions in the head and bruises to the body. He was transferred to Barzelai Hospital in Israel due to the severity of his condition. In another incident, Ali Majed Hussein (25), a released abductee, informed PCHR that at approximately 23:10 on Saturday (26 July), Izzedeen El- Qassam Battalions gunmen traveling in a car abducted him from his grocery store in El-Mashtal Street northwest of Gaza City. They took him to a residential building near the former headquarters of the General Intelligence Service in the Sudaneya area west of Jabalia. The abductee stated that the gunmen beat him with their hands and gun butts on the way. Then they forced him to sit in an open area near the residential building and threw 4 construction bricks at his feet. Then they tied his feet and put cement blocks with protruding iron rods on his feet. Then they took him to an open area near Khaled El-Alami school in Mashtal Street and forced him to lie face down on the ground. Then they beat him and left the area. The area residents took him to Al-Quds Hospital in Gaza City suffering from bruises and punctures in his feet caused by pressure from the cement blocks. On another front, Izzedeen El-Qassam Battalions members closed the house belonging to Abd El-Qadir El-Mash'harawi, the father of Fatah leader Samir El-Mash'haraw, and the house of Zahir Abu Baker in El-Daraj Quarter in Gaza City. At approximately 00:00 on Tuesday (29 July), tens of El-Qassam Battalions members arrived at the house of Abd El-Qadir El- Mash'harawi and forced him to evacuate the house that consists of 5 stories and houses approximately 30 people, most of them women and children. They closed the house entrance with an iron-wielding machine, and wrote on the walls "closed by order of Izzedeen El-Qassam Battalions." Adnan Abd El-Qadir El-Mash'haraw informed PCHR that the commander of the gunmen informed him, "This is a message to your brother Samir in order to refrain from making statements." About 15 minutes later, Izzedeen El-Qassam Battalions gunmen closed the house of Zahir Mohammad Abu Baker located approximately 20 meters away from El-Mash'harawi house using the same method. The house consists of 3 stories and houses 6 people. It is noted that Abu Baker purchased the house from Zeyad Abd El-Qadir El-Mash'harawi on 2 August 2007. On another front, Izzedeen El-Qassam Battalions confiscated private vehicles. The most prominent case occurred at approximately 23:00 on www.reiner-bernstein.de 265 – Chronologie 2008

Saturday (26 July) when 10 masked El-Qassam gunmen in 3 vehicles arrived at the house of Hasan Jum'a El-Efranji in Jamal Abd El-Naser Street in Gaza City. The searched the house garage and confiscated 3 vehicles, one of them a governmental vehicle and the other 2 private. At approximately 1:30 on Monday (28 July) the owners retrieved the 2 private vehicles from El-Qassam Battalions. One was suffering from a serious mechanical flaw due to misuse by members of El-Qassam. PCHR strongly condemns these violations, and: 1) Calls upon the government in Gaza to stop the campaign against civil society organizations and to retreat from all measures of closure and confiscation against dozens of organizations. 2) Asserts that the right of association is ensured by the constitution and international human rights standards, and that all measures taken by security services and the 'Izziddin al-Qassam Brigades violate Law #1 of 2000 Related to Charities and NGOs. 3) Calls for neutralizing the civil society from the conflict between Fatah and Hamas movements, and stresses that independence of the civil society and the vital role played by NGOs in providing social, economic, developmental and cultural services. 4) Calls for the immediate release of all political detainees in the West Bank and Gaza Strip; and reminds of the Palestinian High Court Decision of 20 February 1999 outlawing political arrests; and calls upon all executive parties to respect the High Court decision and retrain from conducting illegal political arrests. 5) Points with concern to the recurrence of attacks on freedom of expression and journalism freedoms; affirming the need to provide protection for journalists and media outlets in order to fulfill their tasks freely in respect of freedom of expression and journalism freedoms. 6) Strongly condemns the continued illegal detentions perpertrated by Izzedeen El-Qassam Battalions, and calls for their immediate stop and for the closure of all El-Qassam-controlled detention centers. The Centre affirms that Izzedeen El-Qassam Battalions is not a law-enforcement agency and is not empowered to conduct arrests or deal in civilian matters in this form. Annexed herewith is a list of civil society organizations, which have been attacked, as documented so far by PCHR staff. Civil Society Organizations That Have Been Attacked in the Gaza Strip Northern Gaza Strip: 1. Jabalya Service Club 2. Life and Hope Association–Jabalya refugee camp 3. Fatah Headquarter in the Northern Gaza Strip 4. North Association for Social Development–Beit Lahia 5. Beit Lahia Development Association 6. Educational Enrichment Association–Beit Lahia 7. Capacity-Building Center of the Association for the Rehabilitation of the Handicapped–Beit Lahia 8. Al-Nahda Association–Beit Lahia 9. Freedom Association for Community Development 10.Palestinian Forum Association 11. Jabalya Friends Association 12. Palestinian Association for Development and Charity 13. Palestinian Upholsterers Association 14. National Sports Club–Beit Hanoun 15. Ta'alof Association 16. The Coast Association www.reiner-bernstein.de 266 – Chronologie 2008

17. North Gaza Governorate 18. Culture and Arts Center 19. Life and Hope Association–al-Twam area 20. Free Homeland Association for Development 21. Afaq Association for Development Gaza City: 1. Palestinian Council for Foreign Relations 2. Abna'ona Association for Development–the Beach Camp 3. Ajyal Association for Creativity and Development–al-Tuffah neighbourhood 4. The library of National Work Corporation 5. Office of Fatah Movement–Martyr Ayman Jouda Groups 6. General Union of Palestine Students 7. Shu'aa' Association–al-Tuffah neighbourhood 8. Palestinian Youth Association Center 9. Gaza Sports Club 10. Palestinian Family Services Associations 11. Department of Refugees' Affairs 12. Palestine of Tomorrow Association 13. Al-Mashtal Sports Club 14. Al-Jalaa' Sports Club 15. The Beach Service Club 16. Culture Revival Association 17. Al-Zaytoun Sports Club 18. Freedom Association for Community Development–al-Tuffah neighbourhood 19. Charity Association for the Rescue of Palestinian Families 20. National Association for Martyrs 21. Gaza Governorate 22. Steadfast Home Association 23. Palestinian National Association for Construction 24. Palestine Is Our Home 25. Media Development Center of Bir Zeit University 26. Arab Knights Association–al-Nasser neighbourhood 27. Wafa News Agency 28. Financial Department of Fatah Movement 29. Haneen Association 30. The Headquarter of Fatah Movement 31. Office of Fatah Parliamentary Bloc 32. Office of Dr. Ibrahim Abu al-Naja 33. General Union of Palestinian Women 34. The Right to Life Association 35. Palestinian Youth Center Central Gaza Strip: 1. Deir al-Balah Service Club 2. Governorate of the Central Gaza Strip 3. Hittin Charity 4. Sun of Freedom Association 5. Palestinian Commission for Development and Culture 6. Cultural and Social Development Association 7. Local Association for Social Development 8. Al-Maghazi Association for Local Development 9. Al-Maghazi Association for the Rehabilitation of the Handicapped 10. Yasour Charity 11. Buds of Hope Association www.reiner-bernstein.de 267 – Chronologie 2008

12. Student Welfare Association 13. Communication Forum 14. National Association for the Rehabilitation of the Handicapped 15. Al-Maghazi Municipality (old office) 16. Al-Manal Association for Women's Development 17. Union of Women's Committees 18. Al-Aqsa Sports Club 19. Palestinian Home Development and Rehabilitation 20. Al-Aqsa Youth Association–Deir al-Balah 21. Al-Boreij Association for Community Rehabilitation 22. Al-Musaddar Association for Rural Development 23. Palestinian Association for Community Development (Ataa')–Nussairat Khan Yunis: 1. Khan Yunis Governorate 2. Buthaina Hijju Association–al-Amal neighbourhood 3. Al-Awda Charity in Khan Yunis 4. Al-Amal Kindergarten–Khuza'a village 5. Tear of Palestine Association 6. Youth Dawn Association 7. Watan Association for Folklore and Family Development 8. Khuza'a Agricultural Center 9. Young Scientists Forum 10. Al-Huda Development Association 11. Rights and Justice Association 12. Nawwar Educational Center of Culture and Free Thought Society 13. Women's Loans Program 14. Palestinian Youth Volunteers Association–Khan Yunis Camp 15. Happy Society Association for Development–al-Qarara village 16. Office of Fatah Movement in the center of Khan Yunis 17. Office of Fatah Movement in the west of Khan Yunis 18. Union of Women's Committees for Social Work 19. National Association for Social Development 20. Palestinian Democratic Union (Fida) 21. Al-Safaa' Development Association 22. Palestinian Cultural Forum Association 23. Qaa' al-Qurain Development Association 24. Al-Fukhari Development and Culture Association 25. Al-Qarara Youth Forum 26. Al-Qarara Center for Social Development 27. Al-Qarara Association for the Development of the Child in Rural Communities 28. Pioneers Association for Palestinian Youth–'Abasan village 29. Al-Hawa and al-Nour Association–Bani Suhaila village 30. Rural Development Association 31. Al-Shorouq Center–Bani Suhaila village 32. Future Association–Khuza'a village 33. Youth without Borders–Khuza'a village 34. Al-Nahda Rural Development Association 35. Palestinian Association for Development 36. Bayader Association for Development–Bani Suhaila 37. Khalil al-Rahman Association–'Abasan village 38. Palestinian Youth Forum–Bani Suhaila village 39. Zahwa Kindergarten 40. Al-Mashriq Charity 41. Palestinian Hopes Charity www.reiner-bernstein.de 268 – Chronologie 2008

42. University Graduates Association–Bani Suhaila village 43. Bunyan Charity 44. International Friendship Club for Children 45.Country Association for Palestinian Folklore – 'Abasan village 46. Union of Palestinian Pharmacists 47. Candles of Hope Association for the Development and Culture of the Child 48. Life Impulse Association 49. The Holy Mosques Islamic Charity 50. Al-Quds Association for the Development of al-Mawasi Area 51. Al-Karama Sports Club 52. Shiny Tomorrow Association Rafah: 1. Collective Center for Public Service (Collective Sports Club) 2. Rafah Service Club 3. Al-Karama Compound for Culture and Arts 4. Rural Activities Center of Yabous Association 5. Public Committee of Refugees 6. Office of Fatah Movement–Khaled al-Hassan Area 7. Youth Forum Office 8. Rafah Governorate 9. Office of Fatah Movement–Salah Khalaf Area 10. Office of Fatah Movement–Majed Abu Sharar Area 11. Al-Nasser Women Center (Rural Women Development Association) 12. Generations Development Center (Ghiras) 13. Yebna Charity 14. Al-Hayat Charity 15. Future Generations Association 16. Palestinian Vision Association (Fajr) 17. Youth Intellectual Development Association 18. Office of Fatah Movement–Sa'd Sayel Area 19. Al-Salam neighborhood Charity 20. Isdoud Charity 21.Al-Nasser Charity For more information please call PCHR office in Gaza, Gaza Strip, on +972 8 2824776–2825893 # PCHR, 29 Omer El Mukhtar St., El Remal, PO Box 1328 Gaza, Gaza Strip. E-mail: [email protected] , Webpage http://www.pchrgaza.org

88 [email protected] , 30.07.2008: ARD schließt Büro in Gaza: ARD-Kameramann Sawah Abu Saif immer noch nicht frei. ARD- Vorsitzender Fritz Raff: "deutliches Zeichen des Protestes". Fünf Tage nach seiner Festnahme durch die radikal-islamische Hamas in Gaza ist der ARD-Kameramann Sawah Abu Saif immer noch nicht in Freiheit. Wie die ARD vor Ort erfahren hat, soll der Gesundheitszustand von Abu Saif kritisch sein. Nach Erkenntnissen von Studioleiter Richard C. Schneider muss davon ausgegangen werden, dass er möglicherweise gefoltert wurde und wird.Bislang hat sich die Hamas noch nicht bereit erklärt, den ARD-Kameramann freizulassen. Aus Protest schließt die ARD ihr Büro in Gaza solange, bis Sawah Abu Saif wieder frei gelassen wurde und sicher zu seiner Familie zurückgekehrt ist. Der ARD-Vorsitzende Fritz Raff sagte: "Die ARD ist in großer Sorge um ihren Kameramann Sawah Abu Saif. Palästinensische Menschenrechtsorganisationen und Human Rights Watch berichten übereinstimmend über Folter im Gazastreifen und im Westjordanland. Es www.reiner-bernstein.de 269 – Chronologie 2008

gibt auch ernstzunehmende Hinweise darauf, dass unser Kameramann davon betroffen ist. Das ist unmenschlich und wir fordern deshalb die Hamas noch einmal nachdrücklich auf, unseren Mitarbeiter sofort freizulassen. Die gegen ihn gerichteten Vorwürfe, das wissen und sagen alle, die mit ihm arbeiten, sind haltlos. Wir bitten deshalb auch alle, die vor Ort überhaupt etwas ausrichten können, sich für Sawah Abu Saif einzusetzen. Unter den gegebenen Umständen ist journalistisches Arbeiten in Gaza nicht mehr möglich. Deshalb und als deutliches Zeichen des Protestes schließt die ARD ihr Büro dort bis auf weiteres." Der Bayerische Rundfunk hat sich als Arbeitgeber klar hinter seinen verhafteten Mitarbeiter in Gaza gestellt. Fernsehdirektor Gerhard Fuchs stellt dazu fest: "Sawah Abu Saif ist ein äußerst zuverlässiger Kollege.Er hat unser vorbehaltloses Vertrauen. Er und seine Kollegen setzen sich für eine faire Berichterstattung aus dem Krisengebiet ein. Wenn das Wohl und der Schutz unserer Mitarbeiter vor Ort nicht gewährleistet ist, müssen wir handeln und unser Büro in Gaza schließen." 66100 Saarbrücken, Tel: 0681 / 602 2040, Fax: 0681 / 602 2049 E-Mail: [email protected]

89 Etgar Lefkovits: ‚EU should absorb Palestinian refugees,’, in „The Jerusalem Post“ 17.07.2008: Meretz MK Yossi Beilin on Thursday called on European countries to declare how many Palestinian refugees and their descendants they would be willing to absorb as part of any future peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. "It is important that we know now how many Palestinian refugees [third] countries are willing to absorb, so that when we get to the critical moment [of a peace agreement] we will be prepared for such an eventuality, and be able to carry it out," Beilin said in an interview with The Jerusalem Post. The dovish lawmaker made the remarks one day after he told a group of European ambassadors at a closed-door meeting of the Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that each of their countries needed to decide what their quota would be for absorbing Palestinian refugees and their descendants. In the interview, Beilin conceded that only a "certain, not large" number of Palestinian refugees and their descendants would be willing to go to third countries as part of a peace agreement, with the bulk choosing to be resettled in a future Palestinian state or remain in the countries where they are currently living. Nevertheless, he said it was important for such information to be known in advance of any future accord, even if it were only a symbolic move, to be ready for such a solution to the problem, partial though it may be. Beilin said that Europeans have never given a "clear picture" of how many refugees – if any – they would be willing to absorb as part of a future peace accord, and that no "affirmative answer" has been received on the issue until now. EU spokeswoman Christina Gallach said Thursday that it was premature to respond to such a proposal at this time. "This is not something that has entered into the pipelines of practical considerations, and I am not aware of specific discussion of this issue," she said in a telephone interview from Brussels. "The EU will be ready to continue to contribute in a clear manner to the final status of peace agreement as negotiations continue," she said. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians – with estimates ranging from 400,000 to 750,000 – left their homes in 1948 and 1949, and they, along www.reiner-bernstein.de 270 – Chronologie 2008

with their millions of descendants, make up one of the prickliest issues to be dealt with by Israeli and Palestinian negotiators as part of any resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The super-sensitive issue of dealing with the Palestinian refugees, has been largely untouched in Israel for years, due to the Palestinian demand for the "right of return" of Palestinian refugees to Israel which the Jewish State flatly rejects as a move which will indelibly alter the character of the country. "We want to put this issue on the table, and not keep it under the table, and deal with it not tomorrow but today so that we can work on an agreed upon solution," said MK Amira Dotan of the ruling Kadima Party, who co-chairs a Knesset committee on the issue together with MK Benny Elon of the rightist National Union-National Religious Party. "We want to push the buttons so that the dynamics can begin," Dotan said. In contrast to Beilin, who shares the view of the international community that a solution to the refugee problem can only happen after a peace accord is reached between Israelis and Palestinians, Elon believes that the issue of Palestinian refugees can – and should – be dealt with now, especially since no peace agreement is in sight in the foreseeable future. "It has been a big mistake not to deal with the issue of the Palestinian refugees," said Elon, who advocates dealing with the issue head-on for humanitarian reasons. A cornerstone of the hawkish parliamentarian's recent diplomatic initiative includes dismantling the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), the mammoth UN body that deals with Palestinian refugees and their descendants, and resettling the Palestinian refugees into countries outside of Israel, in keeping with long-standing Israeli government policy that an influx of refugees would demographically damage Israel's character as a Jewish state. Meanwhile, a much-anticipated visit by UNRWA Commissioner-General Karen Koning AbuZayd to the Knesset for a special parliamentary committee meeting which was scheduled for this week was indefinitely postponed, after AbuZayd said that a fund-raising trip to Saudi Arabia this week was extended.

90 Daniel Luban: Doves Outnumber Hawks in Jewish Community, 17.7.2008: new poll suggests that US Jews hold views about the Middle East that are considerably more dovish than frequently acknowledged, with large majorities favoring diplomacy with Iran, supporting a two-state solution in Israel/Palestine, and advocating US withdrawal from Iraq. US Jews also favor Barack Obama over John McCain by a wide margin in the upcoming November presidential elections, according to the poll, which was released Wednesday by the Jewish advocacy group J Street. And as Washington prepares for a major summit next week hosted by Pastor John Hagee's hawkish Christians United for Israel (CUFI), the poll finds US Jews highly skeptical of political alliances with right-wing evangelical groups such as CUFI. "There is a major gap between the attitudes of and the conventional wisdom about how they view America's role in the Arab-Israeli conflict," said Jim Gerstein of Gerstein/Agne, the firm that conducted the poll. The 800 US Jews surveyed overwhelmingly disapproved of the Middle East policies of the George W. Bush administration. Eighty-three percent disapproved of Bush's overall job performance, versus 16 percent who approved; the participants also disapproved of his handling of the Iraq war www.reiner-bernstein.de 271 – Chronologie 2008

by a 79-21 margin, and felt that Israel was less secure as a result of his policies by a 61-25 margin. The poll found widespread support for an active US role in the Arab-Israeli peace process, with 87 percent supporting such a role and 70 percent feeling that the US should push both sides to make compromises in order to achieve peace. Seventy-five percent of respondents saw a two state solution as necessary to strengthen Israeli security, and 72 percent saw a two state solution as an important US security interest as well. Further, 50 percent agreed more strongly with the statement that "Israel can only achieve real security through peace agreements", versus 34 percent who agreed more strongly with the statement that "Israel can only achieve real security by maintaining its military superiority." With regard to Iran, 69 percent said that they were more likely to vote for a candidate who rejected Bush's equation of diplomacy with appeasement and pursued "strong but tough diplomacy" with Iran, while 21 percent said that they were less likely. But attitudes about military action against Iran were somewhat ambiguous. A plurality of 48 percent of respondents said that they were more likely to vote for a candidate whose positions included attacking Iran if they pursued a nuclear program or supporting an Israeli preemptive strike; 41 percent said that they were less likely. Respondents also favored beginning to withdraw US troops from Iraq by a 64-28 margin. Perhaps unsurprisingly given these positions and their historical voting record, US Jews were heavily leaning towards Senator Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential elections. Sixty-two percent described themselves as likely to vote for Obama, versus 32 percent for his opponent, Senator John McCain. However, support for Israel was not particularly high on the priority list of respondents. Only 8 percent described Israel as one of the two most important issues for them in the upcoming election, placing it seventh on the list of issues; far more important were the economy (55 percent) and the war in Iraq (33 percent). The survey comes at a critical moment with regard to the 2008 elections. While Jews make up only about two percent of the US population, their exceptionally high rate of voter participation gives them almost twice the voting power. Their numbers are also concentrated in several "swing" states, such as Pennsylvania, Ohio, New Jersey, Florida, and Illinois, that could very likely decide a close election next year. Moreover, funding by Jewish donors of Democratic party candidates is traditionally highly significant, accounting, for example, for as much as one half of all campaign contributions received by Democratic candidates to the Senate in the last election cycle. The opinions revealed by the survey could therefore prove influential in shaping the positions of candidates during the election season, challenging the widespread perception that US Jews hold hard-line views about Middle East policy. This perception, critics charge, has been in part a product of the dominance of the hawkish American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in shaping Israel policy. J Street, the group that released today's poll, was founded in April 2008 in large part out of the belief that the more dovish views of most US Jews were being neglected in Washington. www.reiner-bernstein.de 272 – Chronologie 2008

"The poll only confirms the impression that we had that America's elected officials have really misread the Jewish community because they have not moved beyond the loudest and most influential members of the community," said Jeremy Ben-Ami, the executive director of J Street. The survey also comes at a highly charged moment in Washington, as the city prepares for next week's summit hosted by CUFI, the right-wing evangelical group headed by Pastor John Hagee. Hagee's views have attracted a great deal of controversy, causing John McCain to renounce the minister's endorsement earlier this year. Among other things, Hagee has claimed that Christians should seek an undivided Israel and confrontation with Iran as necessary preconditions for precipitating the Armageddon, and that Hitler was a biblically ordained "hunter" who was necessary in order to force Jews to settle in Israel. Yet Hagee has maintained his ties with AIPAC – he told the Jerusalem Post in 2006 that he envisioned CUFI as "a Christian version of AIPAC" – and with leading Israel hawks such as Senator Joseph Lieberman, who is slated to deliver the keynote address at the CUFI summit on Jul. 22. The J Street poll found little sympathy for Hagee and his organization among the broader US Jewish community. 51 percent of participants in the survey had a negative impression of CUFI prior to being told any information about the group, compared to 19 percent who had a positive impression. After hearing descriptions of CUFI's Israel policies, 78 percent of respondents felt that Jewish leaders and institutions should not form alliances with the group. (Inter Press Service) „J Street“ ist im April 2008 nach eigenen Worten mit dem Ziel gegründet worden, als „erste und einzige Lobbygruppe“ der Sicherheit Israels dadurch dienen zu wollen, dass sie die Richtung der US-amerikanischen Außenpolitik im Nahen Osten ändert und eine politische Debatte über Israel und den Nahen Osten in Gang setzt. Zu „J Street“ gehören jüdische und nichtjüdische Persönlichkeiten wie der frühere Berater Bill Clintons, Robert Malley – der heutige für den Nahen Osten und Nordafrika bei der „International Crisis Group“ zuständig ist –, und der frühere US-Botschafter in Israel, Samuel Lewis. „J Street“ versteht sich als Gegenstück zu „K Street“, dem Namen für das traditionelle Lobby-Establishment in Washingto, D.C.

91 Vgl. die Eintragungen am 01.06.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

92 Vgl. die Eintragung am 12.02.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

93 Agence France Press: Saudis offer Moscow billions to break with Tehran: Saudi Arabia has offered to buy Russian arms worth 2.4 billion dollars (1.5 billion euros) if Moscow stops supporting Iran, a Russian newspaper reported Tuesday, citing diplomatic sources. "The kingdom's government advised Moscow to cut back its cooperation with Tehran, and in exchange it held out the prospect of profitable contracts with Saudi Arabia," the daily business newspaper Kommersant wrote. A spokesman for Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin denied the report. "Any claims that military-technical cooperation between Russia and Saudi Arabia is in any way linked to Russian-Iranian dialogue are inappropriate and do not correspond to reality," the Interfax news agency quoted Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov as saying. www.reiner-bernstein.de 273 – Chronologie 2008

The newspaper report came one day after Putin met with the general secretary of Saudi Arabia's Security Council, Prince Bandar bin Sultan. Citing sources in Russia's defence industry, the newspaper said Saudi Arabia was ready to buy at least 100 BMP-3 combat vehicles, 150 T-90 tanks and 160 Mi-17, Mi-26 and Mi-35 helicopters. Kommersant put the total value of the equipment at about 2.4 billion dollars. Moscow has opposed stiffer international sanctions on Iran for its nuclear programme, which Tehran says is civilian in nature. Relations between Russia and Saudi Arabia – a traditional US ally – have warmed considerably in recent years.

94 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 16 Julyx 2008: Arab diplomacy contradicts U.S. policy, U.S. lacks leverage over Arab allies: Arab countries are undertaking diplomatic initiatives that clearly contradict U.S. policy, because they no longer trust the U.S. capacity to contend with escalating regional crises. Even Arab countries traditionally aligned with the United States are no longer willing to follow Washington’s lead on policies toward Iran, Lebanon, or Hamas, concludes a new paper from the Carnegie Middle East Program. Marina Ottaway and Mohammed Herzallah assess the diplomatic efforts of Arab regimes seeking to fill the power vacuum left by the absence of a strong regime in Iraq and ineffectual U.S. policy in . Key Conclusions: – While new Arab diplomatic initiatives may contradict current U.S. policy, they may not contravene long-term U.S. interests. – Arab regional diplomacy lacks an overarching vision and is instead based on a desire to reduce imminent threats. – Influence in the Arab world has shifted to the Gulf and the change is likely permanent due to increased oil wealth and the crises engulfing other regions. – The United States and Saudi Arabia, historically close allies, often hope for the same outcome in regional conflicts but pursue different strategies. In trying to contain Iran, Saudi Arabia seeks to avoid confrontation through diplomatic engagement, while the United States favors isolation. Saudi Arabia promotes reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas as a necessary step in the Israeli–Palestinian peace process, while the United States refuses to recognize Hamas. – Qatar and the United Arab Emirates unexpectedly emerged as extremely active participants in the new regional diplomacy. Qatar’s success in negotiating the Doha agreement between Lebanese rivals prompted other initiatives among other Gulf countries. – Egypt, consumed by domestic challenges and a looming succession crisis, has refrained from intervening in regional issues unless directly affected, such as the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. – Aid-dependent Jordan remains a quiet ally of the United States, neither opposing the initiatives of other Arab countries, nor embarking on any of its own.

95 Gershon Baskin: Planning for failure – how to end the occupation, create the Palestinian state and make peace with Israel without negotiations, in “Al-Quds” 13.07.2008: While I remain somewhat optimistic that it is still possible to reach a negotiated agreement for the two-state solution, the possibility of failure of the negotiations is very real. Failure of the process without a clear and well thought out detailed plan for a strategy of ending the Israeli occupation, www.reiner-bernstein.de 274 – Chronologie 2008

establishing the Palestinian state next to Israel and making peace with Israel will probably result in a new round of violence which is likely to be much more horrific than what we have seen until now. Failed negotiations may very well mean the final demise of the two-state solution and there is no other real solution to this conflict. Talks of a one state solution is a lie. It is no solution. It turns the conflict back into an existential conflict of "us or them" rather than "us and them" as the two state solutions is defined. The so called one state solution denies the basic right of both the Israeli people and the Palestinian people to self determination. It denies both people the right to a nation state of their own – a political framework that gives expression to their cultures, heritage national aspirations, cultural and national identities. If the peace process fails we must be ready to launch a strategy for ending the occupation, bringing about the creation of the Palestinian state next to Israel, making peace between the two states – all of this without negotiations. A new strategy would be based on unilateral actions mainly taking place by the Palestinian. Functionally the primary impetus of the strategy is the unilateral assertion of Palestinian sovereignty in every non-violent way possible. The fundamental basis of the strategy must be a well disciplined national project led by the political leadership. Non-violent, direct confrontation with the occupation is the key, leadership and disciplines are the tools. The first stage of the strategy is the call of the leadership announcing that from this moment forth the Palestinian state exists. The borders of the State of Palestine are the borders of June 4, 1967 and East Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine. The State of Palestine is under occupation, and the Palestinian people will force Israel to end the occupation through a non- violent direct confrontation campaign led by the Palestinian leadership. The leadership would call to the international community to provide full membership in all international forums, including the UN and all of its agencies. The Palestinian leadership will call on all foreign governments to announce that their representative offices and consulates to the Palestinian Authority will now be Embassies to the State of Palestine. The foreign Ambassadors should be called on to submit their letters to accreditation to the President of Palestine, Mahmoud Abbas. Likewise, President Abbas should call on all of the countries in the world to recognize the PLO and other Palestine interest offices around the world as Embassies of the State of Palestine. Following the Presidential decrees, Palestinians would then begin to implement a strategy for imposing its sovereignty. There will be high prices to pay and there will be many violent confrontations with Israel, but it is essential that the violence be one sided. If Palestinians will respond to Israeli violence with violence, the strategy will surely fail. Palestinians must conquer the higher moral ground to succeed. There must be absolutely no violence of any kind coming from the Palestinian side – not even the throwing of stones! The only violence seen on television throughout the world would be Israeli attacks against Palestinian civilians. One of the immediate short term goals of the strategy is for the entire leadership of the Palestinian people to be arrested by Israel. Ten of thousands and if possible hundreds of thousands of Palestinians must fill the Israeli prisons s that there will be no room to hold them. A detailed plan of direct confrontation must be developed. The following will provide some ideas of the kind of strategy needed: www.reiner-bernstein.de 275 – Chronologie 2008

With East Jerusalem as the declared capital of Palestine, President Abbas, the President of Palestine calls on Palestinians all over Palestine to go with him to pray in al Aqsa mosque. The march to al Aqsa would be led by the President and the leadership and the first confrontation with the Israelis would be by the President. Israelis who support the Palestinians should be called on to meet them at the checkpoints to march together to Jerusalem. Mayors, parliament members, heads of NGO’s, doctors, teachers and others should lead people to remove the road blocks that prevent free movement and access from the villages to the main roads. People should remove road blocks with their bare hands and with bulldozers. The roads of Palestine belong to the people of Palestine and they will no longer cooperate with the policies of occupation. The government of Palestine should declare that all of the settlers living in the Palestinian state are now citizens of the state of Palestine. They must adhere to Palestine laws. They must apply to Palestinian driver’s license and new license plates for their vehicles. Unarmed Palestinian check points should be set up at junctions near the settlements to issue traffic tickets to settlers for driving in Palestine without a valid licenses. Each new day a press conference should be held by the leadership to announce the direct confrontation activities for the day. Symbolic and real acts must take place everyday. The Government of Palestine should issue maps of the State of Palestine with copies of the Declaration of Independence. On another day, the Government of Palestine should issue a draft Treaty of Peace with the State of Israel including all of the permanent status issues and signed by the President of Palestine, leaving a space for the signature of the Israeli Prime Minister. Palestinians should constantly declare that their goal is to have friendly, peaceful and full diplomatic relations with all neighbors including the State of Israel. The Government should announce the ground breaking ceremonies for the establishment of at least three new cities in the West Bank. The Government should identify the areas for establishing those new cities and should convene ground breaking ceremonies, making sure to invite international diplomats to the ceremonies. The ground breaking ceremonies, will of course take place in areas under Israel’s direct control. Appropriate political and symbolic names should be selected for the cities such as Independence City, Freedom City, City of Hope, City of Knowledge, etc. Palestinians should boycott all Israeli goods until Israel recognizes the Palestinian state. The Government of Palestine should issue a list of goods that should be focused on. The principle is to deny the right of Israelis to profit from the occupation. Hurt them in the pocket. The Palestinian prisoners carry a huge moral weight amongst Palestinians. Using this strategy their numbers will grow considerably. At the right time a prisoners’ hunger strike should be called for. This will create great solidarity with the Palestinian prisoners and many Palestinians not yet in prison should join in. The Government of Palestine should call on friends of Palestine and peace around the world to hold their own symbolic hunger strikes in front of the Embassies of Israel in their capital cities. The Government of Palestine should call to Palestinian Diaspora to immigrate to the new state. The doors of the Palestinian state are open to all Palestinians. Even if physically these new immigrants cannot yet come to Palestine, the Government should issue Palestinian passports to all of those wishing to immigrate to the new state. Many more ideas can be proposed. This article is serving as a call to Palestinians and to Israelis who support real peace with Palestinians to www.reiner-bernstein.de 276 – Chronologie 2008

wake up now and to begin to prepare the strategy for failure, that we hope will never have to be used. Failure in negotiations may happen. Violence after failure should not be the answer. It is time to get smart. Vgl. die gleichgerichteten Aussagen von Yasser Abed Rabbo in dieser Zeitleiste am 29.02.2008.

96 Joint Communique [of President Nicolas Sarkozy] with Mr. Bashar Al Assad, President of the Syrian Arab Republic, 12 July 2008: The President of the French Republic, Mr. Nicolas SARKOZY, and the President of the Syrian Arab Republic, Mr. Bashar Al Assad, made a wide- ranging, referring to bilateral issues, regional and international interest. In the light of regional developments positive, the two Presidents agreed on a work plan to ensure the revival of bilateral relations, with a common goal to strengthen political ties, economic and cultural ties between the two countries, particularly in education , Academic and linguistic diversity. In this context, the French President will visit Syria at the invitation of President Bashar Al Assad, before mid-September 2008. This visit will be prepared by a trip to Paris, Deputy Prime Minister DARDARI, 21 and 22 July in Paris and a visit to Damascus from French Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Bernard Kouchner. Both Presidents emphasized the importance of Syrian-Israeli peace process and noted the progress already made in the proximity talks held between Syria and Israel under the auspices of Turkey. The Syrian President said that he hoped that France, with the USA, can make its full contribution to a future peace agreement between Israel and Syria in the phase of direct negotiation as in the implementation of the agreement, including for security arrangements as may be necessary. The President French marked the availability of France to respond to any request to that effect, if the parties were interest. The two presidents reiterated their full support for the Doha agreement. The French President welcomed the strong determination of President of Syria to establish diplomatic relations with Lebanon, after the formation of a government of national unity of Lebanon. The French President, on behalf of the Presidency of the European Council, will initiate the appropriate procedures for signing the association agreement between the EU and Syria, and the launch of the ratification process as soon as possible. The two countries will cooperate in an active manner to ensure the success of the Union for the Mediterranean.

97 Das Auswärtige Amt in Berlin verweist in diesem Zusammenhang auf die „Agreed Conclusions of the 9th Euro-Mediterranean Meeting of Ministers of Foreign Affairs“ in Lissabon am 5./6.11.2007. Darin heißt es im Abschnitt „I – Political and Security Partnership“: „In this context [i.e. a regular review of the political situation in the Middle East], the Ministers reaffirm their commitment to achieve a just, comprehensive and lasting solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict, consistent with the terms of reference of the Madrid Conference [October 1991] and its principles, including land for peace and based on the relevant UNS[ecurity]C[ouncil] resolutions and the Road Map. Partners also call for the reinvigoration of efforts to promote progress in the Middle East Peace Process on all its tracks. Ministers welcome the positive role played by the EU in the Middle East, notably in the framework of the Quartet. They encourage the resumption of substantial bilateral talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority which should pave the way to the fulfillment of the vision of two national states, a safe and secure Israel and a viable, sovereign and democratic www.reiner-bernstein.de 277 – Chronologie 2008

Palestinian State living side by side in peace and security. Final state issues, including border issues, have to be agreed by the partners.” In dem Statement des EU-Ratsvorsitzenden, des portugiesischen Außenministers Luis Amado, das der Lissabonner Erklärung beigefügt ist, heißt es vorsichtig. „The paragraphs on the Middle East Peace were – as in the past – discussed at length, and as you understand it has not been easy to find common language. In the agreed common text on the Middle East, we refer in general terms to recent developments.”

98 Vgl. die Eintragung am 17.02.2009 in dieser Zeitleiste.

99 Call an heads of States in the European Union: Paris, 11 July 2007 – On 13 July 2008, many heads of State s of Europe and the South -East Mediterranean bank should meet in Paris for the official launch of the now called “Barcelona Process: Union for the Mediterranean (UfM)” initiative. The presence of heads of States – notably from South and East Mediterranean countries – who are universally renowned for their dismal record of grave human rights violations and the exclusiveness they give to economic projects to the detriment of any political ambition at the summit endangers the interrelatedness between economic development and democratisation that has been so many times reaffirmed by human rights organisations and more generally by all democrats . The emphasis given to economic projects alone seriously misunderstands the aspirations of the people of the region who yearn for development as much as they yearn for the enjoyment of fundamental freedoms they are denied in practice. The will to reinforce a shared ownership of the Euro-Mediterranean cooperation is another key objective of the UfM. The terms of this shared ownership are notably the co-presidency and the setting-up of a Secretariat in one of the partner countries of the Union for the Mediterranean. The appointment of the State in charge of the co-presidency for a two-year term and that of the country hosting the Secretariat might be done in total disregard of the political situation prevailing in the concerned country, thereby supporting dictatorial leaders and contributing to the reinforcement of the marginalisation of independent civil society representatives who fight for the fundamental rights of populations who have them flouted by their governments. The signing organisations consider that by fitting this new initiative into the Barcelona Process and the Good Neighbourhood Policy, blocks and ambiguities as observed in the Euro-Mediterranean partnership should be overcome notably to reach a just and sustainable peace in the Middle-East enabling the creation of a Palestinian State, to promote a democratic reform process and to respect human rights. They consider that the reaffirmation of the respect for the universal values of human rights and democratic principles as essential foundations in the final declaration of heads of States meeting at the UfM [Union for the Mediterranean] summit draft should result into concrete acts. The signing organisations call on the European Union to: – make respect for human rights and democracy a priority both of its internal and foreign policy; – actively contribute to seeking the peace in the region notably in the Middle East by implementing the relevant resolutions for a just and sustainable peace and the recognition of the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people of the international community; www.reiner-bernstein.de 278 – Chronologie 2008

– respect the rights of migrants and refugees who are victims of an unprecedented repressive and securitarian policy; – recognize the actors of civil society notably human rights NGOs as fully- fledged partners in the partnership and cooperation both at the institutional and at the project level.

100 Prime Minister Olmert at the Mediterranean Union Summit, Paris, 13 July 2008: The Honorable President of France, Chairman of the Mediterranean Union Summit, The Honorable President of Egypt, Co-Chairman of the Mediterranean Union Summit, Leaders of the Mediterranean Countries, Leaders of the European Countries, Distinguished Guests, Honorable Chairmen, I came here today, to Paris – the capital of France, from Jerusalem – the capital of the State of Israel, in order to take part in the vision of courageous men. On behalf of the people of Israel, I would like to express our tremendous appreciation for your hard work and your sincere efforts to realize the vision of regional cooperation – a vision of hope, a vision of peace and closeness among the peoples of the Mediterranean. Members of the Summit, According to Jewish tradition, and for many generations, we believe in a value called tikkun olam, or repairing the world. This means that each and every one of us is responsible not only for ourselves, but also for repairing the world and solving its crises. The global crises in the fields of energy, the climate and food threaten us all. However, in addition to these, the Middle East faces additional problems such as water scarcity and an expansion of its deserts. Israel, like its neighbors, which must deal with these challenges on a daily basis, encouraged the finest Israeli researchers to conduct intensive research & development in the field of water technology. Thanks to this experience, Israel currently has unique experience in managing a limited water economy, reclamation of sewage for agricultural irrigation, desalinization, and in advanced agricultural irrigation technologies. The State of Israel is successful in reusing sewage at the highest rate in the world – 75%. We pay special attention to desalination technologies, and by 2012, approximately two-thirds of the amount of water for domestic use (600 million cubic meters) will be derived from desalination. In Israel, the largest, most advanced and cheapest reverse osmosis desalination plant in the world operates, and in one year an additional plant will be established – one even larger. The cost of desalination, which has become highly attractive at less than 70 cents per cubic meter of desalinated water, led to the solution of desalination becoming the most concrete and attainable solution. Agricultural development in the Negev, the "Israeli desert", presented us with difficult challenges. Drip irrigation, a revolutionary Israeli invention which only grows more sophisticated over time, contributes to the maximal utilization of irrigation water – 70% to 80%, as opposed to 40% with regular irrigation – around the world. I do not list these accomplishments in order to tell you of our successes. These achievements and others can significantly reduce the water problem and the increased desertification of the Middle East, as well as in other www.reiner-bernstein.de 279 – Chronologie 2008

areas in the world; improve agricultural production; and reduce poverty around the globe. To this end, we must create partnerships and cooperate with our neighbors on matters of water technology; we must integrate Israeli inventions which are used in many countries around the world, including in the European Union – in the Middle Eastern countries as well. Indeed, from the earliest times until today, the Middle East has been witness to tensions, conflicts and even wars waged over water distress. However, today we have the technological solutions to water shortages and desertification in our hands, and we must discover a way to cooperate and work together – governments, academia and businesspeople – so that we can take full advantage of the accumulated knowledge to improve the use of water for the benefit of our citizens, and primarily – in order to prevent unnecessary tensions. Distinguished Leaders, The foundation for good relations between peoples and the building of long-term interests is supported, in great part, by economic cooperation. I believed so when I signed agreements for industrial cooperation with my colleagues in Egypt and Jordan, and I still believe so today when I stand at the head of a country with an impressive scope of trade with other countries in the Mediterranean region. I believe that we must expand the framework for this cooperation, not only with the countries with which Israel already conducts economic and commercial ties, but also with those with whom we do not have ties. I take this opportunity to respond to statements made here during this important summit: the State of Israel is committed to continuing the process of political negotiations in order to bring about a stable, speedy and comprehensive solution to the historic conflict with the Palestinian people, represented here by their president, Dr. Mahmoud Abbas, and with the Arab countries who have yet to sign peace accords with us. We are in the middle of negotiations. We will continue the negotiations they are important, they are serious, and they are being conducted with caution and responsibility. I know that all those who are seated here around this table, and many who are not here – first and foremost, the United States of America, headed by President George Bush and led by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice – are working towards, wish for and strive for our success in reaching an agreement which will lead to greater stability, to an atmosphere of greater justice and calm, to a cessation of violence and to peace for us and the Palestinians founded on the vision of two states for two people: the State of Israel – the state of the Jewish people, and a Palestinian state for the Palestinian people. We are doing so; we will continue to do so with all Arab countries with which we have yet to sign peace accords. Israel may be a young country – one which recently celebrated its 60 th anniversary – but it has managed to develop many capabilities. Together with these capabilities, Israel also comes to the table with a large measure of good-will – the good-will to create partnerships with countries so that there will be economic prosperity and stability in the Middle East. Any great accomplishment seems impossible until one individual stands up, determines a goal and makes it a reality. This individual is each and every one of us, Fellow Heads of State – not tomorrow, not in the future, not when the processes have been completed, not when all the disagreements have been ended – but today! Today we must act to create bridges between our nations; today we bear the responsibility for the welfare of our www.reiner-bernstein.de 280 – Chronologie 2008

peoples; today we must work together for the Middle East and the entire Mediterranean region – for ourselves, for our children, for the coming generations. Here, in Paris, today, I call, together with you, for the creation of a new economic horizon for the entire region, and I thank you, sir, President of France, Nicolas Sarkozy, for your initiative, your leadership, your determination and your strength, together with your Co-Chair, my friend, Hosny Mubarak – to hold this Summit and reach this starting point which can lead to agreement, cooperation and peace for our peoples. Thank you very much.

101 Vgl. die Eintragungen seit dem 09.07.2004 in dieser Zeitleiste.

102 Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network, 9 July 2008: Jordan: Scrap New Laws That Stifle Democracy – US, EU Should Condition Aid on Kingdom’s Rights Record: (New York, July 1, 2008) – Prime Minister Nader Dahabi should withdraw two new draft laws on nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and public assembly from consideration by parliament, Human Rights Watch said today in a letter to the prime minister. The draft law on NGOs would further expand the government’s wide control over establishing, operating, and funding NGOs. The draft law on assembly would continue to restrict Jordanians’ right to congregate, requiring the Ministry of Interior’s approval for meetings that discuss “public policies.” “These draft laws show Jordan’s intolerance for critical debate in a democracy,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. “Jordan is trying to put a legal veneer on its efforts to stifle civil society.” The government introduced the two new laws at an extraordinary session of parliament in May and June 2008, after Dahabi had withdrawn an earlier draft of the NGO law from parliamentary consideration in January 2008 and urged a revision of the assembly law. This followed criticism from NGOs and political parties, including a December 2007 Human Rights Watch report, “ Shutting Out the Critics ,” which documented how Jordan’s existing laws and policies violated the rights to association and assembly. International law allows only for restrictions on these rights in narrow circumstances that are “necessary in a democratic society.” The draft NGO law represents a drastic step backwards for the development of independent civil society organizations. The law would give the government power to obtain an NGO’s future work plans, governmental approval for donations to an NGO, and allow the government to shut down an NGO for minor infractions. The law allows the government to appoint a state employee to serve as temporary president of an NGO. Several European Commission- and US-funded human rights NGOs in the kingdom currently are registered as “non-profit companies,” under the less stringent Law on Companies. Under the new NGO law, however, such non- profit companies would need to comply with the new NGO laws’ provisions within one year, including mandatory Cabinet approval for foreign funding. The government’s goal with this law appears to be shutting out critics or rivals. In 2006, the government already had taken over two of Jordan’s largest NGOs, the Islamic Center Society (ISC) and the General Union of Voluntary Societies (GUVS). It relied on measures that the new draft law would legalize, such as continuing to run the NGO through government- imposed management and forcing the groups to accept new members with voting rights. www.reiner-bernstein.de 281 – Chronologie 2008

The new draft assembly law makes only modest improvements over the existing law, allowing NGOs to hold General Assembly meetings without prior approval, provided it is “tied to the realization of [a NGO’s] objectives and according to the legislations regulating its work and efforts.” However, government approval would still be required for all other NGO meetings. Jordan announced it is seeking increased financial assistance from the European Commission, which is set to examine progress toward human rights in Jordan at the end of July 2008 under the bilateral Association Agreement. The commission stated in its 2007-2010 plan that a priority for Jordan is reforming the NGO law to comply with international human rights standards, but the proposed new laws show that the European Commission is apparently having little positive impact. Jordan is currently seeking $1 billion in aid from the United States, making US aid per capita to Jordan one of the highest in the world. The United States values its security cooperation with Jordan, whose intelligence service detained and tortured CIA prisoners rendered to Jordan from 2001- 2004, and rarely criticizes Jordan publicly for its human rights violations, despite its professed support for increased democracy in Jordan. “Those giving money to Jordan should explain to their taxpayers why they have allowed Jordan to regress on human rights without protest while continuing ever-higher aid disbursements,” Whitson said. The European Commission and the United States should include among their existing conditions for financial assistance to the kingdom that Jordan pass laws on assembly and association that comply with international human rights standards.

103 Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network, 9 July 2008: The Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies calls on Syrian authorities to cease committing summary executions and inhuman treatment against inmates at the Sednaya Prison, and calls on the Union for the Mediterranean states’ leaders to intervene The Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS) expresses its deep concern towards the events currently taking place at Sednaya prison. The prison has been surrounded for three days, starting on the 5 July, by Syrian security forces, armed with heavy artillery. Human rights organizations in Syria have reported that around 25 prisoners have been killed and scores have been wounded by Syrian security forces after violence broke out between the prisoners and prison guards. The events were triggered when political prisoners began protests against the inhumane treatment they have long been subjected to at the prison. CIHRS urges the Syrian government to take note of the negative diplomatic and legal repercussions the government of Syria could suffer as a result of the excessive and deadly force used against the Sednaya prisoners; on par with the acts committed by the same security force at "Tadmor" prison in Syria on 27 June 1980, in which hundreds of political prisoners were killed. International diplomatic and legal repercussions may be heightened due to the growing media coverage concerning the further police abuse and injuries inflicted on dozens of prisoners’ relatives as they sought to find out the names of those prisoners who had been killed or injured. On the 6 July, Syrian security forces and military police based near Sednaya prison attacked and abused a crowd of people that had gathered outside of Tishrin Military Hospital where the injured and dead prisoners were taken, and who were demanding to know the condition of particular inmates at Sednaya prison. www.reiner-bernstein.de 282 – Chronologie 2008

CIHRS condemns the Syrian government’s refusal to provide detailed information on the circumstances and acts carried out against prisoners at the prison, as well as the government’s refusal to allow human rights defenders within a sufficient distance from the prison to monitor the situation. However, according to information that has been collected, Syrian security forces have committed a host of serious and grave human rights violations during the siege of the prison, and have paid no heed to the recurring calls of Syrian, regional and international rights organizations to immediately cease all acts of arbitrary killing and summary executions, as well as inhumane treatment and abuse of prisoners and their relatives. The Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies also urges Mr. Philip Alston, United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and Mr. Manfred Novak, United Nations Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel and inhuman or degrading treatment to immediately intervene in order to pressure the Syrian government to immediately cease such acts, and conform to its international legal obligations as contained in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1966. CIHRS moreover calls upon leaders of the Union for the Mediterranean, scheduled to meet in Paris on 13 July 2008, which will include Syrian President Bashar Al-Asad, to firmly condemn all arbitrary killings and abuse carried out by Syrian forces at the prison, and to take all necessary diplomatic measures to ensure an end to this massacre prior to the beginning of the summit.

104 Vgl. die Eintragung am 20.06.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

105 Rebecca Anna Stoil: New law states visitors to enemy countries cannot become MKs, in The Jerusalem Post” 30.06.2008: Some of Israel's Arab parliamentarians face a ban from serving in the next Knesset, after a bill to prohibit anyone who visited an enemy state in the recent past from becoming an MK became law on Monday. Arab MKs immediately denounced the new law harshly, calling it unconstitutional, and said it would be challenged and beaten in the Supreme Court. But the legislation, which passed by a 52-24 vote, was hailed by its sponsors as a guarantee that "Trojan horses" and "enemies" would no longer be allowed to sit in the Knesset. "This law will return some of our trampled honor as a nation and will give us a good reason to stand upright," said MK Estherina Tartman (Israel Beiteinu), who – together with MK Zevulun Orlev (NU-NRP) – submitted the bill. "From now on, Israeli citizens can be calm – enemies will no longer sit in the legislature. As in every normal, enlightened, democratic state, anyone who disregards national security will know that he won't be able to be elected to the Knesset." The bill is also known as the Bishara Law, because it was submitted after the publication of the case of former Balad MK Azmi Bishara, who made numerous trips to Lebanon and Syria and is currently wanted for questioning by the Israel Police under suspicion of treason for allegedly aiding Hizbullah during the Second Lebanon War. "From today onward, Arab MKs will have to decide – the Syrian parliament or the Israeli parliament. The law will put the brakes on the infiltration of Trojan horses into the Knesset," said Orlev. "We must demand of the Arab leadership unconditional loyalty to the state of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state just as every democratic state asks of its elected officials." www.reiner-bernstein.de 283 – Chronologie 2008

The legislation is based on clause 7A of the Basic Law: Knesset, which states that "a list of candidates or a candidate can be elected as long as their goals or their actions, literally or interpretively, do not negate the existence of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, [express] incitement to racism or support of the armed struggle of an enemy state or a terror organization against the state of Israel." The new law now adds that "anyone who has illegally visited an enemy state in the seven years preceding the [submission of his name on the party list] will be seen as a supporter of armed struggle, unless they prove otherwise." Arab MKs, who look likely to be directly harmed by the law due to their visits to Lebanon and Syria, said the law would be overruled by the Supreme Court. On Monday, MK Ahmad Tibi (United Arab List) said that because the bill had failed to be approved by a simple majority of all MKs – 61 votes – it could not be considered approved as an amendment to a Basic Law, and would not withstand the test of the Supreme Court because it impinged on equality. MK Muhammad Barakei (Hadash) said that "it is a law of terror by any other name. It aims to impose a rule of terror in thought and political opinion. It is an unconstitutional law – you can't call visits by relatives and visits for the promotion [of] peace support for terror." Balad MK Jamal Zahalka said he planned on appealing the law to the Supreme Court as well, arguing that Arab MKs should have the right to visit Arab countries.

106 Vgl. die Eintragung am 08.04.2007 in dieser Zeitleiste.

107 Complete transcript of interview with President Bashar al-Assad of Syria to Siddharth Varadarajan of The Hindu at the Presidential Office, Damascus, June 8, 2008, via www.hindu.com/nic/syria_prez_int.htm : Varadarajan: Your government recently confirmed that there have been indirect talks between Syria and Israel through Turkey. Now, Israel is occupying the Golan Heights – which is Syrian territory – and obviously Syria is asking to get its territory back. But what can Syria give to Israel in return? President Assad: First of all, as you said, Syrian land is occupied by Israel so they have to give us back our land. We don't have something to give but we have something to achieve together, which is peace. It is not something we have. So, if both sides achieve a certain treaty, including giving back the Golan Heights, this means achieving peace. The other thing besides the land is discussing normal relations, water, security arrangements and all these details that are related to the concept of peace. As I said, it is something we achieve together, but Israel has the land and hould give it back. Q: But it is said that Israel wants Syria to abandon its friends in the region – friends like Hamas, Hizbollah and Iran. What is the Syrian response? A: Nobody asked us to do this. The Israelis have been talking about negotiations without pre-conditions. So, they cannot ask for conditions for the negotiations, and they have not asked either. This is first. Second, Hamas is related to the Palestinian Track and we are talking about the Syrian track; we are not responsible for that track. Hizbollah is part of the Lebanese track and we are not in Lebanon today. So, we are only talking about the Syrian track. This is our position. Q: Jimmy Carter stated recently that 85% of the issues linked to the Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights have been sorted out. What is left is the question of the last 15%? Is that an accurate assessment? www.reiner-bernstein.de 284 – Chronologie 2008

President Assad: You mean during Rabin's government? Varadarajan: Yes exactly. A: Actually, we achieved 80% of what we have to achieve before signing the treaty but of course we do not have precise criteria; this is our estimation. But that is true; we achieved a lot during Rabin, but because of his assassination everything stopped. That's why we have been asking for starting from where we stopped during Rabin, where we talked about the security arrangements, which was the most difficult issue. Of course, we had Rabin deposit which means giving back the Golan Heights till the line of 4th June 1967, and we were about to talk about other issues like normal relations such as having embassies and things like this, and we did not talk about water; this is what has been left. That is true. Q: What do you think is the Israeli compulsion to talk peace with you at this time? It seems that the Americans themselves are not very happy with what Israel is doing. What do you think is motivating Israel to take this step right now? A: The Israelis used to think that with time they are going to be stronger and any opposition to their policies will be weaker, but actually what happened was the opposite. Now, the Israelis learned that without peace they cannot live safely and Israel cannot be safe. I think this is true especially after the war on Lebanon and because of the result of that war inside the Israeli society; this is the main incentive for the Israelis to move toward peace. This is our analysis. Q: As an outside observer, it seems strange that you can be talking peace with Israel a few months after Israel bombed your territory at al-Kibar [September 6, 2007], claiming they targeted a secret nuclear facility. Is this one of the issues you raised with them – that how could they have bombed your territory? A: No we did not. Of course, we have not met with them because it is an indirect negotiation. But, the question here is why did they announce it seven months after the bombing? Why did they not announce it at that time in order to send a delegation from the IAEA to see what is happening? Let us put it this way: they said there was a facility and they bombed this facility and now they have the evidence. How could we not have this evidence seven months ago? Why do they have the evidence today? Because after seven months you could say that Syria built that facility and now it is demolished and they rebuild it in a different way; this is their excuse. While if they gave this alleged evidence at that time, their story would not have been proved genuine or credible. So, this is their ploy, and we did not raise this issue, and we said that time that this is an evidence for us that the Israelis are not serious about peace. That is why we talked about indirect not direct negotiations. It is like probing the intention of the Israeli side; are they serious in giving back the Golan Heights to Syria or is it just a tactic or maneuver for internal Israeli politics. That is why we did not raise the issue and we did not have the chance anyway to meet with them. But we raised it with the IAEA. Q: So what was the nature of that facility? A: It is a military facility, and I announced this, but what the content of that facility is, you do not usually announce a military content. But it is not nuclear; how could it be nuclear, where are the radiations, where are the protections of this facility? How can you build such a facility under the daily watch of satellites? We know that. So it is not nuclear but completely a different issue. Q: Why did the Israelis bomb it? www.reiner-bernstein.de 285 – Chronologie 2008

A: I think because they did not know about it; they were suspicious about its content and they could not know. I cannot answer on their behalf; you should ask them. I think they had wrong information; they were entrapped. How they should explain to the Israelis and the rest of the world why they bombed it? This is where they created this story of a nuclear facility. At the beginning they said that this is a site where they can bring armaments to Hizbollah, but how? It is in the middle of Syria and you have Turkey in the north and Iraq in the east. How can you bring the armaments to Hizbollah? From Turkey, or from Iraq where the Americans operate? This is not logical. Then they said that this is where the Turks used this site, but later; I think a month ago, they said it is nuclear. So, it was clear that they did not have any evidence that it is a nuclear site; they created this evidence through manipulation on the computer that this is a copy of the North Korean plants. Q: So, this so-called photographic evidence and video evidence which indicated that this was a plutonium producing plant made with North Korean help – all of this is fabricated? A: Yes it was fabricated 100%. Of course, they talked about photos of Koreans in Syria, but we have normal relations with North Korea; we receive them formally and publicly, and I receive them and other levels in the government. I received North Korean officials, scientists and whatever. So, this is not true. Q: One of the reasons why the world got a little bit suspicious about this issue is that the Syrians moved quickly to clean up the site. What was the need for that? I mean you should have actually been proactive even in September last year to invite the international community to see the Israeli aggression, for example. Why did you keep quiet for so long and why was this site cleaned up? A: First of all, they did not say at the beginning it was a nuclear site and there were few weeks. Second, it was attacked by missiles; you do not keep it as it is, so we rebuilt it. We did that right away; after the attack by few days, we started rebuilding the site. So, it is something normal to remove the debris and have another site. Q: So the facility was rebuilt basically? What about the debris? A: May be in a different or the same site; it is a military issue and we do not usually announce what it is. May be it is different building for another purpose. Q: I know you invited IAEA to visit the site. Now the US has said that that site is not enough and they should be allowed to visit other sites. Why would the Americans make that demand and what is your response to that? A: We have an agreement between Syria and the Agency and every procedure implemented in Syria should be according to this treaty. According to this treaty, you cannot just come and visit any place according to intelligence information; you cannot. Because every day they may come to the Agency and say we have this information. So, it is a never-ending problem. So, we usually come with certain evidence to see the suspicious place. Actually, they did not come because it is a suspicious place; they did not bring any convincing evidence, I mean the Americans, but we said that we have an interest to bring the Agency to come to this site, but talking about other sites is not within the purview of the agreement. So, we have to be very precise; it is not political but technical issue. And we have a nuclear board or commission that has an agreement with them and they work within this agreement. www.reiner-bernstein.de 286 – Chronologie 2008

Q: So, do you think that the US is trying to create an atmosphere of suspicion against Syria? A: Yes, because this is the image of this administration; everybody in the world still remembers what happened in Iraq when they had all that evidence, but then it was proved that everything was fabricated; even Colin Powel confessed in an interview that he was not truthful, and we all know the same, and most of the countries know about the problem between Syria and the US, and they always try to find traps for Syria. This is reality. Q: One of the speculations is that this Israeli attack was linked to judging their own preparedness for an attack on Iran? Have you heard this story? A: Yes, but nobody can tell what is the real intention of that attack. Q: Your Excellency, turning to Lebanon, the Doha Accord has been seen as a major victory not just for the different Lebanese political players but also for Syria's policy. Do you think the Doha Accord [Qatar of May 21, 2008] and the new coalition agreement will mark the opening of a new chapter in Syrian-Lebanese relations? A: Definitely, yes from different aspects. The first aspect as you mentioned, it is a victory for the Lebanese. This is so because Syria protected itself; when you have chaos, conflict, civil war and whatsoever in Lebanon we will be affected directly, this is the first victory. The second victory is that many Lebanese and many officials around the world used to accuse Syria of creating problems in Lebanon, and that we have an interest in creating these problems and having conflicts in Lebanon, but the Doha Accord which was supported directly by Syria was a stark proof that Syria is working in the other direction, not like what they used to mention; this was very important for Syria. And even the proposals we used to propose few months ago before solving the problem were the same proposals the Doha Accord depended on. So, we were proved to have the vision for a safe Lebanon. Q: Do you think if things move fast, you will make a visit to Beirut? A: Yes, and about the other aspect as I mentioned because we proved that we can see now that many Lebanese noted that Syria is working for the sake of Lebanon; the interests of Syria and Lebanon are common. So, the relations should move in the right direction to be better in the future. But the visit of the president, this is related to the formation of the national unity government in Lebanon first. Second, this is related to the discussion between me and the Lebanese president; we have not had any discussion about my visit. But, when I spoke to him after the Doha Accord, I told him that we are ready to help Lebanon and help him personally in his mission. He said we want the help of the Syrians in the future and we said we are ready; we are still waiting. Q: And will this lead to opening an embassy in Beirut? A: Yes, and we mentioned this three years ago and we said that we do not have any problem. But, the problem is that if you have bad relations with any country, you usually withdraw your ambassador and close the embassy. So, how do you open an embassy with a country or government with whom you have bad relations not good ones? Now, when they have this national unity government, it is going to be normal for Syria to open an embassy in Lebanon. Q: I have been struck by the paradox in Syria's policy where internally Syrian society is very strongly secular and you oppose sectarian politics and you do not allow that kind of politics in your country, but most of your best friends in the region all come from sectarian backgrounds like Hamas, Hizbollah and even the Iranians. Is this a problem for Syria? www.reiner-bernstein.de 287 – Chronologie 2008

A: Actually in politics, you have to be pragmatic; the first question that you have to ask is who is effective in our region, you do not ask who is like you or who is not. Hamas is effective and important in Palestine. Hizbollah is a very important party in Lebanon, and Iran is a very important country in the region. Without those players, you cannot have stability, you cannot have any solution and you cannot reach anything you are looking for. So, whether you like it or not or whether you agree with or disagree, you have to deal with them. You do not say like this administration 'black and white', 'evil and good' and things like this; this does not work like this in politics. If you want to solve problems, you have to deal with the players. Q: The Iranians were not very happy when Syria took part in the Annapolis Conference and I would imagine they are not happy with the indirect talks with Israel. Have you had any feedback from Tehran? A: We were not very happy with Annapolis Conference too! This is because we knew that this is not a serious administration; we knew in advance from subsequent events that they are not serious towards the peace and they announced that many times. They said we are not interested in the Syrian track recently even after Annapolis. So, we knew that these events were window dressing just to tell the American people that we are working for peace. For us, it was important to bring up the issue of the Golan again on the international podium because most of the world was in Annapolis. That's why we had to go in order to put the Golan on the table, but at the same time we were not happy. And now after 6 or 7 months nothing happened on any track. Again, this is a Syrian issue and Iran does not interfere in Syrian issues; they support the Syrian cause whether we are happy or they are happy, and that's why the relations between Syria and Iran are very strong. And in the 1980s most of the world was supporting Saddam Hussein, including the US, against Iran and we were one of very few countries in the world to say that Iran was right at that time and Saddam was wrong. Now, the rest of the world says we were right at that time. So, Iran never forgets that we supported them at that time when the rest of the world used to be against them. That is why the relation is very strong between Syria and Iran. Q: Turning to the UN tribunal being set up in The Hague to deal with the assassination of Rafik Hariri, do you have confidence that it will work objectively? A: If it is not politicized, we should say it is trustworthy and it should solve the problem and who are the criminals. But, usually like any other investigation, you should have forensic evidences in order to have this tribunal, and that is why they said now that they are going to extend the mission of the delegation in Lebanon. This means that things are moving on the right way so far. We hope this tribunal to be a very professional tribunal not politicized one. Q: But, based on the [UN-investigator Detlev] Mehlis report [about the circumstances of the assassination of former Lebanese Premier Rafik Hariri on February 14, 2005], do you fear there is an attempt to frame Syria? A: I think that the reports which came after Mehlis have refuted completely what Mehlis said. That is why we feel relaxed and everything is going on in a professional way. Q: So, the Syrian authorities will fully cooperate once the tribunal gets on the way? A: Definitely, and they mentioned that many times in their reports that the Syrian cooperation was satisfactory. www.reiner-bernstein.de 288 – Chronologie 2008

Q: What would happen if the tribunal asks for Syrian citizens to be sent there for trial? A: Usually they should have an agreement, like what happened with Lebanon when they formed the tribunal; there was an agreement between the Lebanese government and the United Nations and now they must have another agreement between them and between Syria because we have our jury and we have our sovereignty and our judicial system which we will not replace by another one whatsoever. So, there must be an agreement between Syrian and the United Nation about this cooperation. Q: Do you think post-Doha that the Lebanese government will be in a stronger position to influence the tribunal and make sure that it goes in the right direction? A: Of course if you have a unity government formed in Lebanon that will mean that the tribunal should work professionally and not in a politicized way. This is an important guarantee and this means that you have consensus in Lebanon about certain issues, and if you have this consensus, it means that the tribunal cannot be politicized. You are right, this is about the government not about the opposition. Q: Turning to your forthcoming visit to India, what are you expectations? Your father came to India in 1978. Many people remember that visit. Mr Vajpayee came here in 2003 and relations have been ongoing. What are your expectations now from your visit? A: Now we are talking about a different India. We are talking about the rise of India. With the rise of India and China we have a different Asia and a different world. We have, let us say, more hopes than we had in the past. Maybe the policies of India at that time were different as part of the non- aligned movement. At that time we used to look at India as a closer country, but now we see it a big country, an important country; so we have different hopes but in the same way. So, the question is what role can India play in the world, especially regarding our issues, like the peace issue, the Iraq and Palestine issues and all these problems. How we can cooperate on them. So, this is about politics. India and China should play a role with other countries in making a balance that we have missed for more than 18 years now. It is almost 20 years, because this happened in the late 1980s, even before the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Q: So you think if India were to involve itself in the peace process issue, this could bring about a balance? A: Yes, because it has two aspects: the first aspect if you are interested, you can play a direct role between the two sides, Syria and Israel, and the Palestinians and Israel. That will make the region more stable, and that will affect India itself in the long run and the world at large, especially Asia. Second, it's about the role that you can play through your weight or your position as India, a big country, in making dialogue with other powers of the world that is the United States then Europe, your region. How can you help the Middle East become more stable; because you are going to be affected by our problems anyway, and you are already affected I think. What is happening in Indonesia cannot be separated from what is happening in Palestine, for example, especially in the Muslim world. So that is how we see the Indian role from the political point of view. And economic? A: Everybody knows about the huge development that you have in India, especially in the IT field. I am interested in this because I was head of the Syrian Computer Society which is a Syrian NGO before I became President. And I think that developing countries cannot achieve much in the field of hardware, but they can achieve a lot in software because it is about the brains and we have the brains. We just need to provide the appropriate www.reiner-bernstein.de 289 – Chronologie 2008

environment to develop, and this is where India can help. Third, it is about bilateral relations, about investment, how we can attract Indian investment based on the stability in Syria despite the different circumstances based on the geo-political position and the geographical position on the Mediterranean and among the Arab countries. So this is what we hope from the visit. Mainly, according to our circumstances, the reason is political. Q: Turning to other economic matters, one of our Indian public sector companies, OVL, has invested in the al Furat project. In fact, when we bought that share from the Canadian company, the Americans were very unhappy with India. They complained that we shouldn't do business in Syria. But our oil companies are eager to expand their presence here. Is there any prospect for Syria at some point in the future changing the terms of its production sharing agreement? Now there is a requirement that all extracted oil should be sold to the Syrian Petroleum Corporation (SPC). A: This is a very technical question, and I don't have the answer right now. We should ask the government about this. Again, it is technical not political. We are developing our system in Syria, but I don't know about this contract. Q: But you are prepared to be quite flexible in terms of policy arrangements for the oil sector? A: Yes, of Course. That is what happened during the past few years. In the past everything used to go through the SPC. Now we have many other companies working without the SPC. But as to how to sell it, this is what we have to study. Because we are liberalizing our market step by step, but about the oil and about the national sector, we have more opposition to liberalizing it. We have to be more careful. We have an emerging economy, a budding economy which is still weak. It is not strong enough and confident enough to be liberalized fully. Q: What is the impact of the Syria Accountability Act, the sanctions against Syria? Has it hurt you in anyway? A: No, because we don't have real bilateral relations with the United States anyway. Most of our relations used to be with Europe and now with Asia. A few years ago we took a strategic direction to move towards Asia and even South America, which is south – south, but not with the United States. We have a few hundred thousand dollars in terms of trade balance. The effect is more political than economic. Q: Turning to the US presidential elections, how do you think the outcome would affect the prospects of peace in Iraq and the withdrawal of American occupation forces there? A: Usually in Syria we don't bet on who is going to be the President of the United States, especially in a campaign. You don't listen to what they say during the campaign. We usually bet on the policies not speeches, but of course the common thing among those candidates is about the failure of the previous government or administration. This is very important. As long as they see the failure, they are not going to adopt the same doctrine or policy. This is very important for us. Now, how to find a solution? You cannot find a solution in the US. You have to make it in the region. If you want to make it in the region, you have to find out who are the main players: first of all, the Iraqis, and second the rest of the countries surrounding Iraq. They can help. You have to make discussions, to make dialogue. The problem with this administration is that they do not have dialogue even with their allies, in Europe or in the region, including the British first of all, who supported them in their war. So, what we heard from the Democrats, Obama and Hilary Clinton was positive regarding the Iraqi www.reiner-bernstein.de 290 – Chronologie 2008

issue, that you have to make dialogue, to have a political process in order to have withdrawal at the end. What we heard from McCain, that he is going to stay for a hundred years in Iraq: I don't think that's what you may hear from a politician usually, any politician, that he wants to stay one hundred years. But anyway, we have to wait until somebody is in the office. Q: But do you think a clean and quick withdrawal is feasible militarily, and could it have adverse effects? A: This is not the debate, this is the wrong debate. I read it in the American media. It is not whether to leave or not. Now, after five years, they made the situation much worse, and it is getting worse everyday. If they withdraw right now, it is bad anyway. So, there is no difference if they leave or not. It is about the political process. First of all, they have to say that they are going to leave, but when and how, this is the question. They have to put a schedule, a certain timetable and at the same time you should have the political process. In that political process, you first have a dialogue, second constitution, third legitimate institutions and in parallel the withdrawal. This is the political process. So, it is not about the concept or the principle: are you going to withdraw or stay in Iraq. You have to withdraw, but how and when? If you use it the right way, if you answer how and when, you can leave Iraq with a better Iraq, not worse. Now they say, if we leave it is going to be worse. Of course, if you leave it like this it is going to be worse. Q: Were you surprised by the statements that Mr Barack Obama made at the AIPAC meeting the other day? A: No. Again, this is a campaign. If you are in a campaign, you usually talk to your audience. So, AIPAC supports Israel, so it is normal for any candidate in the US to use this language in front of them. So, I wasn't surprised. Q: Recently there was [Deputy Prime Minister] Mofaz in Israel raising the issue of the need to take military action against Iran. Is it something that you are afraid of, or do you think that is not a possibility. A: This is the biggest mistake anyone could make in Iran, whether Israel or the US. I think that the repercussions of this mistake are going to be huge and maybe for decades. On the other hand, they get angry when Ahmadinejad says that Israel is going to disappear. So, why do they have the right to say they are going to attack Iran? Q: And make Iran disappear. A: Disappear or not, they are using the same language. Iran said many times that this is a peaceful nuclear [programme], and as long as they follow international law, why be against them? They said it is peaceful and mentioned many times that they are going to cooperate with the IAEA, but the problem with some Europeans and with the American administration is that they don't want them to have what they have right to have: the fuel. There is no international law which says you cannot have [nuclear] fuel. This is the problem; and it is a national issue in Iran. So, what Mofaz said will make the situation for Israel before the rest of the world and the region worse. That is how we see it. Q: Your Excellency, if we turn to domestic issues before we end, are you thinking, let's say in four to five years, of widening the scope of domestic political activities? I read a statement by you somewhere that there should be a greater role for the so-called patriotic opposition. What is your vision of political developments inside Syria for the next five years? A: When I said we're going to have reform in Syria when I became president, this means every aspect of reform. You may say the main axes are the political, economic and social – upgrading society in general. Usually you move faster in the most urgent axis and where you can www.reiner-bernstein.de 291 – Chronologie 2008

achieve more, where it is faster to move forward. The most urgent in Syria is the economic, because we have poverty; the second one is the political. When you talk about the opposition in the process of political reform that depends on the laws. What laws are you going to have, and what circumstances you are living in today in order to have the good result that you are expecting from a good law, not like what happened in Algeria in 1988, when they had good laws, but they did not have good circumstances. So, they have been paying the price till today. Not like what happened in Lebanon. They have full democracy, but they have been moving from one civil war to another, from one conflict to another for more that 200 years. This is not our goal. What happened during the last seven years: I became president in August 2000, two months later the Intifada started, the conflict in Palestine started and has not stopped. It is getting worse everyday. The problem in Lebanon started in 2004. You have 9/11 after one year and we have the war in Iraq, which is the worst, in 2003. All these circumstances affected Syria directly. Usually in such circumstances you have tension, you have more closed minded people, you have more extremism. For example, we started seeing those terrorist attacks in Syria in 2004. We hadn't seen them since the early 1980s in Syria, especially al-Qaeda, who have the same roots as the Muslim Brothers who were in Syria in the 1980s. So, the whole society is affected. This means the whole political process is going to be affected. We used to think that many things would be implemented in 2005. We couldn't so far. And we have all this American pressure. This doesn't mean that we stop. Now we had the first private satellite TV station last year, the first political magazine three years ago, and now we have many private magazines in different fields. We have more freedom in Syria than before. We are moving slowly and cautiously. We have to be very frank and very clear about this. We don't move fast, and we cannot move fast. The next step is going to be the expansion of the participation of different currents in Syria by having an upper house of parliament, and we are discussing what kind of house will have more participation. Second, the local administration law: how to have freer and more dynamic elections around Syria. Third, and that is what we discussed in 2005 and we didn't discuss before, a new modern party law. This is the most important aspect of the political reform. Actually, we were supposed to do that in 2006, but the problem is that most difficulties started in 2005, after the assassination of Hariri and the embargo imposed by most countries in the region, in Europe and in the US on Syria. This is why we said we have different priorities. Now we started talking again about it. It is not going to be implemented in 2008 because we expect this year to be dangerous. We are going to wait and see what will happen with this administration, then we can discuss it. We are moving forward; and we are not talking about patriotic or not patriotic opposition. Many people want to participate, whether they are opposition or otherwise. I am talking about reform in general. We said that we have opposition but it is not legal because we don't have these laws, but it exists in Syria wherever you go, you can sit with them, you can criticize the government and the state in general, the officials. So, we are dealing positively with opposition, but it doesn't exist as a legal entity yet, because we need these laws for the opposition to be legitimate by law, but it is there and we deal with it as reality. Q: You mentioned Algeria. Is one of your fears that too fast an opening politically may lead to the emergence of Islamist or sectarian parties. A: Sectarian, yes. You come from India. You have the same mosaic, but you have a successful democracy. For different reasons, it was not a www.reiner-bernstein.de 292 – Chronologie 2008

successful democracy in Algeria. Maybe because you have different pillars of society. In our society, we have the Islamic pillar and the pan-Arabism pillar. We have many different currents, but none of them will lead: only these two will lead. If you don't have good relations between the pan- Arabism and the Islamic, you will have problems. And that's what happened maybe in the early 1960s. We had this division between the Islamic and the pan-Arabist. They looked at it as very secular; and in the past they used to think that secular meant atheist – against God, and this one supports God. So, they had conflict with each other. That is why it wasn't easy for us to have real democracy. This is one of the reasons of course. Now you need to have good relations in order to have democracy. This is one of the main issues, but many in the west don't understand the relationship between the Islamic and the pan-Arab pillars. Q: Within Syria, the role of Islamic social charity organizations like the Qubaysis and so on is increasing. Could these eventually emerge as political trends? Are you looking at that as a possibility? A: No, no sectarian current is allowed to be politicized. This is for the security of our region and our country. We cannot allow that. Q: And that law will never change? A: No, they have the right to practice any kind of activity related to Islamic teachings but not in politics. Politics in Syria has its rules and laws. Q: One last question. There is the case of a Syrian-Canadian individual called Maher Arar [who was arrested in the U.S. in 2002 and handed over to Syria for interrogation]. You must have read about him. Now, his case is finally being investigated in the USA to see whether the U.S. violated its own laws. The paradox is that on the one hand, the Americans accuse Syria of human rights violations and then they send someone here to be mistreated. What happened with him? A: We hadn't known anything about this man. After 9/11, we started the first cooperation between Syria and the USA in the security field. One of their messages was about a terrorist called Maher Arar who was coming to Syria, and they wanted Syria to catch him because he is al-Qaeda member. We caught him according to American information, and we trusted the information at that time. So, we put him in prison. After the investigation, we arrived at the conclusion that he is not an al-Qaeda member, so we freed him. He accused Syria, and Canada accused Syria, while they must accuse the USA. This is the price of cooperating with the USA! So, we don't have anything to do with him. Q: But are you prepared to share any information you have about which American officials contacted you to have him detained here? A: Of course. Q: So, if there is a legal process, then you will be willing to cooperate? A: Of course, we do not have anything to do with him. It is an American issue. They asked Syria to cooperate, and we caught him. Q: And is there any ongoing security cooperation of this kind, or has that come to an end? A: No, it has completely stopped. We cannot have security cooperation while we don't have political cooperation. We said no, and were very frank in this context: we told them when we have political cooperation we are ready for any other aspect of cooperation, including security cooperation. Now, there is no cooperation at all; and we are not ready for it yet. We have to wait for another administration and another policy. We are not very optimistic, but it is definitely going to be better. I don't think we can have worse than this policy in the modern history of the USA and the history of the world. www.reiner-bernstein.de 293 – Chronologie 2008

Varadarajan: On that note, thank you very much. President Assad: Thank you very much for coming to Syria.

108 Vgl. Reiner Bernstein: Der verborgene Frieden. Politik und Religion im Nahen Osten. Berlin 2000, S. 178 ff.

109 Democracy Index 2008, ed. by the Guttman Center at the “Israel Democracy Institute”, June 6, 2008: For the first time, the media, cited by 36%, overtakes the Supreme court by one percentage point as the “institution which best safeguards Israeli democracy.” Only about 60% of the public report that they are interested in politics – representing a drop of some 15 percentage points compared with last year. Fifty-seven percent believe that the services which civil organizations provide are better than those provided by the state but, nevertheless, the majority of the public wishes to receive these services from the state. The findings of the Democracy Index, conducted by the Guttman Center at the Israel Democracy Institute, reveal growing mistrust of government institutions and strong anti-political feelings, together with a demand for the state to improve its functioning and resume its position as the main player in the political-social-economic arena. According to the findings of the Democracy Index, the Israeli public continues to show interest in politics and feels a sense of belonging to the state. At the same time, however, the level of trust in decision-makers is at its lowest since the surveys were begun. In this context, one can explain the emergence of strong negative feelings toward politics, politicians, and political parties. As a result, the political involvement of citizens and their belief that elected officials are representing them properly have eroded considerably. The same anti-political phenomenon is also spurring support for solutions for the management of the state and society that are not necessarily democratic, as well as a strong reliance on civil society organizations. The public is also frustrated by the reduction of the extent of the state's involvement in, and its shirking of responsibility for, the economic and social welfare of its citizens. The public is aware that the state's place has been taken, in many cases, by civil society and its many non-governmental organizations which deal with a wide spectrum of issues, from advancing social justice, civil rights, and environmental quality, to food distribution and health services. Civil society and the vital services it provides are appreciated by the public, but they are not viewed as a permanent substitute of equal standing for social services provided by the state, but rather as default or interim services. According to the Democracy Index, a strong call can be heard on the part of the public for the government to improve its functioning and to resume its central role in the political-social- economic arena. The Democracy Index is presented today to the President of the State of Israel, Shimon Peres. It was prepared by the Israel Democracy Institute's Guttman Center by Prof. Asher Arian, Prof. Tamar Hermann, Nir Atmor, Yael Hadar, Yuval Lebel, and Hila Zaban, and is based on international comparative measures and on an analysis of the perception of democracy as reflected in public opinion polls. The Index presents findings of a public opinion poll, representative of the adult population in Israel, with 1,201 respondents taking part in one of three languages, Hebrew, Arabic or Russian (maximum sample error margin: +/-2.8%).Safeguarding democracy: For the first time in many years, respondents do not consider www.reiner-bernstein.de 294 – Chronologie 2008

the Supreme Court as the "institution which best safeguards Israeli democracy" (35%). This year, it is the media which wins the top slot at 36% as the institution that the public believes best safeguards Israeli democracy. For the first time too, major changes are seen in the third and fourth slots, with the Knesset ranking third (16%) and the Prime Minister fourth (13%). Trust in institutions: The public's trust in the Supreme Court fell by 12 percentage points: 49% this year as compared with 61% in 2007. This is a dramatic decrease. Only 36% of the public have trust in the Attorney General, while 64% do not. The IDF heads the list of institutions which the public trusts the most, at 71% – a decline of 3 percentage points compared with 2007. Trust in the President of the State rose from 22% to 47%. Trust in the police fell substantially from 41% to 33%, and in the Knesset from 33% to 29%. The Prime Minister receives an expression of trust of only 17%, while political parties are at the bottom of the list with a rating of 15%. The media – which is viewed as the institution that best safeguards Israeli democracy – received 37%, representing a drop of 8 percentage points compared with 2007. Most of these findings highlight the serious flaws in the functioning of the Israeli political system and point to anti-political trends. Interest in politics: Only 43% of respondents acknowledge that they discuss political issues with their friends or family members; only about 60% say that they are interested in politics – representing a dramatic fall compared with 2006, when 73% said they were interested in political issues. Seventy- three percent of respondents would not advise friends or family members to enter politics; this should be viewed against the backdrop of 68% of respondents who believe that politicians do not take into account the opinion of the man in the street. Corruption: Ninety percent of respondents believe that Israel is tainted with corruption – 60% believe that the level of corruption is very high, while 30% believe that it is quite high. In contrast, only 9% believe that there is very little corruption in Israel, and just 1% believe that there is no corruption at all. More than half of the respondents (51%) believe that corruption is necessary in order to reach the top echelons of Israeli politics today. International comparison: Israel receives better evaluations from international research institutes compared with previous years. Nevertheless, there is no change in Israel's ranking among a sample of 36 countries, and in certain cases, its ranking has fallen. In other words, despite the relative improvement in Israel's scores in certain categories, the situation of other countries has improved more and, relative to them, Israel's ranking has fallen. Civil Society Fifty-seven percent of respondents believe that the quality of services provided by civil organizations is better than that provided by the state. Nevertheless, the majority of citizens is still interested in receiving the services they need from the state rather than from civil society organizations: 53% of respondents agree with the statement that it is preferable for the state to continue its previous level of involvement in social and economic domains, while 28% prefer to see a reduction in state involvement in these domains; 46% prefer to receive services from state organizations, while 29% prefer to receive services from social organizations. The public believes that its elected representatives are concerned, first and foremost, with the furthering of their private interests and are not attuned to the wishes and needs of the voters. This is a dangerous situation for democracy. Should these trends continue, the www.reiner-bernstein.de 295 – Chronologie 2008

involvement of citizens with the political system will gradually decrease, as distrust and alienation increase. This might irrevocably erode the legitimacy of representative democracy in Israel. Satisfaction with the functioning of Israeli democracy: The public's level of satisfaction with the functioning of Israeli democracy has risen: 43% expressed satisfaction, compared with 34% who expressed satisfaction in the 2007 democracy survey. The 2008 democracy survey also shows that the majority of citizens are very proud to be Israeli (80%), and many of them (83%) are certain that they want to continue living in Israel in the long term. It should be pointed out that these findings primarily attest to an emotional loyalty to the state and homeland, and less to respondents' feelings about the present situation. Israeli democracy is still fragile and needs nurturing, particularly in view of the governance crisis and the trend toward alienation from politics, which are prominent in the 2008 Democracy Index.

110 Prime Minister Ehud Olmert at the AIPAC Policy Conference 2008, June 3, 2008: Distinguished members of the United States Congress, President of AIPAC, David Victor, Chairman of AIPAC, Howard Friedman, Executive Director, Howard Kohr, AIPAC Board of Directors, Representatives of the students' organizations, Israeli Ambassador to the United States, Mr. Salai Meridor, Honorable guests, Dear Friends, Thank you AIPAC for providing this opportunity for all of us to come together and show support for Israel! It is always amazing to see the number of people that AIPAC manages to gather in one room. I believe this is the largest such gathering ever. After speaking to this audience via video conference last year, I knew that this year I would not miss the opportunity to participate in the unique experience of the AIPAC Policy Conference. It's truly a pleasure to be here, with so many great friends of Israel. Israel is grateful for AIPAC's tireless efforts and unending dedication to promoting the joint American-Israeli relations, values and interests. AIPAC empowers the next generation of American supporters of Israel and ensures that the alliance between Israel and the United States is never taken for granted. I am therefore delighted to see so many students here, representing the younger, future generation. It serves to assure me, and all of us, that the traditional bonds of friendship between Israel and America will continue to be nurtured and strengthened. I understand that there are some members of Congress in the audience. Israel is grateful for the long-standing bi-partisan Congressional friendship and support, manifested most recently by the initiative to mark Israel's 60th anniversary. We are particularly thankful for your support and recognition of the 10-year Memorandum of Understanding between our countries. The approval of the MOU, from 2009 onward, is crucial to maintaining Israel's security and qualitative edge. I recently had the opportunity to have lunch in Jerusalem with the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, who led a distinguished Congressional delegation to Israel. Our meeting allowed us to discuss a range of issues of mutual interest in a more personal and ntimate forum, and served to assure me that the bi-partisan support for Israel is stronger than ever. I www.reiner-bernstein.de 296 – Chronologie 2008

extend an open invitation to each and every one of you to come to Israel and do the same. I assure you that you will be among friends. As we celebrate 60 years of US-Israeli relations, I feel personally obliged to take a moment to reflect on and remember a close personal friend, Congressman . Tom was a visionary congressman, a dedicated American patriot and a symbol of friendship to Israel. Earlier this week, I met with Annette Lantos in Jerusalem and presented her with a special message of commemoration signed by the entire Government of Israel, as a tribute of Israel's appreciation for Tom's work. I understand that this is the first AIPAC Policy Conference without Tom, and he is sorely missed by us all. I would also like to use this platform to mention another close friend of mine and Tom's, who passed away this week, Yosef Tommy Lapid, former deputy prime minister and minister of justice. Both Tom and Tommy grew up in Hungary, lived on the same street one block apart from each other, and they were both Holocaust survivors saved by the legendary Wallenberg. Tommy was an almost permanent fixture in Israeli public life. He was an articulate, sharp and courageous publicist and politician, but above all, he was a true and loyal friend. The void left by these great men in their passing is as deep as the impact they made in their lives. Ladies and gentlemen, As you know all too well, the situation between Israel and its neighbors, the Palestinians and the other Arab states, is sensitive and complex. My responsibility as Prime Minister, and that of every government in Israel, is first and foremost for the security of its citizens, and we will never compromise on this principle. Israel will never capitulate to terrorism or choose appeasement in the face of evil. Our stand in this regard is unequivocal and is completely on a par with the policies of President Bush and his administration. We will continue to exercise our inalienable right to defend ourselves against all acts of aggression and we will prevail! At the same time, we will never abandon our efforts to achieve peace and reconciliation with our neighbors, as we truly believe that only real peace can ultimately provide the security we all deserve. While we actively pursue peace, we cannot ignore the numerous pitfalls on the path to peace and those forces in the region which seek to sabotage any hope of peace between Israel and its neighbors. The most serious and imminent threat to global security and stability is undoubtedly Iran. Iran is the world's largest exporter of terrorism, a fundamentalist dictatorship, motivated by utter contempt for the values represented by the free world and an uninhibited ambition to achieve military superiority and regional hegemony. It openly calls for the elimination of Israel and actively seeks nuclear capabilities to enable it to translate its sinister plans into action. Iran's fingerprints are evident in almost every terrorist organization across the Middle East, from Hamas and Islamic Jihad in the Gaza Strip to Hizballah in Lebanon. Hizballah, Iran's major protégé, receives its directives, ammunition and finances directly from Tehran, with the help of Syria, and is actively engaged in torpedoing any chance of calm in Lebanon. Its long-standing record as a ruthless terrorist organization has earned Hizballah a place of honor on almost every list of global terrorist organizations. I urge you to work together with us to include Hizballah in the terrorist list of the European Union and encourage other countries to do the same. The Iranian threat must be stopped by all possible means. International economic and political sanctions on Iran, as crucial as they may be, are only an initial step, and must be dramatically increased. Iran's defiance of international resolutions and its continued tactics of deception and denial www.reiner-bernstein.de 297 – Chronologie 2008

leave no doubt as to the urgent need for more drastic and robust measures. The sanctions must be clearly defined and religiously enforced. Any willingness to overlook Iranian violations or justify Iran's questionable tactics will immediately be interpreted as a sign of weakness and will only encourage them to proceed with more vigor. The international community has a duty and responsibility to clarify to Iran, through drastic measures, that the repercussions of their continued pursuit of nuclear weapons will be devastating. The sanctions initiated by the UN are of immense importance, as they represent a unified stand by a large number of nations, but sanctions should also be initiated by individual countries which have dealings with Iran. Each and every country must understand that the long-term cost of a nuclear Iran greatly outweighs the short-term benefits of doing business with Iran. While Iran may be a large oil exporter, it imports almost half of its refined oil products. Sanctions can be imposed on the export of gasoline to Iran and they can be imposed on countries which refine gasoline for Iran. Governments should announce that Iranian businessmen are no longer welcome in their countries, and that funds arriving from or channeled to Iran should not be transferred through their banks. Israel and the United States have long understood the acute danger embodied in a nuclear Iran, and are working closely in a concerted, coordinated effort to prevent Iran from becoming nuclear. Israel will not tolerate the possibility of a nuclear Iran, and neither should any other country in the free world. Dear friends, On May 21, Israel and Syria simultaneously announced the start of negotiations for comprehensive peace, under the auspices of Turkey, based on the principles of the 1991 Madrid Conference. Syria is currently a threat to regional stability, but if it ultimately makes the choice to have peace relations with Israel, for which it will have to disengage from its allies in the Axis of Evil, this will constitute a drastic, strategic shift in the entire Middle East. Iran's negative response to this process can serve as an indication of the benefits embodied in it. Peace between Israel and Syria is a clear Israeli interest, but it is also a Syrian one. I know all too well the fears, suspicions and criticism which have always surrounded the Israeli-Syrian negotiations, and I do not take them lightly. I can only assure you that any future agreement, if and when it is reached, will be backed by all the necessary security guarantees, and that I will never compromise on anything which could undermine Israel's security or vital interests. While the negotiations with Syria are only at a very initial stage, the negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians are continuous and intensive. The Annapolis meeting in November 2007, initiated by President Bush, launched this process and outlined the principles underlying it, and we have been proceeding on this basis ever since. The current leadership in the Palestinian Authority, headed by President Mahmoud Abbas, presents a rare opportunity to achieve an agreement. President Abbas and his government recognize Israel's right to live in security and are as committed as we are to achieving peace. They know full well that the path of terrorism only condemns the Palestinian people to misery and hopelessness, and have a genuine desire to see a Palestinian state living side by side with Israel, in peace. I am wholeheartedly convinced that we are at a critical crossroads, and that this opportunity must not be missed. My obligation, as Prime Minister, is to explore every avenue to reach an www.reiner-bernstein.de 298 – Chronologie 2008

understanding, and I truly believe that now, perhaps for the first time ever, it is attainable. President Abbas and I have met many times over the past two years, and the two teams have been meeting on a weekly basis in a serious effort to achieve a historic breakthrough in the course of 2008. The negotiations cover all outstanding issues between us, and the agreement, if and when it is reached, will reflect the vision introduced to the world by President Bush in June 2002, and its implementation will be subject to the Roadmap. Israel entered this bilateral process with the Palestinians in good faith and with a genuine willingness to make the necessary compromises. The time for both parties to make difficult decisions is soon approaching. I believe that the leadership of Israel and the people of Israel are ready for it, and hope that when the moment of truth finally arrives, the Palestinian leadership will respond to the challenge. The moderate, responsible Arab states, headed by Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, could play an important role in this process. These nations, which want to promote peace and which fully recognize the direct threat to them posed by a nuclear Iran and by foreign and domestic extremism, now have a golden opportunity to support a process of normalization and reconciliation with Israel, which will isolate Iran and the extremists and help foil their pursuit of regional dominance. I hope they will choose to take a constructive part and create an environment which is conducive to the peace negotiations currently taking place between Israel and its neighbors. A clear distinction must be made between the Palestinian Authority, headed by President Abbas, and the Hamas terrorist organization, operating in and controlling Gaza. Israel has never, nor will it ever, negotiate with Hamas, as long as it refuses to accept the three principles set forth by the international community. The reality on Israel's southern border is intolerable. Tens of thousands of innocent Israeli citizens live daily in constant fear and anxiety, under a barrage of missiles, serving as pawns in a cruel, malicious game of roulette played by the Hamas and its cronies in the Gaza Strip. While we have no desire to see the uninvolved Palestinian population in Gaza suffer, we cannot be expected to accept a situation that no other nation in the world would tolerate. You have just seen and heard the brave people of Sderot. Sderot and the other communities in the south of Israel have, over the past seven years, suffered the largest number of missiles launched from the Gaza Strip. These good, hard-working citizens, demonstrate incredible courage and fortitude in their daily struggle to conduct seemingly normal lives in an impossible, incomprehensible situation, and they are an inspiration to us all. Members of Congress, I turn to each and every one of you and ask – if one city, one small city in your state, in your district, was bombed, not even on a daily basis, but just once, with one single missile, what would you do? Would you not demand that your government stand up immediately and take the necessary action to defend your citizens? Would you not expect the entire international community to unequivocally denounce the group responsible for these atrocities? Would you not look to your government to provide a solution? Israel will not be deterred by a large military operation in Gaza if and when we come to the conclusion that this is the best way to restore calm on our southern border, but the fact that no such operation has yet taken place does not imply that we are not taking action. The battle against the terrorists in Gaza is a daily and continuous one. Every day, the government www.reiner-bernstein.de 299 – Chronologie 2008

and the security forces weigh all possible alternatives, and make the choice which we believe is the wisest and most effective. Hopefully, our dialogue with the Palestinians will ripen into an agreement which will clearly show the Palestinian public that there is an alternative to violence and that the key to living in prosperity, honor and dignity lies in reconciliation with Israel. Ladies and gentlemen, friends of Israel, In the sixty years since our founding, we transformed a barren land into a prosperous state, and turned swamps and deserts into modern, flourishing cities. We have founded a strong and vibrant democracy, absorbed millions of Jewish immigrants from across the globe, and created a world class, ground-breaking economy. All this was achieved despite wars and continuous threats to Israel's security. However, the great mission of attaining peace with our Palestinian neighbors and the other Arab states is still ahead of us. Recently, Jews around the world read in the weekly Torah portion about God's decree to the Jewish people. After explaining the ensuing prosperity should the Jewish people follow his commandments, G-d declares "I will provide peace in the land, and you will lie down with none to frighten you." (Leviticus, ch 19 vs. 5) A classical interpretation of the order of these passages suggests that while prosperity follows commitment to G-d's commandments, its value is meaningless if there is no peace. According to G-d's precedence, peace is of greater value than all material things combined. We must believe that peace is a possibility, and strive to make it a reality, and I assure you that I will spare no energy and leave no stone unturned in my efforts to secure a better future for the people of Israel in the Jewish State. This is my duty, this is my obligation and this will be my contribution to my people. I also take this opportunity to stress, once again, that the Government of Israel will spare no effort to bring our three captive sons home – Gilad Shalit, who is being held by Hamas in Gaza, and Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev, who were captured by Hizballah almost two years ago. This is the State of Israel's absolute commitment, and I am sure that you all share our strong desire to see them home safely. The AIPAC Policy Conference is an ideal platform for me to express, on behalf of the people of Israel, my admiration and gratitude to a remarkable friend, President George W. Bush. Without the President's personal involvement, the bilateral process between Israel and the Palestinians may never have progressed. Yet, despite his desire to see peace in the region, the President never expected Israel to compromise its security. His recent visit to Israel on the occasion of our 60th anniversary, and his inspiring, memorable speech at the Knesset, were the ultimate expression of America's unshakable commitment to Israel's security and well-being. The people of Israel will always remember, appreciate and cherish President Bush's understanding, friendship and support. Ladies and gentlemen, Given the recent political developments in Israel, of which I am sure you are all aware, I hesitated as to whether it was the right time and the right thing to leave everything behind and meet with you today. I didn't hesitate for too long. Your friendship to Israel, your dedication to consolidating the strategic bond between Israel and the United States and your steadfast commitment to Israel's security and welfare have all inspired me. Israeli politics is accustomed to all kinds of trials and tribulations, but your love and support for the State of Israel provides a powerful foundation, a solid rock on which we know we can always rely, in good times and in times of www.reiner-bernstein.de 300 – Chronologie 2008

crisis. One of the most fundamental pillars of Israel's national security is its alliance with the United States, and you have dedicated your lives to ensuring that not only will this alliance never weaken or fail, but that it will grow stronger and deeper. I thank you for giving me this opportunity to address you this evening. When I see all of you here, I know that my country is truly blessed. Thank you.

111 Senator John McCain at the AIPAC Policy Conference 2008, June 2, 2008: Thank you very much. Thank you for that kind welcome and thank you, Ron [?], for your generous remarks and the invitation to address you. I see that we have some students here, including a few from Arizona and I welcome you to Washington and your money and it's – it's a pleasure as always to be in the company of the men and women of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. And I know that all of us are proud to be in the company of my dear and beloved, distinguished Senator from the State of Connecticut, my dear friend, Joe Lieberman. Joe, thank you; a man of humility, a man of kindness, and a great and dear friend – not only of America – my family, State of Israel and the world. My friends, all of you involved in the work of AIPAC have taken up a great and vital cause and a cause set firmly in the American heart. When President Truman recognized the new State of Israel 60 years ago he acted on the highest ideals and best instincts of our country. He was a man with courage and a sense of history; and he surely knew what great challenges the Jewish State would face in its early years. To his lasting credit, he resolved that the people of Israel would not face them alone because they would always have a friend and ally in the United States of America. The cause of Israel and of our common security has also depended on men and women of courage, and I've been lucky enough to know quite a few of them. I think often of one in particular, the late Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson. I got to know Senator Jackson when I was the Navy Liaison Officer to the United States Senate. In 1979, I traveled with him to Israel where I knew he was considered a hero. But I had no idea just how admired he was until we landed in the airport in Tel Aviv to find a crowd of 700 or 800 Israelis calling out his name, waving signs that read God Bless You Scoop and Senator Jackson, Thank You. Scoop Jackson had the special respect of the Jewish people, the kind of respect accorded to brave and faithful friends. He was and remains the model of what an American Statesman should be. The people of Israel reserve a special respect for courage because so much courage has been required of them. In the record of history sheer survival in the face of Israel's many trials would have been impressive enough but Israel has achieved much more than that these past 60 years. Israel has endured and thrived and their people have built a nation that's an inspiration to free nations everywhere. Yet no matter how successful a nation of Israel or how far removed from the Holocaust their experiences will never pass from memory. Not long ago I was in Jerusalem with Senator Lieberman and our colleague Lindsay Graham, and we went to the Holocaust Memorial, Yad Vashem. And for all the boundless examples of cruelty and inhumanity to be found there, for all the pain and grief remembered there, somehow I was especially moved by the story of the camp survivors who died from the very nourishment given to them by their liberators. They'd starved and suffered so much that their www.reiner-bernstein.de 301 – Chronologie 2008

bodies were too weak even for food. They endured it all, only to die at the moment of their deliverance. These are the kinds of experiences that the Jewish people carry in memory and they are far from the worst experiences of the Holocaust. These are the kinds of grieves and afflictions from which the State of Israel offered escape, and today when we join in saying never again that is not a wish or request or a plea to the enemies of Israel; it is a promise that the United States and Israel will honor against any enemy, against enemy – any enemy – against any enemy who cares to test us. The threats to Israel's security are large and growing and America's commitment must grow as well. I strongly support the increase in military aid to Israel scheduled to begin in October. I am committed to making certain Israel maintains its qualitative military edge. Israel's enemies are too numerous – Israel's enemies are too numerous, its margin of error too small, and our shared interests and values too great for us to follow any other policy. Foremost – foremost in all our minds is the threat posed by the regime in Tehran. The Iranian President has called for Israel to be wiped off the map and suggested that Israel's Jewish population should return to Europe. He calls Israel a stinking corpse; that it's on its way to annihilation but the Iranian leadership does far more than issue vial insults. It acts in ways directly detrimental to the security of Israel and the United States. A sponsor of both Hamas and Hezbollah, the leadership of Iran has repeatedly used violence to undermine Israel in the Middle East peace process; it has trained, financed, and equipped extremists in Iraq who have killed American soldiers, fighting to bring freedom to that country. It remains the world's chief sponsor of terrorism and threatens to destabilize the entire Middle East from Basra to Beirut. Tehran's continued pursuit of nuclear weapons poses an unacceptable risk, a danger we cannot allow. Emboldened by nuclear weapons, Iran would feel free to sponsor terrorist attacks – any – against any perceived enemy. It's flouting of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty would render that agreement obsolete and could induce Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and others to join a nuclear arms race. The world would have to live indefinitely with the possibility that Tehran might pass nuclear materials or weapons to one of its allied terrorist networks. Armed as well with its ballistic missile arsenal an Iranian nuclear bomb would pose an existential threat to the people of Israel. European negotiators have proposed a peaceful end-game for Tehran should it abandon its nuclear ambitions and comply with the UN Security Council Resolutions. The plan offers far-reaching economic incentives, external support for a civilian nuclear energy and program, and integration into the international community. But Tehran has said no. The Iranians have spent years working toward a nuclear program and the idea that they now seek nuclear weapons because we refuse to engage in Presidential level talks is a serious misreading of history. In reality – in reality a series of Administrations have tried to talk to Iran and none harder – none tried harder than the Clinton Administration. In 1998 the Secretary of State made a public overture to the Iranians, laid out a road map to normal relations and for two years tried to engage. The Clinton Administration even lifted some sanctions and Secretary Albright apologized for American actions going back to the 1950s. But even under President Khatami a man by all accounts less radical than the current President, Iran rejected these overtures. Even so we hear talk of a meeting with the Iranian leadership offered up as if it were some sudden inspiration, a bold new idea that somehow nobody has ever thought of before. [Laughs] www.reiner-bernstein.de 302 – Chronologie 2008

Yet it's hard to see what such a Summit with President Ahmadinejad would actually gain except an earful of anti-Semitic rants and a worldwide audience for a man who denies one Holocaust and talks before frenzied crowds about starting another. [Emphasis Added] Such a spectacle would harm Iranian moderates and dissidents as the radicals and hardliners strengthen their position and suddenly acquire the appearance of respectability. Rather than sitting down unconditionally with the Iranian President or Supreme Leader in the hope that we can talk sense into them, we must create the weary world pressures that will peacefully but decisively change the path that they are on. Essential to this strategy – essential to this strategy is the UN Security Council which should impose progressively tougher political and economic sanctions. Should the Security Council continue to delay in this responsibility, the United States must lead like-minded countries in imposing multi-lateral sanctions outside the UN framework. I'm proud to have been a leader on these issues for years having co-authored the 1992 Iran/Iraq Arms Nonproliferation Act. Over a year ago I proposed applying sanctions to restrict Iran's ability to import refined petroleum products on which it is highly dependent and the time has come for an international campaign to do just that. A severe limit on Iranian imports of gasoline would create immediate pressure on Khomeini and Ahmadinejad to change course and to cease in the pursuit of nuclear weapons. At the same time, we need the support of those in the region who are most concern about Iran and of our European partners as well. They can help by imposing targeted sanctions that will impose a heavy cost on the regime's leaders, including the denial of visas and freezing of assets; as a further measure to contain and deter Iran, the United States should impose financial sanctions on the Central Bank of Iran which aids in Iran's terrorism and weapons proliferation. We must – we must apply the full force of law to prevent business dealings with Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps. I was pleased – I was pleased to join Senators Lieberman and Kyle in backing an Amendment calling for the designation of the Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization responsible for killing American troops in Iraq. Over three-quarters of the Senate supported this obvious step, but not Senator Obama. He opposed this Resolution because its support for countering Iranian influence in Iraq was he said quote a wrong message not only to the world but also to the region. [Laughs] But here too, he's mistaken; holding Iran's influence in check and holding a terrorist organization accountable sends exactly the right message to Iran, to the region, and to the world. We should privatize the sanctions against Iran by launching a worldwide divestment campaign. As more people – businesses, pension funds, and financial institutions across the world divest from companies doing business with Iran the radical elite who run that country will become even more unpopular than they are already. Years ago – years ago the moral clarity and conviction of civilized nations came together in a divestment campaign against South Africa helping to rid that nation of the evil of apartheid. In our day, we must use that same power and moral conviction against the regime in Iran and help – and help to safeguard the people of Israel and the peace of the world. In all of this, we will not only be defending our own safety and welfare, but also the democratic aspirations of the Iranian people. They are a great – they are a great and civilized people with little sympathy for the terrorists their leaders finance and no wish to threaten other nations with nuclear weapons. Iran's rulers would be very different if the people themselves had a choice in the matter and www.reiner-bernstein.de 303 – Chronologie 2008

American policy should always reflect their hopes for a freer and more just society. The same holds true – the same holds true for the Palestinian people most of whom ask only for a better life in a less violent world. They are badly served by the terrorist led group in charge of Gaza; this is a group that still refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist, refuses to denounce violence, and refuses to acknowledge prior peace commitments. They deliberately target Israeli civilians in an attempt to terrorize the Jewish population. They spread violence and hatred and with every new bombing they setback the cause of their own people. During my last visit to Israel in March I saw for myself the work of Hamas in the town of Sderot just across the Border as you know from Gaza. I saw the houses that had been hit by Hamas rockets; in the face of injuries, death, and destruction thousands of Israelis have had to flee. Many others have stayed to carry on as best they can. I visited the home of a man named Pinhas Amar, who lives with his disabled wife, Aliza and their children. One day last year the sirens sounded again to alert the town to incoming rocket-fire. The rest of the family found cover. Aliza on the other side of the house was knocked out of her wheelchair and struck by shrapnel. This occurred on December 17th and from that day until the day of my visit just some three months later, more than 1,000 rockets had struck Sderot. Today, siren warnings are commonplace; the elementary schools are surrounded by concrete shelters and children walking the streets in costume for Purim celebrations did so in fear. No nation in the world would allow its population to be attacked so incessantly, to be killed and intimidated so mercilessly without responding.And the nation of Israel is no exception. Prime Minister Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas are engaged in talks that all of us hope will yield progress toward peace. Yet while we encourage this process we must also insure that Israel's people can live in safety until there is a Palestinian leadership willing and able to deliver peace. The peace process that places face in terrorists can never end in peace and we do no favors to the Palestinian people by conferring approval upon the terrorist syndicate that has seized power in Gaza. Likewise, Israel's chance for enduring peace with Lebanon depends on a Lebanese government that has a monopoly on authority within its country's Borders. That means no independent militias, no Hezbollah fighters, no weapons and equipment flowing to Hezbollah. Hezbollah fighters recently took up arms against their fellow Lebanese starting the worst internal fighting since the Civil War ended in 1990. In the process they extracted an agreement for a new political arrangement in which Hezbollah and its allies can veto any Cabinet decision. As a leader of Hezbollah often reminds us, this group's mission is the defeat of Israel. The international community needs to more fully empower our allies in Lebanon, not only with military aid but also with the resources to undermine Hezbollah's appeal – better schools, hospitals, roads and power generation and the like. We simply cannot afford to cede Lebanon's future to Syria and Iran. And we have an additional task; in the summer of 2006 Hamas and Hezbollah kidnapped – kidnapped three young Israelis, Gilad Shalit, Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser. And they've held them ever since. I met with the families of two of these men in December 2006 and heard firsthand about their ordeal. I committed then to bring attention to their situation, to insist that the Geneva Conventions are observed and call for the swift release of these men. These men are being unlawfully held and they must be set free and – and returned home to Israel. www.reiner-bernstein.de 304 – Chronologie 2008

Another great – matter of great importance to the security of both America and Israel is Iraq. You would never know from listening to those who are still caught up in angry arguments over yesterday's options but our troops in Iraq have made hard-one progress under General Petraeus' new strategy. And Iraqi political leaders have moved ahead slowly and insufficiently but forward nonetheless. Sectarian violence declined dramatically; Sunnis in Anbar Province and throughout Iraq are cooperating in the fight against Al Qaeda and Shia extremist militias no longer control Basra. The Malaki government and its forces are in charge. Al Qaeda terrorists are on the run and our troops are going to make sure that they never – never come back. It's worth recalling that America's progress in Iraq is the direct result of the new strategy that Senator Obama vehemently opposed. It was the strategy he predicted would fail when he voted to cut off funds for our forces in Iraq. He now says he intends to withdraw combat troops from Iraq one to two brigades per month until they're all removed. He will do so regardless of the conditions in Iraq, regardless of the consequences for our national security, regardless of Israel's security and in disregard of the best advice of our Commander's on the ground. This course will result in a catastrophe. If our troops are ordered to make a forced retreat we risk all out civil war genocide and a failed state in the heart of the Middle East. Al Qaeda terrorists would rejoice in the defeat of the United States; allowing a potential terrorist sanctuary would profoundly affect the security of the United States, Israel, and our other friends and would invite further intervention from Iraq's neighbors, including a very much emboldened Iran. We must not let this happen. We must not leave the region to suffer chaos, terrorist violence, and a wider war. My friends, as the people of Israel know better than most, the safety of free people can never be taken for granted. And in a world full of dangers, Israel and the United States must always stand together. The State of Israel stands as a singular achievement in many ways and not the least is its achievement as the great democracy of the Middle East. If there are ties between America and Israel that critics of our alliance have never understood perhaps that's because they do not fully understand the love of liberty and the pursuit of justice. But they should know – they should know those ties cannot be broken. We were brought together by shared ideals and by shared adversity; we have been comrades in struggle and trusted partners in the quest for peace. We are the most natural of allies and like Israel itself – that alliance is forever. Thank you.

112 Senator Barack Obama at the AIPAC Policy Conference 2008, June 4, 2008: It's great to see so many friends from across the country. I want to congratulate Howard Friedman, David Victor and Howard Kohr on a successful conference, and on the completion of a new headquarters just a few blocks away. Before I begin, I want to say that I know some provocative emails have been circulating throughout Jewish communities across the country. A few of you may have gotten them. They're filled with tall tales and dire warnings about a certain candidate for President. And all I want to say is – let me know if you see this guy named Barack Obama, because he sounds pretty frightening. But if anyone has been confused by these emails, I want you to know that today I'll be speaking from my heart, and as a true friend of Israel. And I know that when I visit with AIPAC, I am among friends. Good friends. Friends who share my strong commitment to make sure that the www.reiner-bernstein.de 305 – Chronologie 2008

bond between the United States and Israel is unbreakable today, tomorrow, and forever. One of the many things that I admire about AIPAC is that you fight for this common cause from the bottom up. The lifeblood of AIPAC is here in this room – grassroots activists of all ages, from all parts of the country, who come to Washington year after year to make your voices heard. Nothing reflects the face of AIPAC more than the 1,200 students who have travelled here to make it clear to the world that the bond between Israel and the United States is rooted in more than our shared national interests – it's rooted in the shared values and shared stories of our people. And as President, I will work with you to ensure that it this bond strengthened. I first became familiar with the story of Israel when I was eleven years old. I learned of the long journey and steady determination of the Jewish people to preserve their identity through faith, family and culture. Year after year, century after century, Jews carried on their traditions, and their dream of a homeland, in the face of impossible odds. The story made a powerful impression on me. I had grown up without a sense of roots. My father was black, he was from Kenya, and he left us when I was two. My mother was white, she was from Kansas, and I'd moved with her to Indonesia and then back to Hawaii. In many ways, I didn't know where I came from. So I was drawn to the belief that you could sustain a spiritual, emotional and cultural identity. And I deeply understood the Zionist idea – that there is always a homeland at the center of our story. I also learned about the horror of the Holocaust, and the terrible urgency it brought to the journey home to Israel. For much of my childhood, I lived with my grandparents. My grandfather had served in World War II, and so had my great uncle. He was a Kansas boy, who probably never expected to see Europe – let alone the horrors that awaited him there. And for months after he came home from Germany, he remained in a state of shock, alone with the painful memories that wouldn't leave his head. You see, my great uncle had been a part of the 89th Infantry Division – the first Americans to reach a Nazi concentration camp. They liberated Ohrdruf, part of Buchenwald, on an April day in 1945. The horrors of that camp go beyond our capacity to imagine. Tens of thousands died of hunger, torture, disease, or plain murder – part of the Nazi killing machine that killed 6 million people. When the Americans marched in, they discovered huge piles of dead bodies and starving survivors. General Eisenhower ordered Germans from the nearby town to tour the camp, so they could see what was being done in their name. He ordered American troops to tour the camp, so they could see the evil they were fighting against. He invited Congressmen and journalists to bear witness. And he ordered that photographs and films be made. Explaining his actions, Eisenhower said that he wanted to produce, "first-hand evidence of these things, if ever, in the future, there develops a tendency to charge these allegations merely to propaganda." I saw some of those very images at Yad Vashem, and they never leave you. And those images just hint at the stories that survivors of the Shoah carried with them. Like Eisenhower, each of us bears witness to anyone and everyone who would deny these unspeakable crimes, or ever speak of repeating them. We must mean what we say when we speak the words: "never again." It was just a few years after the liberation of the camps that David Ben- Gurion declared the founding of the Jewish State of Israel. We know that the establishment of Israel was just and necessary, rooted in centuries of struggle, and decades of patient work. But 60 years later, we know that we www.reiner-bernstein.de 306 – Chronologie 2008

cannot relent, we cannot yield, and as President I will never compromise when it comes to Israel's security. Not when there are still voices that deny the Holocaust. Not when there are terrorist groups and political leaders committed to Israel's destruction. Not when there are maps across the Middle East that don't even acknowledge Israel's existence, and government-funded textbooks filled with hatred toward Jews. Not when there are rockets raining down on Sderot, and Israeli children have to take a deep breath and summon uncommon courage every time they board a bus or walk to school. I have long understood Israel's quest for peace and need for security. But never more so than during my travels there two years ago. Flying in an IDF helicopter, I saw a narrow and beautiful strip of land nestled against the Mediterranean. On the ground, I met a family who saw their house destroyed by a Katyusha Rocket. I spoke to Israeli troops who faced daily threats as they maintained security near the blue line. I talked to people who wanted nothing more simple, or elusive, than a secure future for their children. I have been proud to be a part of a strong, bi-partisan consensus that has stood by Israel in the face of all threats. That is a commitment that both John McCain and I share, because support for Israel in this country goes beyond party. But part of our commitment must be speaking up when Israel's security is at risk, and I don't think any of us can be satisfied that America's recent foreign policy has made Israel more secure. Hamas now controls Gaza. Hizbollah has tightened its grip on southern Lebanon, and is flexing its muscles in Beirut. Because of the war in Iraq, Iran – which always posed a greater threat to Israel than Iraq – is emboldened, and poses the greatest strategic challenge to the United States and Israel in the Middle East in a generation. Iraq is unstable, and al Qaeda has stepped up its recruitment. Israel's quest for peace with its neighbors has stalled, despite the heavy burdens borne by the Israeli people. And America is more isolated in the region, reducing our strength and jeopardizing Israel's safety. The question is how to move forward. There are those who would continue and intensify this failed status quo, ignoring eight years of accumulated evidence that our foreign policy is dangerously flawed. And then there are those who would lay all of the problems of the Middle East at the doorstep of Israel and its supporters, as if the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the root of all trouble in the region. These voices blame the Middle East's only democracy for the region's extremism. They offer the false promise that abandoning a stalwart ally is somehow the path to strength. It is not, it never has been, and it never will be. Our alliance is based on shared interests and shared values. Those who threaten Israel threaten us. Israel has always faced these threats on the front lines. And I will bring to the White House an unshakeable commitment to Israel's security. That starts with ensuring Israel's qualitative military advantage. I will ensure that Israel can defend itself from any threat – from Gaza to Tehran. Defense cooperation between the United States and Israel is a model of success, and must be deepened. As President, I will implement a Memorandum of Understanding that provides $30 billion in assistance to Israel over the next decade – investments to Israel's security that will not be tied to any other nation. First, we must approve the foreign aid request for 2009. Going forward, we can enhance our cooperation on missile defense. We should export military equipment to our ally Israel under the same guidelines as NATO. And I will always stand up for Israel's right to defend itself in the United Nations and around the world. www.reiner-bernstein.de 307 – Chronologie 2008

Across the political spectrum, Israelis understand that real security can only come through lasting peace. And that is why we – as friends of Israel –- must resolve to do all we can to help Israel and its neighbors to achieve it. Because a secure, lasting peace is in Israel's national interest. It is in America's national interest. And it is in the interest of the Palestinian people and the Arab world. As President, I will work to help Israel achieve the goal of two states, a Jewish state of Israel and a Palestinian state, living side by side in peace and security. And I won't wait until the waning days of my presidency. I will take an active role, and make a personal commitment to do all I can to advance the cause of peace from the start of my Administration. The long road to peace requires Palestinian partners committed to making the journey. We must isolate Hamas unless and until they renounce terrorism, recognize Israel's right to exist, and abide by past agreements. There is no room at the negotiating table for terrorist organizations. That is why I opposed holding elections in 2006 with Hamas on the ballot. The Israelis and the Palestinian Authority warned us at the time against holding these elections. But this Administration pressed ahead, and the result is a Gaza controlled by Hamas, with rockets raining down on Israel. The Palestinian people must understand that progress will not come through the false prophets of extremism or the corrupt use of foreign aid. The United States and the international community must stand by Palestinians who are committed to cracking down on terror and carrying the burden of peacemaking. I will strongly urge Arab governments to take steps to normalize relations with Israel, and to fulfill their responsibility to pressure extremists and provide real support for President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad. Egypt must cut off the smuggling of weapons into Gaza. Israel can also advance the cause of peace by taking appropriate steps – consistent with its security – to ease the freedom of movement for Palestinians, improve economic conditions in the West Bank, and to refrain from building new settlements – as it agreed to with the Bush Administration at Annapolis. Let me be clear. Israel's security is sacrosanct. It is non-negotiable. The Palestinians need a state that is contiguous and cohesive, and that allows them to prosper – but any agreement with the Palestinian people must preserve Israel's identity as a Jewish state, with secure, recognized and defensible borders. Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided. I have no illusions that this will be easy. It will require difficult decisions on both sides. But Israel is strong enough to achieve peace, if it has partners who are committed to the goal. Most Israelis and Palestinians want peace, and we must strengthen their hand. The United States must be a strong and consistent partner in this process – not to force concessions, but to help committed partners avoid stalemate and the kind of vacuums that are filled by violence. That's what I commit to do as President of the United States. The threats to Israel start close to home, but they don't end there. Syria continues its support for terror and meddling in Lebanon. And Syria has taken dangerous steps in pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, which is why Israeli action was justified to end that threat. I also believe that the United States has a responsibility to support Israel's efforts to renew peace talks with the Syrians. We must never force Israel to the negotiating table, but neither should we ever block negotiations when Israel's leaders decide that they may serve Israeli interests. As President, I will do whatever I can to help Israel succeed in these negotiations. And success will require the www.reiner-bernstein.de 308 – Chronologie 2008

full enforcement of Security Council Resolution 1701 in Lebanon, and a stop to Syria's support for terror. It is time for this reckless behavior to come to an end. There is no greater threat to Israel – or to the peace and stability of the region – than Iran. Now this audience is made up of both Republicans and Democrats, and the enemies of Israel should have no doubt that, regardless of party, Americans stand shoulder-to-shoulder in our commitment to Israel's security. So while I don't want to strike too partisan a note here today, I do want to address some willful mischaracterizations of my positions. The Iranian regime supports violent extremists and challenges us across the region. It pursues a nuclear capability that could spark a dangerous arms race, and raise the prospect of a transfer of nuclear know-how to terrorists. Its President denies the Holocaust and threatens to wipe Israel off the map. The danger from Iran is grave, it is real, and my goal will be to eliminate this threat. But just as we are clear-eyed about the threat, we must be clear about the failure of today's policy. We knew, in 2002, that Iran supported terrorism. We knew Iran had an illicit nuclear program. We knew Iran posed a grave threat to Israel. But instead of pursuing a strategy to address this threat, we ignored it and instead invaded and occupied Iraq. When I opposed the war, I warned that it would fan the flames of extremism in the Middle East. That is precisely what happened in Iran – the hardliners tightened their grip, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected President in 2005. And the United States and Israel are less secure. I respect Senator McCain, and look forward to a substantive debate with him these next five months. But on this point, we have differed, and we will differ. Senator McCain refuses to understand or acknowledge the failure of the policy that he would continue. He criticizes my willingness to use strong diplomacy, but offers only an alternate reality – one where the war in Iraq has somehow put Iran on its heels. The truth is the opposite. Iran has strengthened its position. Iran is now enriching uranium, and has reportedly stockpiled 150 kilos of low enriched uranium. Its support for terrorism and threats toward Israel have increased. Those are the facts, they cannot be denied, and I refuse to continue a policy that has made the United States and Israel less secure. Senator McCain offers a false choice: stay the course in Iraq, or cede the region to Iran. I reject this logic because there is a better way. Keeping all of our troops tied down indefinitely in Iraq is not the way to weaken Iran – it is precisely what has strengthened it. It is a policy for staying, not a plan for victory. I have proposed a responsible, phased redeployment of our troops from Iraq. We will get out as carefully as we were careless getting in. We will finally pressure Iraq's leaders to take meaningful responsibility for their own future. We will also use all elements of American power to pressure Iran. I will do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. That starts with aggressive, principled diplomacy without self-defeating preconditions, but with a clear-eyed understanding of our interests. We have no time to waste. We cannot unconditionally rule out an approach that could prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. We have tried limited, piecemeal talks while we outsource the sustained work to our European allies. It is time for the United States to lead. There will be careful preparation. We will open up lines of communication, build an agenda, coordinate closely with our allies, and evaluate the potential for progress. Contrary to the claims of some, I have no interest in www.reiner-bernstein.de 309 – Chronologie 2008

sitting down with men like Ahmadinejad just for the sake of talking. But as President of the United States, I would be willing to lead tough and principled diplomacy with the appropriate Iranian leader at a time and place of my choosing – if, and only if – it can advance the interests of the United States. Only recently have some come to think that diplomacy by definition cannot be tough. They forget the example of Truman, and Kennedy and Reagan. These Presidents understood that diplomacy backed by real leverage was a fundamental tool of statecraft. And it is time to once again make American diplomacy a tool to succeed, not just a means of containing failure. We will pursue this diplomacy with no illusions about the Iranian regime. Instead, we will present a clear choice. If you abandon your dangerous nuclear program, support for terror, and threats to Israel, there will be meaningful incentives – including the lifting of sanctions, and political and economic integration with the international community. If you refuse, we will ratchet up the pressure. My presidency will strengthen our hand as we restore our standing. Our willingness to pursue diplomacy will make it easier to mobilize others to join our cause. If Iran fails to change course when presented with this choice by the United States, it will be clear – to the people of Iran, and to the world – that the Iranian regime is the author of its own isolation. That will strengthen our hand with Russia and China as we insist on stronger sanctions in the Security Council. And we should work with Europe, Japan and the Gulf states to find every avenue outside the UN to isolate the Iranian regime – from cutting off loan guarantees and expanding financial sanctions, to banning the export of refined petroleum to Iran, to boycotting firms associated with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, which has rightly been labeled a terrorist organization. I was interested to see Senator McCain propose divestment as a source of leverage – not the bigoted divestment that has sought to punish Israeli scientists and academics, but divestment targeted at the Iranian regime. It's a good concept, but not a new one. I introduced legislation over a year ago that would encourage states and the private sector to divest from companies that do business in Iran. This bill has bipartisan support, but for reasons that I'll let him explain, Senator McCain never signed on. Meanwhile, an anonymous Senator is blocking the bill. It is time to pass this into law so that we can tighten the squeeze on the Iranian regime. We should also pursue other unilateral sanctions that target Iranian banks and assets. And we must free ourselves from the tyranny of oil. The price of a barrel of oil is one of the most dangerous weapons in the world. Petrodollars pay for weapons that kill American troops and Israeli citizens. And the Bush Administration's policies have driven up the price of oil, while its energy policy has made us more dependent on foreign oil and gas. It's time for the United States to take real steps to end our addiction to oil. And we can join with Israel, building on last year's US-Israel Energy Cooperation Act, to deepen our partnership in developing alternative sources of energy by increasing scientific collaboration and joint research and development. The surest way to increase our leverage in the long term is to stop bankrolling the Iranian regime. Finally, let there be no doubt: I will always keep the threat of military action on the table to defend our security and our ally Israel. Sometimes there are no alternatives to confrontation. But that only makes diplomacy more important. If we must use military force, we are more likely to succeed, and www.reiner-bernstein.de 310 – Chronologie 2008

will have far greater support at home and abroad, if we have exhausted our diplomatic efforts. That is the change we need in our foreign policy. Change that restores American power and influence. Change accompanied by a pledge that I will make known to allies and adversaries alike: that America maintains an unwavering friendship with Israel, and an unshakeable commitment to its security. As members of AIPAC, you have helped advance this bipartisan consensus to support and defend our ally Israel. And I am sure that today on Capitol Hill you will be meeting with members of Congress and spreading the word. But we are here because of more than policy. We are here because the values we hold dear are deeply embedded in the story of Israel. Just look at what Israel has accomplished in 60 years. From decades of struggle and the terrible wake of the Holocaust, a nation was forged to provide a home for Jews from all corners of the world – from Syria to Ethiopia to the Soviet Union. In the face of constant threats, Israel has triumphed. In the face of constant peril, Israel has prospered. In a state of constant insecurity, Israel has maintained a vibrant and open discourse, and a resilient commitment to the rule of law. As any Israeli will tell you, Israel is not a perfect place, but like the United States it sets an example for all when it seeks a more perfect future. These same qualities can be found among American Jews. It is why so many Jewish Americans have stood by Israel, while advancing the American story. Because there is a commitment embedded in the Jewish faith and tradition: to freedom and fairness; to social justice and equal opportunity. To tikkun olam – the obligation to repair this world. I will never forget that I would not be standing here today if it weren't for that commitment. In the great social movements in our country's history, Jewish and African Americans have stood shoulder to shoulder. They took buses down south together. They marched together. They bled together. And Jewish Americans like Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner were willing to die alongside a black man – James Chaney – on behalf of freedom and equality. Their legacy is our inheritance. We must not allow the relationship between Jews and African Americans to suffer. This is a bond that must be strengthened. Together, we can rededicate ourselves to end prejudice and combat hatred in all of its forms. Together, we can renew our commitment to justice. Together, we can join our voices together, and in doing so make even the mightiest of walls fall down. That work must include our shared commitment to Israel. You and I know that we must do more than stand still. Now is the time to be vigilant in facing down every foe, just as we move forward in seeking a future of peace for the children of Israel, and for all children. Now is the time to stand by Israel as it writes the next chapter in its extraordinary journey. Now is the time to join together in the work of repairing this world.

113 Obama backtracks on an undivided J'lem, in “The Jerusalem Post” 14.07.2008: In his first major speech minutes after clinching the Democrat nomination as the party's candidate for the US presidential election, Barack Obama surprised listeners at an AIPAC convention by saying Jerusalem should be Israel's "undivided" capital. However, the Illinois senator retracted his comments on Sunday, saying that they were "badly phrased," Israel Radio reported. "You know, the truth is that this was an example where we had some poor phrasing in the speech, and we immediately tried to correct the www.reiner-bernstein.de 311 – Chronologie 2008

interpretation that was given," Obama said during an interview on CNN's "Fareed Zakaria – GPS." "The point we were simply making was, is that we don't want barbed wire running through Jerusalem, similar to the way it was prior to the '67 war, that it is possible for us to create a Jerusalem that is cohesive and coherent. I was not trying to predetermine what are essentially final-status issues." The senator explained that despite the error in conveying his message, he did not intend to abandon the notion that the two sides – Israel and the Palestinians – should discuss such issues on their own, with strong backing from the United States. Israel, Obama said, must realize that its existence over the long term is dependent on its ability to achieve peace with its neighbors, while the Palestinian leadership must recognize the fact that the battles it fights, the direction in which it is going and the rhetoric it uses do not "deliver the goods" for the Palestinian people. What Israeli citizens want and what the residents of the West Bank long for is a pragmatic approach that would allow them to be safe, live their lives and educate their children, Obama added. Obama is scheduled to come to Israel for a brief 24-hour visit next week as part of a European and Middle Easter tour (during which he will visit Germany, France, the United Kingdom and also Iraq and Jordan). Obama's campaign headquarters have not yet published his itinerary and the precise date of his arrival, but he is scheduled to visit the Western Wall, Yad Vashem and take a helicopter trip to Sderot. Additionally, Obama will meet Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Defense Minister Ehud Barak, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and opposition leader and Likud chairman Binyamin Netanyahu. A poll published by Newsweek recently found that Obama is still the favored candidate, though by a smaller margin than last month. Obama enjoys 44 percent of support, while Republican nominee John McCain enjoys 41%.

114 Haviv Rettig: Flexible aliya plan presented to Knesset, in “The Jerusalem Post”-internet 03.06.2008: A new program being developed by the Jewish Agency and the government seeks to bring Diaspora Jews to Israel on a kind of temporary aliya – or long-term residency – during which they will experience life in Israel before deciding whether to move to the country permanently. The program, dubbed "flexible aliya," was presented by Jewish Agency director- general Moshe Vigdor in a meeting of the Knesset Immigration, Absorption and Diaspora Affairs Committee on Tuesday morning. It is being developed jointly by the JA and the Interior and Immigrant Absorption ministries. According to the new initiative, Jews from around the world will be able to move to Israel for a period ranging from several months to several years, during which they will be able to work, study and volunteer in the country. The exact nature of the new residency status is being determined in discussions with the Interior Ministry, but Jewish Agency officials said Tuesday that the status would be more than a tourist and less than an immigrant. This might mean eligibility for state-funded Hebrew courses, but not for the tax breaks and partially funded university studies contained in the aliya absorption package, while the compulsory military service of olim [immigrants] would not be required but other unspecified civic duties could be imposed. At the Knesset meeting, Vigdor noted that 10 percent of www.reiner-bernstein.de 312 – Chronologie 2008

participants in Masa, a program that brings up to 8,000 Jewish college-age youth to Israel each year for 5-month and year-long programs, end up making aliya within two years.

115 Vgl. die Eintragung am 13.05.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

116 Christoph Schult and Holger Stark: Berlin Forges Master Plan for Prisoner Exchange, “Spiegel”-online 01.06.2008, via www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,556951,00.html : A German intelligence agent has been brokering a prisoner exchange deal between Israel and Hezbollah on behalf of the United Nations. Now an official proposal is on the table, and Jerusalem is due to decide shortly whether to accept it. Secret diplomacy in the Middle East is always a sensitive issue. Successive German foreign ministers have realized that, and so has German negotiator Gerhard C., who has been mediating between Israel and the Lebanese Hezbollah for almost two years. For most of that time, the agent of Germany's foreign intelligence service, the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), had little to show for his troubles apart a fractured hand sustained in a fall during a secret visit to Israel. But since last week the German agent, who has been shuttling back and forth between the two sides on behalf of the United Nations, has been able to report signs of progress to his masters in Berlin and New York, and his news gives rise to hope for an easing of tensions in this troubled region. The deal the agent is currently arranging could enter the history books as a masterly diplomatic coup, if it works. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has been informed, as has Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, who travels to Jerusalem this week. After months of negotiations, which went on even throughout Lebanon's recent government crisis, "Mr Hezbollah" as Gerhard C. is known in intelligence circles, recently presented the text of a master plan aimed at securing the return of the two Israeli soldiers Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev, both of whom are believed to be dead. Their capture near the Lebanese-Israeli border in a raid by Hezbollah on July 12, 2006, had triggered the 33-day war between Israel and the Lebanese-based guerrillas. Hezbollah put its secret tunnel system and high-tech weapons to such effective use against the usually well-prepared Israeli army that the war was called a "failure" by the Israeli government-appointed commission that investigated it. In large parts of the Arab world, the militia of Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah has been hailed as the historic victor over the hated Israeli army. Berlin's master plan envisages that the Israeli government of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert release four Hezbollah militiamen captured in southern Lebanon during the war. Olmert's soldiers weren't able to capture many Lebanese guerrillas, and the four are the last fighters still being held by Israel. In addition, Israel is to hand over the bodies of 10 Lebanese combatants as well as the remains of fighters from previous wars. It would also provide maps detailing the location of minefields Israeli troops set up in southern Lebanon. Handover List Includes Druze Killer The list includes the name of a man who provokes Israeli fury like few others: Samir Kuntar, 45. The member of the Druze religion, a spin-off of Islam, belonged to an Arab terror unit that killed four Israelis in the Israeli town of Nahariya in 1979. Kuntar shot dead a man in front of the eyes of his daughter and then smashed the girl's skull in. The mother managed to www.reiner-bernstein.de 313 – Chronologie 2008

hide the second child but it asphyxiated while she tried to calm it down. Kuntar has expressed no remorse for his deed to this day. "The only place for me is at the fighting front which is soaked with the blood of martyrs," he recently wrote to Nasrallah from his prison cell. In return, Hezbollah is prepared to hand over the bodies of Regev and Goldwasser. Nasrallah's negotiator Hajj Wafik never officially confirmed that the soldiers died but their death is now regarded as a fact in the secret talks. In addition the Shiite group, which receives millions from the Iranian government each year and gets weapons from Tehran and Damascus, is to provide information on the fate of a further Israeli, Ron Arad. The fighter jet navigator is a national hero in Israel. He was shot down in 1986 over Lebanon and has been missing ever since. He is believed to have been taken to Iran and to have died there. The deal would require Hezbollah to give a detailed report on Arad's fate. The Israeli government decided in 2004 to link Samir Kuntar's fate with information on the whereabouts of Ron Arad's body. But Olmert's cabinet now seems ready to free the killer. "My brother will soon be home," said Bassam Kuntar. Hezbollah leader Nasrallah says there will be a solution "very soon." Berlin Plan Proposes Release of Palestinians Prisoners That may be a little too optimistic, because the Berlin master plan also consists of a second part which is no less sensitive: the release by Israel of Palestinian prisoners. In the negotiations over recent months, Hezbollah has insisted that in addition to releasing the four Lebanese militiamen and Kuntar, Olmert must free a large number of Palestinian fighters being held in Israeli prisons. The most recent number being discussed is several dozen. That would enable Nasrallah to present himself as guardian of all "resistance groups" against Israel and as a strategist capable of standing up to Israel not just on the battlefield, but on the diplomatic stage as well. It's quite possible that the ambitious plan could still fail, because the release of Palestinian fighters would weaken Israel's position against Hamas. The Palestinian group also holds an Israeli soldier, Corporal Gilad Shalit, and is demanding the release of around 450 Palestinian prisoners being held in Israel. The prisoner exchange resembles haggling in a bazaar. If Israel were to release Palestinians in a deal with Hezbollah, Hamas would respond by increasing its own demands, especially given that Shalit is still alive. Even without this problem Olmert will have trouble selling the return of two dead soldiers as a success. For months, the Israeli negotiators didn't tell the soldiers' families that they believed them to be dead. When Israeli newspaper "Jediot Acharonot" last week confirmed a report in SPIEGEL to that effect, the mother of Ehud Goldwasser was outraged. "Nobody said a word to us." Olmert Weakened The prime minister is under severe political pressure as it is. He looks increasingly likely to face a corruption charge after damning court testimony from US businessman Morris Talansky that he handed Olmert more than $100,000. Coalition partner Ehud Barak called on him to resign last week and Olmert's strongest rival, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, called for new elections. Critics within Olmert's party would attack the release of Palestinian prisoners as a further sign of weakness. "There is no way we will release Palestinians," vowed Yaakov Edri, a member of Olmert's Kadima party and a minister in his cabinet. German mediator Gerhard C. is well aware of these objections and has spent months trying to find a solution that enables both sides to save face. There aren't many better suited to the task that "Mr Hezbollah", who www.reiner-bernstein.de 314 – Chronologie 2008

speaks fluent Arabic, is trusted in Jerusalem and Beirut and played a central behind-the-scenes role in the last big prisoner exchange in 2004. The proposed deal the BND agent developed in accord with the United Nations harbors a major political risk for UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon, who wants to overcome the stalemate between the two enemies by segregating the actual deal from the issue of Palestinian prisoners. The two-step plan envisages allowing some time to pass between the first exchange and the subsequent release of Palestinians. The latter step would officially be billed as a humanitarian gesture by the Israeli government. That would make it hard for Hezbollah to sell the return of anti-Zionist fighters as a triumph for Nasrallah. Israel could imagine such an arrangement, Olmert's chief negotiator Ofer Dekel had indicated to the German mediator – provided that Nasrallah gave a sign that the soldiers were alive. Now that they are believed to be dead, Israel's willingness to reach a deal has lessened. On the other hand, there is growing pressure for a quick settlement, both from the United Nations and by supporters of a deal in Israel. Decisive talks are now set take place this week in Israel, followed by a final round of shuttle diplomacy by the BND agent between Jerusalem, Beirut, New York and Berlin. Excitement is running high at both the UN and in the German government ahead of the Israeli government's decision. The issue of Palestinian prisoners remains "on the table", said an Israeli who is accompanying the talks. There's no guarantee that the government will agree to an exchange, said the insider. "But it can't be ruled out either."

117 Ofri Ilani: U-S. Prof. gives Israeli prize money to Palestinian university, in „Haaretz“-Online 26.05.2008: The American mathematician David Mumford, co-winner of the 2008 Wolf Foundation Prize in Mathematics, announced upon receiving the award yesterday that he will donate the money to Bir Zeit University, near Ramallah, and to Gisha, an Israeli organization that advocates for Palestinian freedom of movement. "I decided to donate my share of the Wolf Prize to enable the academic community in occupied Palestine to survive and thrive," Mumford told Haaretz. "I am very grateful for the prize, but I believe that Palestinian students should have an opportunity to go elsewhere to acquire an education. Students in the West Bank and Gaza today do not have an opportunity to do that." The Wolf Foundation awards prizes of $100,000 each year "to outstanding scientists and artists for achievements in the interest of mankind and friendly relations among peoples," its web site says. It is considered one of the most prestigious international honors in mathematics. Mumford, professor emeritus at Brown University and Harvard University, shared this year's prize with Pierre Deligne and Phillip Griffiths of Princeton University. According to the Wolf Foundation, he was recognized for his "work on algebraic surfaces; on geometric invariant theory; and for laying the foundations of the modern algebraic theory of the moduli space of curves and theta functions." Mumford, who received the prize from President Shimon Peres in the Knesset, said he has already contacted Bir Zeit University and Gisha, and they have agreed to accept his donation. "The achievements I accomplished in mathematics were made possible thanks to my being able to move freely and exchange ideas with other scholars," he said. "It would not have been possible without an international consensus on an exchange of ideas. Mathematics works best when people can move and get together. www.reiner-bernstein.de 315 – Chronologie 2008

That's its elixir of life. But the people of occupied Palestine don't have an opportunity to do that. The school system is fighting for its life, and mobility is very limited." "When I visited Israel in 1995, there was a feeling of hope, but that is not the situation today," he added. "Education for people in the occupied territories gives them a future. The alternative is chaos." He said his decision was not aimed at Israel. "I have tremendous regard for Israel, which is without a doubt a major force in the mathematics world. But unfortunately, the Palestinians cannot take part in this prosperity."

118 Amos Harel and Barak Ravid: Olmert to Haaretz: Syria contacts are ‚historic breakthrough“, in „Haaretz“-Online 21.05.2008: Israel and Syria will begin indirect negotiations in Istanbul in a few weeks, in an effort to reach a peace agreement. The talks will be held through Turkish mediators. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told Haaretz on Wednesday that "there had been a development in Syrian positions and the contacts with Syria are a historic breakthrough." Olmert added that "these exchanges have been ongoing for a long time and they have now matured." On Monday [May 19, 2008], a secret mini-conference was held in Istanbul to establish the framework of the negotiations and its content. At the end of the meetings a coordinated joint declaration announced that talks will begin. "Israel and Syria began indirect peace talks under Turkish auspices," the statement read. "Both sides declared that their intention is to conduct these talks in good faith and with an open mind. They decided to conduct the dialogue in a serious and continuous manner in a bid to reach a comprehensive peace in accordance with the framework established at the Madrid peace conference." At the 1991 Madrid peace conference, it was decided to hold direct negotiations between Israel and its neighbors on the basis of United Nations Resolutions 242 and 338. The efforts to reach agreement on starting talks began in February 2007 with the exchange of informal notes between Syria and Israel through Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. The talks on Monday involved, on the Israeli side, the Prime Minister's Bureau chief of staff, Yoram Turbowicz, and his political adviser, Shalom Turgeman. Syria was represented by the legal counselor of the Foreign Ministry, Dr. Riad Daoudi. The Syrian official is a veteran of behind-the- scenes talks with Israel, and held talks with Uri Sagie, adviser to Ehud Barak, even after talks with Syria broke down in 2000. Facilitating the indirect talks was Erdogan's foreign policy adviser, Ahmet Davutoglu. Speaking Wednesday at a Tel Aviv conference on education, Prime Minister Olmert said that "negotiations with Syria will not be easy and will not be simple, it may take a long time and it will involve concessions. "After evaluating all the data and receiving the opinion of the defense establishment, I reached the conclusion that the chance [for success] is greater than the risk, and with this hope we are today getting on our way." Olmert added that the resumption of negotiations with Syria is a national obligation that must be tried. "That was the same conclusion that [Yitzhak] Rabin, [Benjamin] Netanyahu, and Ehud Barak had reached when each in turn invested efforts in this direction and were even willing to make painful, extraordinary concessions in order to reach peace with Syria," Olmert said. www.reiner-bernstein.de 316 – Chronologie 2008

"The years that have passed have not improved our security situation along the northern border, which is still a source of major concern regarding the deterioration of our security situation. Under such conditions it is always best to talk and not shoot, and I am happy that the two sides have agreed to talk.' A senior source in the Prime Minister's Bureau declined to offer details on the content of the talks but said they were held while the representatives of Israel and Syria sat in separate rooms, with the Turkish facilitators shuttling between them. According to the Israeli source, the two sides agreed to hold indirect meetings every few weeks in Istanbul. "The fact that the Syrian president agreed to the framework of the negotiations grants credibility to his intentions," the senior source said. "It is obvious to us that if we reach agreement it will be respected and it will be possible to implement it. "During the talks Israel did not make any preliminary promises on the Golan Heights and did not refer to the promises made by Rabin," the source said. He was referring to a 1994 promise Rabin made to U.S. Secretary of State Warren Christopher, that if Syria met Israel's security conditions, Israel would withdraw from the Golan Heights. However, Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem said Wednesday night during a visit to Bahrain that Israel had commited to withdrawing to the June 4, 1967 lines, noting that this was not a new development. "Already in 1993 the late prime minister Yitzhak Rabin commited to this, and since then all other prime ministers have followed," the Syrian minister said. He also expressed hope that Israel will be serious in the talks so that progress will be achieved and make direct talks possible. Talks between Israel and Syria at Shepherdstown in 2000 stalled over the question of the border of June 4, which the Syrians claim constituted the border on the waterline of Lake Kinneret, while Israel maintains that because the lake has dried up over the years, the waterline moved several hundred meters. Over the years, the waterline had served as an unofficial border. Former Syrian information minister, Mahdi Dahlallah, said Wednesday night that if there is a peace agreement "then there will no longer be any need for resistance," a direct reference to Hezbollah in Lebanon and also Hamas. Dahlallah said that the "resistance is not an end in and of itself but a means for restoring land that was taken away, and therefore if this territory is restored there is no reason for resistance." Meanwhile, senior Israeli security figures suggested Wednesday that there should be no exaggerated expectations of the renewed talks. The same sources said that it is hard to believe that the exchanges will come to fruition in the near future, certainly not in terms of a peace agreement between the two countries. At the Israel Defense Forces, the assessment is that a major component that may encourage a Syrian agreement for an accord depends on American involvement. IDF sources say that if the Bush administration is willing to place the talks under its aegis and Syrian President Bashar Assad is convinced that U.S. support will be extensive in return for peace with Israel, progress will be achieved. Syria "is not as interested in making peace with Israel as it is in making peace with Washington," said Itamar Rabinovich, who served as an Israeli negotiator in the last round of talks with Syria www.reiner-bernstein.de 317 – Chronologie 2008

The U.S. administration had been updated on the status of the talks between the two sides, and Washington announced Wednesday that it is not opposed. "We were not surprised by it, and we do not object to it," said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino on the unexpected joint announcement by Israel and Syria on Wednesday that they were conducting indirect talks through Turkey. Perino said that the United States was not involved in the effort, which was "a decision undertaken by Israel," but added that the administration hoped "that this is a forum to address various concerns we all have with Syria – Syria's support of terrorism, repression of its own people. And so we will see how this progresses." Israel informed Egypt and the Palestinian Authorities of the existence of indirect talks with Syria before the official announcement Wednesday. It sought to assure the Palestinians that Israel is in no way opting for the Syrian track at the expense of negotiations with the Palestinian Authority.

119 Vgl. die Eintragung am 23.02.2009 in dieser Zeitleiste.

120 Alon Liel bemühte sich im Frühjahr 2007 um Schritte der Entspannung zwischen beiden Staaten, so die Eintragung am 12.04.2007 in dieser Zeitleiste.

121 Alon Liel: Please, Mr. President, in “Haaretz”-Online 16.05.2008: Dear President Bush, Welcome to Israel. I believe that your visit at this time is more important than ever, because two days spent in Israel are vital to understanding our situation. These two days have helped to bring you up to speed as to the mood of the country on its 60th birthday, the feeling of despair that hangs over a nation surrounded by a sea of fundamentalism. These 48 hours are giving you a first-hand look at the political situation of our prime minister. This trip is also allowing you to check the pulse of Palestinian public opinion; perhaps even to reflect on your miscalculation (not the first) in gambling on the moderate forces in Lebanon to gain the upper hand over their nemesis, Hezbollah. While here, you can gain a keener sense of the way the sands are blowing than if you had remained in Washington, which is now preoccupied with figuring out who will be the next occupant of your soon-to-be-former residence. I assume you have come with gifts for our 60th birthday that are you are eagerly unpacking from your suitcase. While I do not discount your sincerity and goodwill, I would like to ask for one particular present that I'm sure you did not bring, but which could be put to immediate use. It is a gift that can keep at bay a future conflagration that threatens the region, a gift that perhaps can salvage America's standing in the Middle East. It is a gift that bears strategic importance for the State of Israel and has the potential to simultaneously give a boost to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. Mr. President, I know it is hardly respectful to ask for gifts, but this time it is urgent. Sir, I am asking you to appoint a special envoy whose task would be to oversee diplomatic contacts between Israel and Syria. This is a gift that won't cost you much, and it may seem unnecessary to you, but for us it would be a lifesaver. Mr. President, you've already appointed numerous envoys to the region during your term in office, only to see a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian www.reiner-bernstein.de 318 – Chronologie 2008

problem move further out of reach. I promise you, sir, that this time you won't be wasting an envoy. Your new emissary will enable us to jump-start the process that could change the balance of power in the Middle East. Mr. President, as the one who has run the world for the past eight years, and by extension the Middle East, you have played no small part in the regional gains by Shi'ite fundamentalists who threaten us from every direction. You were so focused on the nuclear bomb that had yet to be produced that you didn't bother to concern yourself with the most potent conventional weapon there is in Iran: winning hearts and minds in the region – hearts and minds that you have managed to repel and which are now in the possession of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The Iranians don't need to use the bomb. With their heads, their mouths and the Koran, they beat us with a knockout punch. Mr. President, Syria is not a natural member of the Iranian fundamentalist camp. Just ask the most renowned Orientalists at a university not far from where you stand today in Jerusalem. The Syrians fear the Iranians almost as much as we do. You have a one-time opportunity to stop Syria from falling completely into Iranian hands. Mr. President, give us a chance to at least ensure quiet on our northern front. We have our hands full as it is with Hamas in the Gaza Strip and, perhaps very soon, the West Bank. Please, Mr. President. Even though you may not view this gift as significant, we can put it to immediate use. Even your fellow citizens will benefit from it at the end of the day. Dr. Alon Liel, a former director of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, is chairman of the Israel-Syria Peace Society.

122 Vgl. die Eintragung am 27.02.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

123 US President before the Knesset, 15 May 2008: President Peres and Mr. Prime Minister, Madam Speaker, thank very much for hosting this special session. President Beinish, Leader of the Opposition Netanyahu, Ministers, members of the Knesset, distinguished guests: Shalom. Laura and I are thrilled to be back in Israel. We have been deeply moved by the celebrations of the past two days. And this afternoon, I am honored to stand before one of the world's great democratic assemblies and convey the wishes of the American people with these words: Yom Ha'atzmaut . (Applause.) It is a rare privilege for the American President to speak to the Knesset. (Laughter.) Although the Prime Minister told me there is something even rarer – to have just one person in this chamber speaking at a time. (Laughter.) My only regret is that one of Israel's greatest leaders is not here to share this moment. He is a warrior for the ages, a man of peace, a friend. The prayers of the American people are with Ariel Sharon. (Applause.) We gather to mark a momentous occasion. Sixty years ago in Tel Aviv, David Ben-Gurion proclaimed Israel's independence, founded on the "natural right of the Jewish people to be masters of their own fate." What followed was more than the establishment of a new country. It was the redemption of an ancient promise given to Abraham and Moses and David – a homeland for the chosen people Eretz Yisrael. Eleven minutes later, on the orders of President Harry Truman, the United States was proud to be the first nation to recognize Israel's independence. And on this landmark anniversary, America is proud to be Israel's closest ally and best friend in the world. www.reiner-bernstein.de 319 – Chronologie 2008

The alliance between our governments is unbreakable, yet the source of our friendship runs deeper than any treaty. It is grounded in the shared spirit of our people, the bonds of the Book, the ties of the soul. When William Bradford stepped off the Mayflower in 1620, he quoted the words of Jeremiah: "Come let us declare in Zion the word of God." The founders of my country saw a new promised land and bestowed upon their towns names like Bethlehem and New Canaan. And in time, many Americans became passionate advocates for a Jewish state. Centuries of suffering and sacrifice would pass before the dream was fulfilled. The Jewish people endured the agony of the pogroms, the tragedy of the Great War, and the horror of the Holocaust – what Elie Wiesel called "the kingdom of the night." Soulless men took away lives and broke apart families. Yet they could not take away the spirit of the Jewish people, and they could not break the promise of God. (Applause.) When news of Israel's freedom finally arrived, Golda Meir, a fearless woman raised in Wisconsin, could summon only tears. She later said: "For two thousand years we have waited for our deliverance. Now that it is here it is so great and wonderful that it surpasses human words." The joy of independence was tempered by the outbreak of battle, a struggle that has continued for six decades. Yet in spite of the violence, in defiance of the threats, Israel has built a thriving democracy in the heart of the Holy Land. You have welcomed immigrants from the four corners of the Earth. You have forged a free and modern society based on the love of liberty, a passion for justice, and a respect for human dignity. You have worked tirelessly for peace. You have fought valiantly for freedom. My country's admiration for Israel does not end there. When Americans look at Israel, we see a pioneer spirit that worked an agricultural miracle and now leads a high-tech revolution. We see world-class universities and a global leader in business and innovation and the arts. We see a resource more valuable than oil or gold: the talent and determination of a free people who refuse to let any obstacle stand in the way of their destiny. I have been fortunate to see the character of Israel up close. I have touched the Western Wall, seen the sun reflected in the Sea of Galilee, I have prayed at Yad Vashem. And earlier today, I visited Masada, an inspiring monument to courage and sacrifice. At this historic site, Israeli soldiers swear an oath: "Masada shall never fall again." Citizens of Israel: Masada shall never fall again, and America will be at your side. This anniversary is a time to reflect on the past. It's also an opportunity to look to the future. As we go forward, our alliance will be guided by clear principles – shared convictions rooted in moral clarity and unswayed by popularity polls or the shifting opinions of international elites. We believe in the matchless value of every man, woman, and child. So we insist that the people of Israel have the right to a decent, normal, and peaceful life, just like the citizens of every other nation. (Applause.) We believe that democracy is the only way to ensure human rights. So we consider it a source of shame that the United Nations routinely passes more human rights resolutions against the freest democracy in the Middle East than any other nation in the world. (Applause.) We believe that religious liberty is fundamental to a civilized society. So we condemn anti-Semitism in all forms – whether by those who openly question Israel's right to exist, or by others who quietly excuse them. We believe that free people should strive and sacrifice for peace. So we applaud the courageous choices Israeli's leaders have made. We also believe that nations have a right to defend themselves and that no nation www.reiner-bernstein.de 320 – Chronologie 2008

should ever be forced to negotiate with killers pledged to its destruction. (Applause.) We believe that targeting innocent lives to achieve political objectives is always and everywhere wrong. So we stand together against terror and extremism, and we will never let down our guard or lose our resolve. (Applause.) The fight against terror and extremism is the defining challenge of our time. It is more than a clash of arms. It is a clash of visions, a great ideological struggle. On the one side are those who defend the ideals of justice and dignity with the power of reason and truth. On the other side are those who pursue a narrow vision of cruelty and control by committing murder, inciting fear, and spreading lies. This struggle is waged with the technology of the 21st century, but at its core it is an ancient battle between good and evil. The killers claim the mantle of Islam, but they are not religious men. No one who prays to the God of Abraham could strap a suicide vest to an innocent child, or blow up guiltless guests at a Passover Seder, or fly planes into office buildings filled with unsuspecting workers. In truth, the men who carry out these savage acts serve no higher goal than their own desire for power. They accept no God before themselves. And they reserve a special hatred for the most ardent defenders of liberty, including Americans and Israelis. And that is why the founding charter of Hamas calls for the "elimination" of Israel. And that is why the followers of Hezbollah chant "Death to Israel, Death to America!" That is why Osama bin Laden teaches that "the killing of Jews and Americans is one of the biggest duties." And that is why the President of Iran dreams of returning the Middle East to the Middle Ages and calls for Israel to be wiped off the map. There are good and decent people who cannot fathom the darkness in these men and try to explain away their words. It's natural, but it is deadly wrong. As witnesses to evil in the past, we carry a solemn responsibility to take these words seriously. Jews and Americans have seen the consequences of disregarding the words of leaders who espouse hatred. And that is a mistake the world must not repeat in the 21st century. Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: "Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided." We have an obligation to call this what it is – the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history. (Applause.) Some people suggest if the United States would just break ties with Israel, all our problems in the Middle East would go away. This is a tired argument that buys into the propaganda of the enemies of peace, and America utterly rejects it. Israel's population may be just over 7 million. But when you confront terror and evil, you are 307 million strong, because the United States of America stands with you. (Applause.) America stands with you in breaking up terrorist networks and denying the extremists sanctuary. America stands with you in firmly opposing Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions. Permitting the world's leading sponsor of terror to possess the world's deadliest weapons would be an unforgivable betrayal for future generations. For the sake of peace, the world must not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon. (Applause.) Ultimately, to prevail in this struggle, we must offer an alternative to the ideology of the extremists by extending our vision of justice and tolerance and freedom and hope. These values are the self-evident right of all www.reiner-bernstein.de 321 – Chronologie 2008

people, of all religions, in all the world because they are a gift from the Almighty God. Securing these rights is also the surest way to secure peace. Leaders who are accountable to their people will not pursue endless confrontation and bloodshed. Young people with a place in their society and a voice in their future are less likely to search for meaning in radicalism. Societies where citizens can express their conscience and worship their God will not export violence, they will be partners in peace. The fundamental insight, that freedom yields peace, is the great lesson of the 20th century. Now our task is to apply it to the 21st. Nowhere is this work more urgent than here in the Middle East. We must stand with the reformers working to break the old patterns of tyranny and despair. We must give voice to millions of ordinary people who dream of a better life in a free society. We must confront the moral relativism that views all forms of government as equally acceptable and thereby consigns whole societies to slavery. Above all, we must have faith in our values and ourselves and confidently pursue the expansion of liberty as the path to a peaceful future. That future will be a dramatic departure from the Middle East of today. So as we mark 60 years from Israel's founding, let us try to envision the region 60 years from now. This vision is not going to arrive easily or overnight; it will encounter violent resistance. But if we and future Presidents and future maintain our resolve and have faith in our ideals, here is the Middle East that we can see: Israel will be celebrating the 120th anniversary as one of the world's great democracies, a secure and flourishing homeland for the Jewish people. The Palestinian people will have the homeland they have long dreamed of and deserved – a democratic state that is governed by law, and respects human rights, and rejects terror. From Cairo to Riyadh to Baghdad and Beirut, people will live in free and independent societies, where a desire for peace is reinforced by ties of diplomacy and tourism and trade. Iran and Syria will be peaceful nations, with today's oppression a distant memory and where people are free to speak their minds and develop their God- given talents. Al Qaeda and Hezbollah and Hamas will be defeated, as Muslims across the region recognize the emptiness of the terrorists' vision and the injustice of their cause. Overall, the Middle East will be characterized by a new period of tolerance and integration. And this doesn't mean that Israel and its neighbors will be best of friends. But when leaders across the region answer to their people, they will focus their energies on schools and jobs, not on rocket attacks and suicide bombings. With this change, Israel will open a new hopeful chapter in which its people can live a normal life, and the dream of Herzl and the founders of 1948 can be fully and finally realized. This is a bold vision, and some will say it can never be achieved. But think about what we have witnessed in our own time. When Europe was destroying itself through total war and genocide, it was difficult to envision a continent that six decades later would be free and at peace. When Japanese pilots were flying suicide missions into American battleships, it seemed impossible that six decades later Japan would be a democracy, a lynchpin of security in Asia, and one of America's closest friends. And when waves of refugees arrived here in the desert with nothing, surrounded by hostile armies, it was almost unimaginable that Israel would grow into one of the freest and most successful nations on the earth. Yet each one of these transformations took place. And a future of transformation is possible in the Middle East, so long as a new generation of leaders has the courage to defeat the enemies of freedom, to make the www.reiner-bernstein.de 322 – Chronologie 2008

hard choices necessary for peace, and stand firm on the solid rock of universal values. Sixty years ago, on the eve of Israel's independence, the last British soldiers departing Jerusalem stopped at a building in the Jewish quarter of the Old City. An officer knocked on the door and met a senior rabbi. The officer presented him with a short iron bar – the key to the Zion Gate – and said it was the first time in 18 centuries that a key to the gates of Jerusalem had belonged to a Jew. His hands trembling, the rabbi offered a prayer of thanksgiving to God, "Who had granted us life and permitted us to reach this day." Then he turned to the officer, and uttered the words Jews had awaited for so long: "I accept this key in the name of my people." Over the past six decades, the Jewish people have established a state that would make that humble rabbi proud. You have raised a modern society in the Promised Land, a light unto the nations that preserves the legacy of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob. And you have built a mighty democracy that will endure forever and can always count on the United States of America to be at your side. God bless. (Applause.)

124 MP Ehud before the Knesset, 15 May 2008: Madam Speaker of the Knesset, The Honorable President of the State of Israel, Mr. Shimon Peres, Honored Guest of this House, the Honorable President of the United States of America, Mr. George Bush, and Mrs. Laura Bush, Madam Secretary of State, Ms. Condoleezza Rice, Government Ministers, Members of Knesset, The Honorable US Ambassador to Israel, Mr. Richard Jones, The Honorable Israeli Ambassador to the United States, Mr. Salai Meridor, Dear Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen, The State of Israel and the Israeli Knesset are honored to host you, Mr. President, in the home of Israeli democracy, the house where the free will of the Israeli people is manifested, through its delegates and elected representatives. On behalf of the citizens of Israel, on behalf of the Government of Israel and on behalf of the members of this House, I warmly welcome you as the President of a great nation, the leader of the Free World, and as a true, steadfast and loyal friend of the State of Israel. The deep-rooted friendship between the United States and Israel is not an accidental one, and it cannot be taken for granted. It is a friendship predicated on shared values and on a moral, human and social destiny, the main principles of which are individual liberty, social justice and peace. The greatness of the United States lies in its willingness and ability to act and sacrifice for the sake of a global, international order based on democracy, human rights, free economy and the achievement of peace. The distinction between a way of life which is worth defending and that which must be opposed has always been, and still remains, clear and sharp. In the words of American President Harry Truman, who, sixty years ago, supported the establishment of the State of Israel: "One way of life is based upon the will of a majority, and is distinguished by free institutions, representative government, free elections, guarantees of individual liberty, freedom of speech and religion, and freedom from political oppression. The second way of life is based upon the will of a minority, forcibly imposed upon the majority. It relies upon terror and oppression, a controlled press and radio; fixed election, and the suppression of personal freedoms". www.reiner-bernstein.de 323 – Chronologie 2008

In a world where the American light-tower prevailed, the Jewish people rose, through tremendous efforts, from the abyss of the Holocaust to the pinnacle of revival, and founded, by the heroism of its sons, the democratic State of Israel. Since then and throughout the years, despite the changes of governments in Washington and governments in Jerusalem, the alliance of friendship between our peoples and countries has remained solid and continued to grow stronger and more powerful. The United States' identification with the Jewish people's struggle for national revival was demonstrated even before the establishment of the State of Israel, with its demand to open the gates of the Land of Israel to Holocaust survivors. Precisely sixty years ago, just a few minutes after the State of Israel's declaration of independence, the United States was the first country to grant us recognition. When the nascent, indigent nation took upon itself the challenge of absorbing hundreds of thousands of destitute Israeli refugees from Europe and Arab states, your country lent a hand and provided loans and financial aid. Later, when the Soviet Union was arming Israel's enemies who conspired to destroy us, the United States supplied Israel with the means to defend itself. When the courageous outcry was heard from behind the Iron Curtain "let my people go!", it was American pressure which led to the opening of the gates for the mass immigration of our brothers from the Soviet Union to Israel. And of course, it was American President George Bush Sr. who acted to bring to Israel the masses of Ethiopian Jews in the operation later known as Operation Moshe. In the international arena, the UN General Assembly, the Security Council, and on countless other occasions, the United States consistently stood by Israel, often in splendid isolation, and in the face of a malicious, biased, automatic bloc, comprised mostly of totalitarian countries and dictatorships. Today, on your visit to Israel, allow me to express the appreciation and gratitude of the people of Israel for your nation's leadership and for its dedication to its moral, historic and universal role as the torchbearer of democracy, justice, freedom and peace. Mr. President, The United States and Israel have a long-standing strategic alliance. This alliance also encompassed the economic relations between our two countries. In the first decades following the establishment of the state, the economic aid was unilateral, and was undoubtedly an important component in strengthening the Israeli economy. However, today I can proudly say that the relations are no longer based merely on dependence, but rather on cooperation and mutual benefit. In the fields of trade, technology, research and development there is a true partnership between our countries, a partnership founded on economic considerations, but also on shared values and a worldview which attributes great value to the Israeli entrepreneurship and ingenuity. The United States and Israel also share the concept that democracy and market economy walk hand in hand and that this combination is the winning recipe for growth and welfare. The United States opened its gates for Israel's entrepreneurial forces, so that they can thrive in the vibrant economic framework which America leads. Numerous Israeli companies are traded on the New York Stock Exchange, and cooperation in the field of hi-tech between Israel and the United States resulted in groundbreaking successes of international standards. Dear Friend, Your visit to Israel on the occasion of Israel's 60th anniversary celebrations is a wonderful gesture of personal and inter-state friendship. However, it is www.reiner-bernstein.de 324 – Chronologie 2008

not only a courtesy visit. This visit provided another important opportunity for us to discuss the advancement of a peaceful solution to the Israeli- Palestinian conflict, in accordance with your vision, Mr. President, of two states for two peoples. Your personal involvement, and the commendable efforts of the Secretary of State, Ms. Condoleezza Rice, is vital for the success of the intensive negotiations taking place between us and the Palestinians. When, eventually, we reach with the help of G-d an historic peace treaty between us and our Palestinian neighbors, it will be submitted for the approval of this House, which represents the entire spectrum of opinions in the State of Israel. Knowing the differing views in this House and the sentiments of the citizens of Israel, I am convinced that a peace agreement which fully reflects the vision which you introduced to the world in June 2002, and which is based on two states for two peoples – a Jewish state and a Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security – will be approved by a vast majority of the Knesset members and will be supported by an overwhelming majority of the Israeli public. Mr. President, The Middle East is a region fraught with danger. The firm actions taken by the United States throughout the years against sources of aggression, violence and terrorism are aimed at defending the justice and preventing a fundamental undermining of stability in our region – stability which is so vital for world peace, the international energy market and the global economy. There is not the slightest shadow of doubt that confronting the murderous, fundamentalist threat of terror, which is devoid of any moral inhibitions, is the most important challenge currently facing democratic societies across the globe. We had a reminder of this only yesterday afternoon, when a rocket struck a mall in Ashkelon and injured innocent citizens. The outcome of this confrontation will have far-reaching repercussions on the future and way of life of the Free World. You, Mr. President, will be remembered as the one who courageously, and without hesitation, took the reigns of leadership and stood firmly and determinedly against this formidable challenge. The most severe source of threat currently to the stability of the Middle East and to world peace is, as you know, Iran. The danger lies in the pretentious ambition of the regime in Tehran to achieve regional hegemony, its cynical use of terror and religious hatred to further its aims, and its obvious pursuit of nuclear capabilities. The Iranian President's threats to wipe Israel off the map, and the preparations he makes to carry this out through long-range missiles and nuclear capabilities, compel us to be ready to defend ourselves. But the threat is not aimed at Israel alone, and the majority of countries in the region also see themselves threatened. Israel believes that while the severity of the Iranian threat forces us not to rule out any other course of action, presenting a united international, political and economic front against Iran, and more severe and effective sanctions, is a necessary, even if not final, step on the right path to curbing the Iranian threat. Mr. President, On its 60th anniversary, Israel has no stronger desire than to achieve peace with its Palestinian neighbors and other Arab states. Your continued support of the effort to achieve peace and security in our region is America's greatest gift to the State of Israel on its 60th anniversary. Allow me please to convey through you to the American people, to both Houses of Congress and to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who, www.reiner-bernstein.de 325 – Chronologie 2008

throughout all these years, persevered in their bipartisan support of Israel, our tremendous gratitude for the generous and vital political, economic and security aid that they have given us. Prophet Isaiah, son of Amotz, whose voice and universal vision of peace and justice were heard here, in the eternal capital, in Jerusalem, 2,700 years ago, called in his prophecy for the opening of the gates of the city for the entry of a "righteous nation": "Open ye the gates, that the righteous nation that keepeth faithfulness may enter in.” The gates of Jerusalem, the gates of the State of Israel and the gates of the hearts of the people of Israel are open to you, Mr. President, as the head of a great nation and friend, which seeks justice, freedom and peace. Welcome, and welcome to all those who accompany you on this important visit, which symbolizes, more than anything else, the spirit and depth of the special alliance between our peoples and countries. And on a more personal note: it may not always be acceptable on these official occasions, which are often subject to quite a few strict rules of protocol, but I fear that such an occasion will not repeat itself in your capacity as President of the United States. So, I wish to say to you personally, from one person to another, one father to another, one son of great parents to another, and to a warm and sensitive family man such as yourself: political life provides all of us with many occasions in which statements are made, registered in the protocol, echo in the air and later fade away as if they were never made. What you heard today, with your lovely wife and supportive team, is the truth. It will not fade away and disappear. Not necessarily because it is registered in the Knesset records, but because it comes from the heart – my own personal heart, the heart of the entire Knesset and the heart of the people of Israel. Today, more than any other day, the Knesset gives an accurate, true and deep expression to the entire people of Israel, and all this is thanks to you and for you. May you be blessed.

125 Excerpts in „The Jerusalem Post“-online 12.05.2008: Newly returned to White House following the wedding of his daughter Jenna at his Texas ranch this weekend, US President George W. Bush was in notably good spirits as he sat with The Jerusalem Post and three other Israeli journalists in the Oval Office on Monday. He spoke about the moral principles that underpin his presidency and about the challenges posed by Islamic extremism. But he did not say unequivocally that he believed he could thwart Iran's nuclear drive before leaving office. Ahead his visit to Israel later this week, the president also stressed his continuing belief that an accord can be reached this year between Israel and the Palestinians. He said he had witnessed the emergence of the belief in Israel that the Jewish state's long-term survival depends on there being a Palestinian state. And he added that he himself could not envisage the Middle East evolving in the absence of such a Palestinian state. President Bush's opening remarks: I'm looking forward to my trip to Israel, and Saudi and Egypt. There's no better place to talk about democracy, and the history of democracy, and the challenge of democracy in dealing with existential threats and terrorism and state sponsored terrorists than in the Knesset. www.reiner-bernstein.de 326 – Chronologie 2008

I hope at the end of the speech [I'll give in the Knesset], people will say, "If vision accounts for anything, he has got a vision of how to deal with the extremists and radicals." Bush on the corruption allegations against Prime Minister Olmert, and whether an accord with the Palestinians is still possible in 2008: I do [think a deal is still possible]. Let me say something about Olmert. It's a legal matter inside the system. The system will deal with it. My relationship with the prime minister has been nothing but excellent. I find him to be an honest guy who loves his family. He's easy to talk to. He's a strategic thinker. So we'll see what happens. The vision of a state is such a powerful notion, such an important notion for Israel's very existence, that I do believe that we have a chance to get something defined. This is not an Olmert plan. This is a plan of a government. Tzipi Livni is handling the negotiations. Ehud Barak is involved. During my presidency, there's been clarity for people to see the world the way it really is. A failed leadership of Hamas in Gaza, for example. Plus [there's been] the emergence of thought in Israel that the only way to exist in the long-term is for there to be a Palestinian state. And it's a powerful idea. I believe in powerful ideas. I believe that with US help, the negotiators can come up with the definition of a state. The state won't exist until certain obligations are met. But it's the definition itself which becomes a powerful engine for the marginalization of people who murder innocents to achieve their objectives. That's really what the struggle is about. It's the same struggle in Iraq and it's the same struggle in Lebanon. The Middle East is where the great ideological conflict is being played out. And an effective Bush foreign policy is to put the focus of the United States squarely in the middle of the Middle East. That's like our top priority. It is the top priority of this government. Bush on the prospects for halting Iran's nuclear drive in his term: Iran is an incredibly negative influence. They are sending weapons into Iraq and we're pushing back hard and will continue to do so. Hizbullah is no longer the great force against Israel. All of a sudden, they've turned against their own people. Hamas is not a classic political party trying to better people's lives. They are trying to destroy Israel. That's the truth. The other truth is that Iran is involved in funding Hamas and Hizbullah and it's that Iranian influence which I'm deeply concerned about. But there needs to be more than just the United States concerned about it. We take [seriously] this issue of [Iran] getting the technology, the know- how on how to develop a nuclear weapon. All options are on the table. Of course you want to try to solve this problem diplomatically. What definitely will be done [before I leave office will be the establishment of] a structure on how to deal with this, to try to resolve this diplomatically. In other words sanctions, pressures, financial pressures. You know, a history of pressure that will serve as a framework to make sure other countries are involved. Bush on how to tackle the current instability in Lebanon: I'd advise the world backing [Prime Minister] Saniora. He's a good guy. He's tough and he's in a really tough situation. I admire him. Lebanese democracy is vital for the Middle East. This is again a case of people receiving outside funds to destabilize democracies. Bush on what he'll be demanding from Israel during his visit, including on settlements: www.reiner-bernstein.de 327 – Chronologie 2008

I will come not as somebody who demands, but as someone who encourages. The United States cannot impose peace. Lasting peace happens when people understand, in this case, that the definition of the [Palestinian] state is the first step toward peace. And it's hard work. So what I'll be doing is encouraging people to see if they can't reach agreement on what the borders of a state will look like, for example. Because once you can define the borders of the state then you can deal with the settlement issue in much more concrete terms. I'm not running for the Nobel Peace Prize. I'm just trying to be a guy to use the influence of the United States to move the process along. All I've tried to do is wade in and add some legitimacy to the two-state solution. I've been the first president to articulate it. To me it's the only solution. I just don't see how the Middle East evolves without a Palestinian state that's free and democratic. I don't see how the Middle East can involve without a democratic Lebanon, or without an Iraq that succeeds. And, by the way, Iraq is succeeding. Bush on whether he would consider an Iranian attack on Israel the equivalent of an attack on the US: I made it clear that if the world wants to avoid [World War III], then we better deal with the Iranian issue now. Implicit in that is that if they have one of those things and lob it at Israel or at other friends of ours, there'll be a response. Bush on his vision for Israel's borders, and Mahmoud Abbas as a peace partner: We believe in a contiguous [Palestinian] state. It can't look like Swiss cheese. That's why we've been talking about these outposts. Some of these remote settlements. The question is how much territory can the sides settle on. I don't want to give your newspapers a screaming headline, "Bush says this is what the borders ought to look like." But Bush does reiterate what he told the world [and in] the letter [to Ariel Sharon in 2004, which some understand as indicating American support for Israeli expansion into the West Bank to encompass major settlements]. Bush on possible Israeli-Syrian dialogue: I have made some very clear conditions for the United States to talk to [Syria]. Early on in my administration we said, you're housing Hamas, you're enabling transit of materials to Hizbullah in Lebanon. Since then, they've made life miserable for the young democracy in Iraq. It's easy to get our attention. And that is actually to become a constructive force. A positive force. A force for peace. Not a force that continually uses these extremist groups to destabilize the nationhood. That's the position of the United States, separated from Syria by an ocean. Israeli politicians have got to come up with their own vision of security. And I have never told Olmert one thing or another about what to do about his security. That's not what friends do. He's made the decision that he made, the idea of trying to get dialogue. I know him well. And I know he's as concerned as any other person that's ever been the prime minister of Israel. The biggest long-term threat to peace in the Middle East is Iran. The Iranian connection to Syria is very troubling. Anything done should keep that strategic reason in mind. Of all the people who understand the existential threat that the Iranians pose, it's the Israelis. Bush looking back on what he's done as president: In terms of Israel, I hope that history will say that this is a guy who clearly saw the world the way it is. Ideological conflicts require a combination of force and vision in order to marginalize and defeat... www.reiner-bernstein.de 328 – Chronologie 2008

I can assure you that al-Qaida, Hamas and Hizbullah don't think about the comforts of life. They are driven. And the fundamental challenge facing this world is well, countries like the United States, be prepared to continue to stay in the lead. You asked legacy and all that business, which I don't worry about by the way. I'll be long gone before some smart person ever figures out what happened inside this Oval Office. But one of [those legacies] has got to be, he clearly saw the threat and he did something about it.

126 Daniel Barenboim: Meine Heimat, eure Heimat, in „Der Tagesspiegel“ 10.5.2008: Einige Jahre lebte er in Jerusalem. Er hat einen israelischen Pass und einen palästinensischen. Der Dirigent Daniel Barenboim über Israel In meinem Dirigentenzimmer in der Staatsoper Unter den Linden hängen Bilder, die mich daran erinnern, was ich sehe, wenn ich in meinem Haus in Jerusalem aus dem Fenster schaue. Die Farben sind verblichen, hie und da kräuselt sich das Papier, trotzdem kann man die Ansichten gut erkennen. Die Altstadt, den Felsendom mit seiner leuchtenden Kuppel, Mauern, Tore. Manchmal sitze ich vor einer Vorstellung in diesem Zimmer, betrachte die Bilder und denke an Jerusalem, an Israel, meine Heimat. Vor 1989 soll das Zimmer ein Refugium der Staatssicherheit der DDR gewesen sein. Wäre ich sentimental, würde mir das sicher helfen, nicht sentimental zu werden. Aber ich bin nicht sentimental, dafür geht mir die Lage im Nahen Osten viel zu nahe. Ich habe seit 1952 einen israelischen Pass. Seit ich 15 bin, reise ich als Musiker durch die Welt. Ich habe in London gelebt und in Paris, jahrelang bin ich zwischen Chicago und Berlin hin- und hergependelt. Vor dem israelischen Pass besaß ich bereits den argentinischen, später kam der spanische hinzu. Und seit 2007 bin ich der einzige Israeli auf der Welt, der bei Grenzkontrollen auch einen palästinensischen Pass vorzeigen kann. Ich bin der lebende Beweis dafür, dass einzig eine pragmatische Zweistaatenlösung (besser noch eine Föderation aus drei Staaten: Israel, Palästina und Jordanien) der Region Frieden bringen kann. Was ich antworte, wenn Leute sagen, ich sei blauäugig und doch nur ein Künstler? Dass ich in der Tat kein politischer Mensch bin – auch wenn ich Ben Gurion und Schimon Peres schon als Kind die Hand schütteln durfte. Weil mich nie das Politische interessiert hat, sondern immer das Menschliche. Insofern fühle ich mich gerade als Künstler in der Lage, die Situation zu analysieren. Meine Großeltern väterlicher- wie mütterlicherseits waren russische Juden, die nach den Pogromen von 1904 nach Argentinien flohen. Was die Geschichte meiner Familie betrifft, habe ich als Kind leider nicht viele Frage gestellt. Zum einen war ich sehr mit mir selbst beschäftigt, zum anderen war es normal, dass sich bei uns ständig etwas änderte. Die Geschichte meiner Großeltern mütterlicherseits aber kenne ich gut. Als sie – er 16, sie 14, beide waren allein – im Hafen von Buenos Aires ankamen, hieß es, es dürften nur Familien von Bord, das Aufnahmekontingent sei erschöpft. Da packte mein Großvater meine Großmutter und sagte: Wir heiraten! Und das taten sie. An Land trennten sich ihre Wege. Nach zwei oder drei Jahren haben sie sich dann wieder getroffen, richtig verliebt und ihr ganzes restliches Leben miteinander verbracht. Jene Großmutter war eine glühende Zionistin. Schon 1929 reiste sie mit ihren Töchtern – darunter meine 17-jährige Mutter – für ein halbes Jahr nach Palästina, um zu sehen, ob man dort leben könnte. Die Familie meines Vaters hingegen war vollkommen assimiliert, das „gelobte Land“ www.reiner-bernstein.de 329 – Chronologie 2008

spielte keine Rolle, jedenfalls so lange nicht, bis meine musikalische Begabung entdeckt wurde. Plötzlich wollten meine Eltern, dass ich als zukünftiger Künstler in einer Mehrheit aufwachse und nicht als Teil einer Minderheit in der Diaspora. Die Überzeugung wiederum, dass Normalität ein wesentliches Kriterium meiner geistigen Entwicklung sein würde, war Wasser auf die Mühlen meiner zionistischen Großmutter: Die Barenboims beschlossen, nach Israel auszuwandern. Unsere erste Station 1952 war Salzburg, wo ich am Schlusskonzert eines Sommerkurses des Dirigenten Igor Markewitsch teilnahm. Die Reise dauerte 52 Stunden: Zwischenlandungen in Montevideo, Rio, Sao Paulo, Recife, auf der Isla del Sol, in Madrid – und dann mit dem Zug von Rom nach Salzburg. Als Neunjähriger sprach ich nur Spanisch und ein bisschen Jiddisch. In Buenos Aires war ich mir keines jüdischen Problems bewusst gewesen, in Salzburg begann ich es zu spüren. Jüdische Freunde nahmen mich mit nach Badgastein zu einem großen Wasserfall und erzählten mir, dass während der Nazizeit Juden dort hineingeworfen worden waren. Ich bekam eine erste Ahnung vom Schicksal des jüdischen Volkes und weiß, dass mich auch die Erzählungen meiner Eltern über den Holocaust tief beunruhigten. Im Dezember erreichten wir Israel. Es war Winter, das Schuljahr hatte längst begonnen, ich musste ad hoc ein neues Alphabet und eine neue Sprache lernen. Aber da ich ein unkompliziertes und kontaktfreudiges Kind war, habe ich mich schnell angepasst. So fing bald ein neues, schönes, sehr intensives Leben an. Alles war Aufbruch und Aufbau! In den Straßen von Tel Aviv – man stelle sich vor! – lernte ich Fußball spielen. Später schloss ich mich einer Jugendbewegung an. Ich weiß noch, wie sehr wir auf Jungen mit Oberlippenbärten herabblickten und auf Mädchen, die Lippenstift benutzten: Beides hielten wir für oberflächlich, für schlicht nicht wesentlich. Da meine Familie kein Geld hatte, wurden wir in der ersten Zeit von einem Onkel aus Brasilien unterstützt. Seine Tochter ist heute brasilianische Botschafterin in Slowenien. Was den Namen betrifft, so wurden wir damals angehalten, diesen ins Hebräische zu übersetzen, ganz im Sinne eines neuen jüdisch-israelischen Selbstbewusstseins. Ben Gurion etwa, den ich später als Staatsmann und Visionär sehr bewunderte, kam aus dem polnischen Plonsk und hieß ursprünglich David Grün. Er wollte meine Eltern unbedingt davon überzeugen, dass ich mit dem Namen Barenboim (der jiddischen Version von Birnbaum) niemals berühmt werden würde. Viel besser wäre doch Agassi (hebr.: Birne) – da könnte man zur Not glauben, man habe es mit einem Italiener zu tun. Nun, keiner von uns war von dieser Idee wirklich begeistert. Absolut gesehen ist die Zeit, die ich in Israel verbracht habe, nicht besonders lang. Sie beschränkt sich auf die Jahre von 1952 bis ’54 und zwischen ’56 und den frühen Sechzigern. Auf allen Konzertreisen begleiteten mich meine Eltern, ihrer Meinung nach brauchte ich ein möglichst „normales“ Familienleben. Das Europa der frühen fünfziger Jahre war von den Folgen des Krieges schwer gezeichnet. Auch insofern empfand ich den Unterschied zu Israel als besonders groß. Israel war damals der sozialste, idealistischste, glücklichste Staat, der sich denken lässt. Niemand hatte das Gefühl, er würde lediglich „für den Staat“ arbeiten, diesen gab es ja nicht. Der Staat entstand vor unseren Augen, speiste sich aus unserem Idealismus, unserem alltäglichen Engagement, unserer Arbeit. Jude in Israel zu sein, das bedeutete auch: nicht mehr nur freie Berufe zu ergreifen wie in der Diaspora (Künstler, Anwalt, Arzt, Bankier), sondern auch Bauer zu sein, www.reiner-bernstein.de 330 – Chronologie 2008

Polizist oder Soldat. Staat und Heimat, Heimat und Staat verschmolzen zu einer Einheit. Die Linke in Israel, die Arbeitspartei, war bis 1977 an der Macht. 29 Jahre lang. Warum? Die Traditionalisten hatten nach dem Unabhängigkeitskrieg von 1948 keine Chancen mehr, die Religiösen warteten auf den Messias – und die Sozialisten blieben übrig. Erst nach dem Sechstagekrieg 1967 haben sich diese Koordinaten massiv verschoben. Die Idee eines „Ur- Israel“ verblasste. Plötzlich gab es billigere Arbeitskräfte aus den palästinensischen Gebieten, wenig später tauchten die ersten israelischen Millionäre auf. Das sozialistische Gleichgewicht geriet aus den Fugen, das Israelbild kippte. Ich bin in Israel mit europäischer Kultur und europäischen Werten groß geworden, die Direktorin meines Gymnasiums war eine Kunsthistorikerin, wie sie für Berlin-Dahlem typisch gewesen wäre. Mir kam das sehr entgegen, denn in meiner pubertären Trotzphase zählte für mich nur Israel, seine Gegenwart und Zukunft. Alles andere war vorbei. Mit 19 oder 20 wurde ich zum argentinischen Wehrdienst eingezogen. Zwei Aufschübe konnte ich erwirken, schließlich fiel mir vor den Behörden ein, dass ich israelischer Staatsbürger war. Die Folge: Mit meinem argentinischen Pass konnte ich überallhin, nur nicht nach Israel – und mit meinem israelischen Pass konnte ich überallhin, nur nicht nach Argentinien. 1966 begegnete ich in London der Cellistin Jacqueline du Pré. Wir fühlten uns sofort zueinander hingezogen, persönlich wie musikalisch, und beschlossen zu heiraten. Ganz ohne meinen Einfluss trug Jacqueline sich mit der Absicht, zum Judentum überzutreten. Der Gedanke an Kinder spielte dabei sicher eine Rolle, außerdem kannte sie viele große Musiker, die Juden waren. Für ihre Karriere war das nicht nur förderlich, es hieß, sie habe sich mit der „jüdischen Musikmafia“ eingelassen. Im Juni 1967 heirateten wir in Jerusalem, unmittelbar nach dem Sechstagekrieg. Ben Gurion, der sich aus Musik nicht viel machte, nahm an unserer Hochzeitsfeier teil. Es beeindruckte ihn, dass ein nichtjüdisches englisches Mädchen sich so mit seinem Land identifizierte. Als der Krieg gegen die arabischen Staaten unmittelbar bevorstand, waren wir am 31. Mai mit einer der letzten regulären Maschinen nach Israel geflogen. Fast jeden Abend gaben wir Konzerte. Das letzte fand am 5. Juni in Beerscheva statt, in einem Ort auf halbem Weg zwischen Tel Aviv und der ägyptischen Grenze. Als wir nach dem Konzert nach Hause fuhren, kamen uns die ersten Panzer entgegen. Nach 1967 hat Israel sich sehr nach den USA ausgerichtet – nicht unbedingt zu seinem Vorteil. Die Traditionalisten sagten, die neu besetzten Gebiete geben wir nicht mehr her. Die Religiösen sagten, das sind nicht besetzte, sondern befreite, ja biblische Gebiete. Damit war das Ende des Sozialismus in Israel besiegelt. Seither wird der Konflikt im Nahen Osten weltpolitisch instrumentalisiert. Jahrzehntelang las man in riesigen Schlagzeilen von immer neuen Kriegen und Attentaten. Das hat die Situation in den Köpfen zementiert. Heute sind andere Krisenherde „wichtiger“, und über den Nahen Osten liest man fast gar nichts mehr. Das ist noch schlimmer. Viele Israelis träumen, dass sie aufwachen – und die Palästinenser sind weg. Und die Palästinenser träumen, die Israelis seien weg. Beide Seiten können längst nicht mehr zwischen Traum und Realität unterscheiden. Das ist der psychologische Kern des Problems. Seit den sechziger Jahren habe ich mich in Israel nicht mehr so wohlgefühlt. Natürlich ist es meine Heimat, meine Eltern sind beide in Jerusalem begraben. Immer wenn in Israel Krieg herrschte, habe ich dort www.reiner-bernstein.de 331 – Chronologie 2008

gespielt: 1956, 1967, 1973. Die Musik war meine „Waffe“. 1970 aber, nach dem schwarzen September, sagte Golda Meir, was soll dieses Gerede von den Palästinensern? Wir sind das palästinensische Volk! Da hat es in meinem Kopf „Klick“ gemacht. Das war moralisch nicht in Ordnung. Die Juden haben ein Recht auf diesen Staat. Der Holocaust und das schlechte Gewissen der Europäer nach ’45 haben diesen Anspruch noch verstärkt. Was sich leicht vergisst: Es gab auch einen gemäßigten Zionismus, es gab Leute wie Martin Buber, die von Anfang an die Nichtjuden mit bedachten, die in Palästina lebende Bevölkerung. Der militante Zionismus hingegen hat sich gedanklich nicht weiterentwickelt. Er basiert bis heute auf einer Lüge: Das Land, das die Juden besiedelten, war eben nicht leer! Heute haben viele Israelis nicht die geringste Ahnung, was für ein Gefühl es ist, ein Palästinenser zu sein. Wie es ist, in einer Stadt wie Nablus zu leben, in einem Gefängnis für 180 000 Menschen. Dort gibt es kein Restaurant, kein Café, kein Kino. Nichts. Wo, bitteschön, bleibt hier die jüdische Intelligenz? Ich spreche nicht von Gerechtigkeit und nicht von Liebe. Warum aber füttert man den Hass im Gazastreifen immer weiter? Eine militärische Lösung wird es niemals geben. Hier kämpfen zwei Völker um ein und dasselbe Land. Dabei kann Israel so stark sein, wie es will, die Unsicherheit, die Angst wird bleiben. Der Konflikt hat sich nach innen gefressen, er nagt an der jüdischen Seele. Das hat man zugelassen. Man wollte Land haben, wo es nie Juden gegeben hat, und man baute Siedlungen dort. Alle Palästinenser halten das für eine imperialistische Provokation – zu Recht. Ihr Widerstand ist absolut nachvollziehbar und verständlich. Nicht die Gewalt. Aber ihr Nein. Wir Israelis müssen endlich den Mut haben, auf diese Gewalt nicht zu reagieren. Den Mut, zu unserer Geschichte zu stehen: Die Palästinenser durften nicht erwarten, dass wir uns nach dem Holocaust um andere kümmern konnten. Wir mussten überleben. Das haben wir getan, jetzt aber schauen wir gemeinsam nach vorn. Der israelische Ministerpräsident, der das vertritt, ist noch nicht geboren. Im Grunde sind wir heute nicht weiter als 1947, als die Vereinten Nationen die Teilung Palästinas beschlossen. Schlimmer noch: 1947 hat man sich eine binationale Lösung vorstellen können, 60 Jahre später scheint sie undenkbar. In Israel spricht man heute im Blick auf die Zweistaatenlösung von Trennung, ja von Scheidung. Was für ein Zynismus! Scheiden lasse ich mich doch nur von jemandem, den ich einmal geliebt habe … Ich leide unter dieser Situation, und alles, was ich mache, hat auch mit diesem Leiden zu tun: Ob ich in Israel Wagner dirigiere (keineswegs als Erster!) oder vor der Knesset aus der israelischen Verfassung zitiere, ob ich 1999 gemeinsam mit dem palästinensischen Schriftsteller Edward Said das West-Eastern Divan Orchestra gründe oder – wie unlängst in Jerusalem – ein Konzert für zwei Völker veranstalte. Es macht mich wahnsinnig, zu sehen, wie viel Unrecht wir Juden täglich begehen und wie sehr wir damit die zukünftige Existenz Israels gefährden. So sarkastisch es klingt: Ich bin froh, dass ich 1942 geboren wurde. Ich werde es hoffentlich nicht mehr erleben, dass es keinen Staat Israel mehr geben könnte, so wie ich es auch nicht erleben werde, dass möglicherweise die klassische Musik in unseren Denken und Fühlen keine Rolle mehr spielt. Ich lebe seit vielen Jahren nicht mehr in Israel, und ich bin mir meiner Außenwahrnehmung sehr bewusst. Manchmal werde ich gefragt: Was ist ein Jude? Da antworte ich: Ein Jude, der 2008 in Berlin antisemitische Erfahrungen macht, ist ein anderer als derjenige, dem das 1940 widerfährt. Damals fühlte man sich bedroht, heute denke ich an Israel, mein Land. www.reiner-bernstein.de 332 – Chronologie 2008

Heute kann ich sagen: Entweder du setzt dich mit mir auseinander, du Antisemit, oder wir gehen beide getrennte Wege, basta. Das macht einen existenziellen Unterschied. Kurzfristig bin ich, was den Frieden im Nahen Osten betrifft, pessimistisch, langfristig bin ich eher optimistisch. Was mir Hoffnung gibt? Das Musizieren. Denn vor einer Symphonie von Beethoven, vor Mozarts „Don Giovanni“ oder Wagners „Tristan “ sind alle Menschen gleich. Der Autor ist Generalmusikdirektor der Berliner Staatsoper Unter den Linden. Aufgezeichnet von Christine Lemke-Matwey.

127 Tom Segev: Heiliges verrücktes Land, in „Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung“ 09.05.2008.

128 Vgl. die Eintragung unter dem 29.01.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

129 Sana Abdallah: Lebanese Foes Finally Agree, in „Middle East Times“ 22.05.2008: AMMAN – Rival Lebanese leaders have reached an accord after five days of often bitter negotiations in Doha bringing to an end an 18-month national crisis that brought the country perilously close to the edge of civil war. Qatar's Prime Minister Sheik Hamad bin Jassem on Wednesday announced that the pro- and anti-Western camps had made a deal paving the way for the election of army chief Gen. Michel Suleiman as president, a position that has been vacant since November. The choice of Suleiman as president, a seat that is reserved to a Maronite Christian, was never in dispute. The agreement also allows the formation of a new unity government that gives the ruling majority 16 portfolios, 11 for the Hezbollah-led opposition, and three to be chosen by the elected head-of-state. It also entails a compromise on the parliamentary electoral districts in Beirut, which apparently was forged after fierce bargaining that threatened to derail the reconciliation dialogue, which began on Friday. The rivals also agreed to ban the use of weapons in any internal conflict. This met the ruling majority's demand that Hezbollah guarantees to never again turn its guns inwards. Militia gunfights earlier this month between battle-ready opposition militias and lightly-armed pro-government gunmen in west Beirut and the Druze mountains resulted in the deaths of at least 65 people in six days of clashes. The first signs that Lebanon was returning to normality emerged in downtown Beirut with the opposition on Wednesday dismantling the sit-in tents that had littered the trendy area for the past year and a half and had paralyzed businesses there. Reports from Beirut said hundreds of jubilant people and shop owners took to the streets to celebrate the accord, while the opposition leadership in the capital promised to "rehabilitate" the downtown area. The move came less than an hour after House speaker Nabih Berri, head of the opposition Shiite Amal movement, announced from the round table in Doha that the sit-in protest was over. Opposition officials in Beirut said the protest had achieved its objectives that demanded a fair share of representation in the government after the ruling camp agreed to give them more than one-third of the portfolios, thus granting them veto power on critical policy decisions. In the meantime, while the Qatari prime minister said the president would be elected within 24 hours, Lebanese officials expected parliament to www.reiner-bernstein.de 333 – Chronologie 2008

convene to elect Suleiman on May 25, to allow time for invited Arab and international dignitaries to attend this long-awaited event. This date is symbolic for Lebanon, as it marks eight years since the end of the Israeli occupation of south Lebanon, a liberation credited to the Shiite Hezbollah organization's military wing, known to the Lebanese and Arabs as the resistance. Until Tuesday night, it appeared that negotiations in Doha were deadlocked, after the Arab mediating committee gave the politicians until Wednesday to respond to one of two proposals to end the crisis. The Qatari hosts had evidently persisted, and the emir personally intervened to ensure that the talks would not end in failure. Negotiations continued until dawn. Officials from both sides said the deal was a compromise solution that had no winners or losers, in a multi-confessional system that many Lebanese say cannot afford to have a single dominating sect. Independent Lebanese analysts suggest that beyond the closed doors in Doha subtle negotiations were taking place between regional and international backers of either side of the Lebanese divide. As the crisis continued to escalate over the past 18 months, politicians from both camps had repeatedly acknowledged that their problems at home could not be solved without the United States and its French and Saudi allies – which back the ruling majority – and Iran and Syria that back the opposition. Though unclear what role may have been exercised by the foreign backers to persuade the two sides to forge the deal, analysts said that Qatari leaders must have been instrumental in succeeding where others had failed, thanks to its ability to maintain balanced negotiations by maintaining strong ties with both sides of the Western and anti-Western poles playing out in the region. Pundits suspected that the foreign powers had urged their Lebanese allies to defuse tensions after the outbreak of civil strife became precariously close to all-out civil war – a result that no one wanted. Thus, the Lebanese accord was quickly and warmly welcomed by Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia and France, while commentators expected Washington to follow suit. Coincidentally – or perhaps not – shortly after the declaration of the Lebanese accord, it was announced in Damascus and Jerusalem that Israel and Syria had resumed peace negotiations through Turkish mediation, ending an eight-year freeze in this track of the peace process. It is difficult to confirm whether this development is linked in any way to the breakthrough by the Lebanese rivals, but analysts say that whatever way the Syrian-Israeli negotiations take will certainly reflect on Lebanese politics. Vgl. auch die Eintragung am 10.03.2008 in diese Zeitleiste.

130 Vgl. die gleichgerichtete Aussage von Yasser Abed Rabbo am 25.04.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

131 Quartet Statement of May 2, 2008: Representatives of the Quartet–U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, High Representative for European Common Foreign and Security Policy Javier Solana, European Commissioner for External Relations Benita Ferrero-Waldner, and Slovenian Foreign Minister Dimitrij www.reiner-bernstein.de 334 – Chronologie 2008

Rupel—met today in London to discuss the situation in the Middle East. They were joined by Quartet Representative Tony Blair. The Quartet expressed its strong support for ongoing Israeli-Palestinian negotiations and encouraged the parties to make every effort to realize the shared goal of an agreement on the establishment of a Palestinian state by the end of 2008. Commending the parties for their continuous and intensive negotiations, the Quartet emphasized the urgent need for progress and called on the international community to remain constructively engaged in support of negotiations with the goal of the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza and an end to the conflict. The Quartet emphasized the importance of visible progress on the ground to build confidence and create an atmosphere supportive of negotiations. The Quartet welcomed concrete steps by both sides in the wake of the trilateral meeting between Secretary of State Rice, Prime Minister Fayyad and Defense Minister Barak, and stressed the urgent need for rapid and continued implementation of these and previous commitments to improve conditions on the ground. While taking note of some positive steps, including the removal of some roadblocks and an outpost by Israel, and improved security performance by the Palestinian Authority, the Quartet noted that much more remained to be done to improve the situation on the ground in order to change the conditions of life in the West Bank and to keep the political process on track. In this context, the Quartet expressed its support for Quartet Representative Tony Blair, and underscored the urgent need for progress and close donor coordination. It also expressed its strong backing for the planned Bethlehem Conference on Private Sector Investment in May as well as the parties' agreement to improve security and economic conditions in Jenin, which can offer a model for important progress on the ground. Noting the particular importance of justice sector reform, the Quartet looked forward to the meeting that will take place in Berlin in June to promote and coordinate donor assistance in this area. The Quartet called upon both sides to fulfill their obligations under the Roadmap. It also called on both sides to refrain from any steps that undermine confidence or could prejudice the outcome of negotiations. In this context, the Quartet expressed its deep concern at continuing settlement activity and called on Israel to freeze all settlement activity including natural growth, and to dismantle outposts erected since March 2001. It called on the Palestinian Authority to fulfil its commitments to fight terrorism and to accelerate steps to rebuild and refocus its security apparatus. It urged Israel and the PA to increase cooperation in that respect and to facilitate the delivery of security assistance to the Palestinian Authority. The Quartet condemned continuing rocket attacks from Gaza on southern Israel, including against Sderot and Ashkelon, as well as the terrorist attacks at a seminary in Jerusalem on March 6. The Quartet also expressed deep concern at Palestinian civilian casualties, including the recent death of a mother and four of her children in Gaza. It called for an end to all violence and terror and urged all parties to take all feasible steps to ensure the protection of affected civilians in accordance with international law. Noting its deep concern over humanitarian conditions in Gaza, the Quartet called for continued emergency and humanitarian assistance and the www.reiner-bernstein.de 335 – Chronologie 2008

provision of essential services to Gaza without obstruction The Quartet expressed its continuing concern over the closure of major Gaza crossing points given the impact on the Palestinian economy and daily life. The Quartet condemned the terrorist attack on Nahal Oz fuel terminal on April 9, and noted that such attacks on the Gaza crossings interfere with the supply of essential services and undermine the interests of the Palestinian people. Principals strongly encouraged Israel, the Palestinian Authority, and Egypt to work together to formulate a new approach on Gaza that would provide security to all Gazans, end all acts of terror, provide for the controlled and sustained opening of the Gaza crossings for humanitarian reasons and commercial flows, support the legitimate Palestinian Authority government, and work towards conditions that would permit implementation of the 2005 Agreement on Movement and Access. Looking forward to a productive meeting of the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee, the Quartet encouraged all parties to do their part to support Palestinian institutional capacity building and economic development. The Quartet called for all donors to follow through on pledges made at the December 2007 Paris Donors' Conference. Underlining the crucial role of Arab states in support of the peace process, and the importance of the Arab League peace initiative, the Quartet encouraged the Arab states to fulfil both their political and financial roles in support of the Annapolis process. The Quartet also discussed the proposal for an international meeting in Moscow to lend continued support to the parties in their negotiations and efforts on the ground. The Quartet authorized its envoys to continue to work to facilitate the achievement of all of these goals. The Quartet reaffirmed its commitment to a just, lasting, and comprehensive peace in the Middle East based on UNSCRs 242, 338, 1397 and 1515.

132 Ghait al-Omari: The Perils of Unconditional Engagement, via www.middleeastprogress.org 02.05.2008: The issue of whether or not to engage Hamas boils down to the following question: would such engagement help moderate the organization, or would it simply improve Hamas’ chances of dominating the Palestinian political scene and encourage extremism throughout the Middle East? For now, any engagement that goes beyond achieving de-escalation in Gaza would serve to bolster Hamas at the expense of those working toward a two-state solution. Those who argue that engagement would bring about a significant change in Hamas’ policies proceed from a faulty assumption regarding the way the organization thinks. Hamas does not reject the two-state solution and engage in terrorism because it fails to understand what is objectionable about this approach, or because it is unaware that this contradicts the basic values and behavioral norms of members of the international community. Its behavior is based on a cold, rational cost-benefit calculation. This calculus relates to Hamas’ domestic political goals, the regional dimension and its relations with Israel. Like any political party, its primary goal is to gain and hold onto power, in this case within Palestinian society. In any engagement, Hamas—like any rational political actor—will seek to maximize its benefits and minimize its costs. It will use any international dialogue it can achieve to send one overriding message to its local, regional and global constituencies alike: namely, that it can maintain its positions regarding the peace process, Israel and the use of violence, while at the same time gaining international legitimacy. It will argue that it www.reiner-bernstein.de 336 – Chronologie 2008

provides at least as many benefits as its secular opponents, without making any compromises. Engaging Hamas without the terms of engagement being clear and without it first paying the political price of admission to the international club—particularly by accepting the two-state solution and disarming—amounts to a political free lunch. As recently demonstrated by President Jimmy Carter’s meetings with Hamas, it will pocket and cash the gains from cost-free engagement without feeling any incentive to change. On the domestic front, Hamas seeks exclusive dominance over Palestinian political life. Since the Oslo Accords, it has consistently used terrorism to undermine the peace process. Hamas has also exploited the lack of results from this process to undermine its main rival, the secular nationalist Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and discredit the PLO’s political platform of statehood through negotiations. It is no coincidence that in the numerous so-called “Palestinian national unity” talks, Hamas was unwilling to compromise on its anti-two state platform or to relinquish its arms and militias. These are strategic assets that Hamas wants to keep in reserve to use when it sees fit. This was vividly demonstrated in Gaza last June and more recently when Hamas led the breach of the Rafah border with Egypt. At the regional level, Hamas is part of the larger trend of revolutionary political Islam which represents the main challenge to pro-Western regimes in the Middle East. The Muslim Brotherhood and other similar organizations in Jordan, Egypt and elsewhere are looking to see how far Hamas can push the envelope. Similarly, pro-U.S. Arab governments are watching nervously to see whether the international community will be wittingly or unwittingly complicit in undermining Palestinian leaders like President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad. Any hint of international legitimization of an unmodified Hamas will cause the various regional players to draw their own lessons. In terms of relations with Israel, even the most pragmatic Hamas voices have stated a willingness only to accept Israel as a matter of transient practical necessity. They speak only of a temporary truce that will not bring about a permanent end to the conflict. This might not be a matter of immediate concern for those interested in short-term security stabilization, which could explain the Israeli public’s interest in engaging Hamas. However, the long-term implications in terms of regional normalization and stabilization, as well as in terms of encouraging extremism and irredentism, are problematic. Unconditional political engagement with Hamas would send a myriad of unhelpful messages. To the Palestinian public, the message would be that extremism pays while moderation does not. To Arab Islamist parties, the message would be that terrorism and violent coups will not only be tolerated, they will be rewarded. To pro-Western Arab governments, the message would be that they cannot rely on Western support. To Israel, the message would be that it is doomed to live in a sea of hostility and that the best it can hope for are short periods of calm that punctuate a future of perpetual conflict. Even if Hamas does gain international legitimacy, it will not go away. The question of what to do with Hamas and its considerable capacity to play the role of a spoiler remains. In the long term, primacy within the Palestinian political arena will be determined above all by the outcome of the peace process: if negotiations produce a viable Palestinian state, moderates will reap the political rewards. If negotiations fail, Hamas will be able to claim that its platform of “resistance” is the only avenue left for achieving Palestinian national aspirations. www.reiner-bernstein.de 337 – Chronologie 2008

To get to a final peace agreement, the Annapolis process has to be re- energized and re-focused. As progress continues to be made by the Palestinian and Israeli negotiators on the large permanent status issues, visible changes must begin to occur on the ground. The Palestinian public needs to feel that Israel is serious about peacemaking and that the moderates are able to produce results. In particular, a settlement freeze is essential to restore faith in the peace process, while improvement in the daily lives and freedom of movement for Palestinians will help maintain a sense of hope. For its part, the Palestinian national movement needs to start rebuilding its own credibility in the fields of good governance and the imposition of law and order. Efforts undertaken by Prime Minister Fayyad in these fields are critical. If inefficiency, corruption and security chaos are not rooted out, and if Fatah—as the leader of the PLO and the Palestinian Authority—continues to be seen as a stumbling block in the way of reform, Hamas will continue to have public appeal. In the short term, however, it could be possible to reach security stabilization with Hamas without paying too high a political price. A de- escalation package brokered by an Arab country that has pre-existing relations with Hamas (a role being played effectively by Egypt today) and an end to the siege of Gaza through the reopening of the Gaza crossing points under Palestinian Authority control, can help avoid— for a period of time, at least—a deeply destabilizing all out military confrontation in Gaza. Once a measure of calm is achieved, political capital and energy should be focused not on the futile and counterproductive strategy of courting and rewarding Hamas for free. Rather, those who want to see long-term stability and the victory of moderation in the Middle East should focus on ensuring the success of the peace process and securing the establishment of a Palestinian state to live alongside Israel. Once that is achieved, Hamas will have to face the real challenge of either accepting the terms of the new political reality or consigning itself to irrelevance.

133 Text der gemeinsamen Erklärung, in „Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung” 02.05.2008, S. 2: 1. Glaube und Vernunft sind beides Geschenke Gottes an die Menschheit. 2. Glaube und Vernunft widersprechen einander nicht, aber Glaube kann in einigen Fällen über der Vernunft sein, aber nie gegen sie. 3. Glaube und Vernunft sind in sich nicht gewalttätig. Weder Vernunft noch Glaube sollte für Gewalt gebraucht werden; unglücklicherweise wurden beide zuweilen missbraucht, um Gewalttaten zu begehen. In jedem Fall können diese Ereignisse weder Vernunft noch Glaube in Frage stellen. 4. Beide Seiten stimmen überein, in der gemeinsamen Förderung wahrer Religiosität fortzufahren, in besonderer Spiritualität, um die Achtung für heilig gehaltene Symbole zu ermutigen und moralische Werte zu fördern. 5. Christen und Muslime sollten über Toleranz hinausgehen, in der Anerkennung der Unterschiede, doch im Bewusstsein der Gemeinsamkeiten, und Gott dafür dankbar sein. Sie sind berufen zu gegenseitigem Respekt und verurteilen deshalb die Verspottung des religiösen Glaubens. 6. Verallgemeinerungen sollten im Gespräch über Religionen vermieden werden. Unterschiede zwischen den Konfessionen innerhalb des Christentums und des Islams sowie die Verschiedenheit historischer Kontexte sind wichtige beachtenswerte Faktoren. 7. Religiöse Traditionen können nicht auf der Basis eines einzelnen Verses oder einer Passage in den jeweiligen heiligen Büchern beurteilt werden. www.reiner-bernstein.de 338 – Chronologie 2008

Sowohl eine Gesamtschau als auch eine adäquate hermeneutische Methode sind notwendig für ihr faires Verständnis.

134 Speech of IDF Chief of the General Staff [Gabi Ashkenasi] for the “March of the Living”, Auschwitz-Birkenau, May 1, 2008: His honor, the Hungarian Defense Minister, His honor, the Deputy Education Minister, His honor, the Chairman of the European-Jewish Union in France, His honor, the former Chief Rabbi of Israel, Rabbi Israel Me'ir Lau–A brand plucked out of the fire; The bereaved families; The wounded soldiers and their families; Members of the IDF 'Witnesses in Uniform' delegation; Teenagers from Israel and from around the world; Fellow Israelis; Distinguished guests and friends from around the world: I am honored to be here today and to share this significant experience with you. I will begin in Hebrew and will say a few words in English later on in my address. Here, on this cursed land, saturated with the blood of our brothers and sisters, descendants of the Jewish nation; Here, in the Auschwitz-Birkenau Death Camp, the most evil place on the face of the planet, where our people, whose only crime was being Jewish, were tortured and murdered in gas chambers and crematoria; Here, in the place where the Nazi oppressor reduced our humanity to serial numbers—no more names, no more faces, no identity—all that remained was a number branded on the forearm; Here in this most dreadful place, I stand on Holocaust Martyrs and Heroes Remembrance Day, as the commander of the Israel Defense Forces. With hundreds of Witnesses in Uniform by my side–joining the thousands of representatives of the IDF who come here every year, commanders of the ground forces, the Air Force and the Navy–the defending force of the Jewish people, reborn in its land—with tight lips, a coarse voice and tears in my eyes, yet still standing tall—I salute to the ashes of our people and vow: "Never Again." We, soldiers of the IDF, emissaries of a country and of a nation, stand here today wearing the IDF uniform and carrying the flag of the State of Israel with pride in the name of the tens of thousands of the IDF warriors and commanders. We consider ourselves the executor of the last will and testament, the dream and the silent prayer of our six million Jewish brothers and sisters whose existence was brutally expunged by the Nazi oppressor. Major B'naya Rein, may his memory be blessed, who was killed in the Second Lebanon War, made the following journal entry during his visit to Poland in July of the year 2000: I've arrived home, to the cemetery of the Jewish people; the cemetery of my grandfather's family and the cemetery of my grandmother's family. Throughout my entire journey in Poland, death has followed me. However, I know that this death has produced lives and these lives include me, you, all of us. “It is these lives which have provided me with the opportunity to be a solider in the State of Israel. It is these lives which have granted me the privilege to, as an Israeli solider from the State of Israel, represent all of those who have lived and are now gone". From here, on the soil of Auschwitz, next to thousands of representatives of the , we join the commemoration of the legacy of the www.reiner-bernstein.de 339 – Chronologie 2008

millions who perished, calling to the nations of the world and their governments: "Learn the lesson of this most terrible horror, and let not its seeds sprout anew. Fight Anti-Semitism and racism of any kind wherever they are, and do all that is necessary to prevent the propagation of the violence in all its forms. Sixty-three years have passed since the end of the most horrible war humankind has ever known. Sixty-three years after the atrocity. The Star of David is no longer a mark of disgrace, but a symbol and a sign of the resurrection of the Jewish people. As the commander of the Israel Defense Forces, the fighting force of the mighty Jewish State, I stand here with pride and honor and pledge: "Never Again!" Never again shall we stand helpless, crying for the mercy of others. Never again shall we beg to be defended. Never again shall we allow our sons and daughters, our parents and our grandparents to be erased from the face of the earth. Never again shall the frightened eyes of Jewish children look with ghastly dread through the barbed-wire fences of concentration camps. Never! We who have had the privilege of seeing the establishment and the blossoming of the State of Israel; we, who have been entrusted with the country's fate, know that if we had had our country then, in those somber days, the Holocaust of the Jewish people would not have taken place. We remember, and will never forget, that from the killing and the destruction, from the ashes and the despair, we have risen to establish not only the Jewish State, but the military force that will forever provide security for the Jewish people, protecting it from any future attempts of persecution, torture and destruction. These days, after sixty years of independence, the existence of an independent Jewish state is not a fact that should be taken for granted. Even today, in our region of the world, voices are heard calling for the destruction of the State of Israel. Even today, we have to continue the struggle for our right to maintain a national home and safe haven for the Jewish people in their land. We have learned our lesson. We take threats of leaders calling for the destruction of Israel very seriously. From this sense of deep responsibility for our continued existence as a people in our land and for the continuity of our heritage, we have no choice but to continue the struggle. Since we are fighting for our very existence, we cannot afford to grow weary or be deterred in our struggle. In the words of Mordechai Anielewicz, commander of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising in his last letter on May 8th, 1943, sixty-five years ago this week: "It is impossible to put into words what we have been through. One thing is clear, what happened exceeded our boldest dreams. The Germans ran twice from the ghetto. One of our companies held out for 40 minutes, and another for more than six hours. The mine set in the 'brushmakers' area exploded. Self-defense in the ghetto will be a reality.I have been a witness to the magnificent, heroic fighting of Jewish men in battle". Two days ago, I laid a wreath and saluted at the doorstep of the bunker where he commanded the uprising at Mila 18 in Warsaw. Now, I would like to dedicate some words to our colleagues from around the world who stand here with us: I stand here today, in this heartbreaking spot, as the commander of the army of the Jewish nation. In the name of the Israel Defense Forces I salute the six million Jews who were annihilated by the Nazis and their collaborators. www.reiner-bernstein.de 340 – Chronologie 2008

I vow to uphold the responsibility of the Israel Defense Forces—never again to allow Jewish blood to be spilled in vain. May the memory of those who perished in the Holocaust be forever blessed and remembered. A people which does not know or honor its past, shrouds its future in uncertainty. Therefore, it is crucial that new generations of IDF soldiers and officers make this sacred march in honor and remembrance of our persecuted ancestors. Standing here, on this cursed land that has witnessed the most terrible of horrors in human history, I call upon all nations' leaders to remove human hatred from the face of the earth; to act determinedly to erase anti- Semitism around the world, preventing it from ever gaining force. Above all, each and every one of us must do their utmost to ensure that never again will we walk alone. Here on this cursed ground, from which still cry the voices of our slain brothers, and as commander of the Israel Defense Forces of the stateof the Jewish people, I salute our six million brothers and sisters, who have been persecuted, deported, tortured and cruelly murdered, and swear that "Jewish blood shall never again be spilled in vain!" Blessed be the memory of those who perished in the Holocaust!

135 Uzi Benziman: Deep regret would suffice, in „Haaretz”-Online 30.04.2008: On April 17, 1996, during the Grapes of Wrath campaign, Israel Defense Forces artillery fired a number of shells at the Lebanese village of Kanna. One hundred and two Lebanese villagers were killed in the attack. Israel cut short the military campaign and withdrew its forces. In retrospect, the shelling is seen as a decisive mistake which completely upset the campaign and prevented its objectives from being reached. The reactions on the part of the senior brass in the IDF reflected some embarrassment: Accusations were traded between Military Intelligence and the Northern Command over who was responsible for the serious error. The tragic attack, two days ago, on the Abu Muatak family in Beit Hanoun shows that the IDF has not learned a thing but has forgotten a great deal. The IDF's first reaction concerning the killing of the mother and her four children was one of denial of any involvement in the tragedy. Southern Command sources fed alternative information to radio broadcasters: There was no shelling from a tank on the house next to the one in which the family lived; there was firing from the air but it was aimed at armed men; if people who were "not involved" were hurt, the reason for this apparently was extremely powerful explosives that were being carried by the armed men who were hit from the air. These explanations were accompanied by a laconic expression of regret over the fact that there had been casualties and that Hamas chose to wage its struggle against Israel from inside areas densely populated by civilians. This pattern of response—to cast doubt about the very information that arrives from Palestinian sources about the circumstances of the killing, to avoid accepting responsibility for an unfortunate event, to produce a version that describes the chain of developments in such a way as to place the source of the tragedy on the enemy, and to create a demonic image of the adversary as someone who is capable of purposely causing bloodshed among his own people so as to achieve diplomatic gain, or as someone who does not hesitate to stage a horrifying arena of death so as to besmirch Israel's name, repeats itself every time tragedies of this nature occur. Here are a few reminders. In December 2000, the young boy Mohammed al-Dura was killed in front of the cameras of the French TV network, France www.reiner-bernstein.de 341 – Chronologie 2008

2. The first reaction then on the part of Yom-Tov Samia, who was at the time the head of Southern Command, was: There is no certainty that the boy was shot by the IDF. Ever since then, Israel has officially denied responsibility for the boy's death. Those who have forgotten should be reminded that it was this hair-raising event that fuelled the flames of the second intifada. A not too short list of foreign peace activists and foreign journalists have been wounded or killed by our fire (including Rachel Corrie, Tom Hurndall, Brian Avery, James Miller and Fadel Shana). In all these instances, the IDF at first denied responsibility for the tragedy and placed it instead on the behavior of the victims. Even when the IDF opened investigations, the conclusion generally was that none of the soldiers needed to be brought to trial. Only in a few cases, when there was pressure from the families of the victims and from foreign countries, did the army's version change. That is what happened in the cases of the death of Hurndall and of Miller, which recently concluded with an agreement to pay a large amount of compensation to the widow. When 19 Palestinians were killed by Israeli shells in Beit Hanoun (18.11.2006), Major General , the head of Southern Command, stated: "There is no certainty that all of them were killed by IDF fire." When seven members of the Ali Ghaliya family were killed on the Gaza beach (9.6.2006), Galant said that they may have been hit by an old mine (in fact it transpired that they were hit by a fresh Israeli shell). During the Second Lebanon War, the Israel Air Force hit a building in the village of Kanna and dozens of people lost their lives as a result. In this case too, the IDF at first denied its responsibility for the event and presented what appeared to be contradictions in Hezbollah's timetable detailing the way in which things developed. The IDF also claimed that Hezbollah had staged the display of the bodies opposite the cameras. Later on, the event was described by Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni as a significant diplomatic turning point that had a negative effect on Israel's status in the war. Since these events tend to repeat themselves, and since Israel, unlike its adversaries, feels embarrassment when it harms innocent people, it would be better once and for all to formulate the text of a fitting response that would first and foremost include accepting responsibility for a tragedy, expressing deep regret and empathy for the families, and mentioning the part of the enemy in creating the conditions in which the event took place. Ehud Olmert's remarks during yesterday's cabinet meeting are a suitable pattern to be adopted. It is a shame just that it took 24 hours to find the right formula.

136 PCHR – Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, Press Release, 28 April 2008: Palestinian Military Court Sentences Emad Sa'ed to Death PCHR Calls upon President Abbas to reject the Ruling, and Calls for Abolishing the Death Penalty in Palestinian Law PCHR is extremely concerned over the passing of a death sentence against Emad Mahmoud Sa'ed Sa'ed (25 from Yatta) by the High Military Court of the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) that convened in the Governmental Compound "Muqata'a" in Hebron this morning. The Court sentenced Sa'ed to death by firing squad for treason and collaborating with the Israeli occupation. The Centre calls upon President Mahmoud Abbas not to sign this cruel and inhumane sentence, and to stop its implementation. At approximately 10:00 on Monday, 28 April 2008, the High Military Court convened with Lt. Colonel Ahmad Abu Dayya as Chief Judge and Major Muman Fanoun and Captain Fadi Hejazi as panel judges. The Chief www.reiner-bernstein.de 342 – Chronologie 2008

Military Prosecutor Major Issa Amr and Military Prosecutor First Lt. Hani El- Hieh prosecuted the case. At the end of the session, the Court sentenced Emad Mahmoud Sa'ed Sa'ed (25) to death by firing squad for treason and collaborating with the Israeli occupation. The decision stated, "It was proven to the Court the guilt of the suspect Emad Sa'ed, who is a security officer, of the crime of treason and collaboration with the Israeli occupation as part of a network headed by his uncle in the Yatta area. The defendant provided information to his father. And this information, according to the defendant's testimony, led to the martyrdom of 4 persons wanted to the occupation forces, the demolition of a house, and the arrest of a number of wanted persons. The Court based its decision on Article 131 of the Palestinian Military Penal Code for the Year 1979, and decided unanimously to sentence Sgt. Emad Sa'ed to death by firing squad." The defendant was arrested on 7 August 2007 by the Palestinian Military Intelligence. It is noted that this is the second death sentence issued by this Court in less than a month. The High Military Court convened in Jenin on 6 April sentenced Tha'er Mahmoud Husni Ermeilat (23) from Thanaba east of Tulkarm to death by firing squad. He was convicted of murdering Ala Ayesh Mubarak (20) from Tulkarm refugee camp on 22 October 2006. PCHR is extremely concerned over the continued utilization of the death penalty in the PNA, and: – Calls upon the PNA to announce a moratorium on the use of this form of punishment that violates international human rights standards, especially the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), the Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (1966), and the UN Convention against Torture (1984). – Calls upon President Mahmoud Abbas not to sign this cruel and inhumane sentence, and to stop its implementation. – Affirms that the prosecution of collaborators is a right and duty of the PNA since these collaborators are an occupation tool participating in the implementation of war crimes against Palestinian civilians. However, this does not necessitate the implementation of the death penalty. – Points that abolishing the death penalty does imply leniency towards dangerous criminals, who must be subjected to deterring punishment while preserving our humanity. – Affirms the unconstitutionality of the Palestinian Military Penal Code for the Year 1979 since it was not passed by the PNA and was not submitted to the PLC for approval. – Calls upon the PNA to review all legislation relative to the death penalty, especially the Law No. 74 for the Year 1936 effective in the Gaza Strip and the Jordanian Penal Code No. 16 for the Year 1960 effective in the West Bank. The Centre calls for passing a unified penal code that conforms with international human rights standards, especially those pertaining to the death penalty.

137 PM Olmert's 28.4.08 Speech [translated] at the Opening of the "My Homeland" Exhibit at Yad Vashem, via www.pmo.gov.il/PMOEng/Communication/PMSpeaks/speechexyad280408. htm : Minister Ruhama Avraham Balila, Chairman of the Yad Vashem Council, Tommy Lapid, Chairman of the Board of Directors, Avner Shalev, Director General of the Prime Minister's Office, Raanan Dinur, Chairman of the Center for Survivor Organizations, Noah Pelog, Distinguished Guests, www.reiner-bernstein.de 343 – Chronologie 2008

All my life, I wondered in my heart of hearts whether or not the statement that the State of Israel was a miracle, that its establishment is a miracle, was true. Recently the President of France told me during a personal conversation that he thought the State of Israel was the miracle of the 20 th century. While we were sitting here, when the emcee said this, my friend Tommy Lapid, in a spontaneous reaction, whispered to me, "Why the miracle of the 20th century? It was the miracle of all history." I still do not know if it is true to say that it is a miracle or that there is something more profound here, more complex, more dramatic than some miraculous thing which cannot be explained the way that things develop and are built and exist are. We will not resolve this question at this time, but we can say with certainty that the State of Israel is a wondrous phenomenon, unique in human history. There was never such a human phenomenon in the history of any other people; there was never the phenomenon of a people returning to its land, of reviving its language, renewing its culture, rehabilitating its national and sovereign existence in an ancient land as happened to this people – as happened to us in the middle of the 20th century and since. One of the wonderful and moving phenomena connected to the establishment and renewal of the existence of a Jewish sovereignty in our land is the Holocaust survivors who came here, fought here, fell here, built here, created here, and in fact succeeded – together with others – to lay the foundations for what transformed the State of Israel into what it is today. Last year we spoke of Holocaust survivors in other contexts, and these too cannot be forgotten nor do we wish to. During this unavoidable process we grew up, and at times our feelings became a little tactless and blunt; we forgot that among them were many who no longer had the strength or the capability, and we did not know beforehand that we must pay attention to them and take care of them and help them as we should have understood and felt – and they were deserving. So in the heat of this argument and the things we said of ourselves regarding what we did not know to do and which perhaps we did a little last year – we forgot to speak of what the Holocaust survivors did in order to make the State of Israel what it is. We spoke of their suffering and not of their strength; we spoke of their distress and did not mention their contribution. We spoke of the squalor in which quite a few of them lived and did not emphasize enough the tremendous strength with which they succeeded in rising out of the infinite depths they experienced to the heights to which they rose in leading the life of this country. Something of this can be seen in this exhibit – which I managed to see in the quick glance I got of the captions and highlights. As a result of the impossible race which is the pace of life in this country, we are not aware of what occurs on a daily basis; there is a deficit in our ability to see clearly all the components of the larger picture because everything is mixed up and blended together. Something interfered with our ability to distinguish that some of the things which are important in all fields of life were created by people who came from a different world which we native-born Israelis can never really fully understand because we were born here in this unique place – it has no equal and it is ours. However, we did not come from the place that the Holocaust survivors came from. We see some areas in our spheres of life; some of the most prominent symbols which symbolize our lives; some statements and sentences which are an inseparable part of the most pronounced ethos of Israeliness. These are, in fact, the creative fruits of people who came from somewhere else, for whom the land of Israel and Israeliness were never taken for granted, who were considered strangers www.reiner-bernstein.de 344 – Chronologie 2008

when they transformed these symbols to ones which represent what we are proud to present as Israeli and Israeliness. Perhaps it should be said that we are proud, as this is the best and most beautiful part of our Israeliness. When we see it here, we gain a more accurate perspective of the contribution, weight and significance the survivors had on the life of the State of Israel, in what it was and what it has yet to become. On behalf of the Government of Israel, I thank you for choosing to open this exhibit on the eve of Holocaust Martyrs' and Heroes' Remembrance Day. The bottom line is not what was or even what is, but rather primarily what will be. From these depths, from this strength, from this inspiration, there is no limit to what this country can design for itself. Thank you.

138 Zuletzt ist von Aaron David Miller das Buch erschienen „The Much Too Promised Land: America’s Elusive Search for Arab-Israeli Peace“ (Bantham Books 2008).

139 Vgl. die Rezension von Millers Buch „The Much Too Promised Land“ in der Menüleiste „Rezensionen“ dieser Homepage.

140 Vgl. die gleichgerichtete Aussage von Nazmi Jubeh am 05.05.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

141 In Washington, D.C., steht „K Street“ für die politischen Lobbygruppen, während „J Street“ als die witzige Variante mit (noch – „in flux“) beschränktem Einfluss verstanden werden will. In der Einladung zu ihrer Gründung hieß es: „J Street aims to change that [the political outreach of the far Right]. We are the first and only lobby and PAC [Political Action Committee] dedicated to ensuring Israel’s security, changing the direction of American policy in the Middle East and opening up American political debate about Israel and the Middle East.“ Zu den Sympathisanten und Mitgliedern gehören auch prominente Nichtjuden wie der frühere US- amerikanische Botschafter in Tel Aviv, Samuel Lewis.

142 a) Monday, April 28, 2008 – Q & A on new dovish ‚Israel Lobby,’ in Meretz USA Weblog: We’ve done a short e-mail interview with Jeremy Ben-Ami, the founder (along with Daniel Levy) of "J Street”the new dovish Israel lobby and its political action committee, "JStreetPAC." The following are our questions and Jeremy Ben-Ami’s answers in full: Question: Perhaps a year ago, when stories or rumors started circulating of a new liberal Israel lobby, it was thought to be associated with George Soros. What (if anything) can you say about the role of Soros in your efforts? Ben-Ami: George Soros is not involved in or funding J Street. J Street is the outgrowth of 18 months of planning and discussion among pro-Israel, pro-peace activists about how best to establish a new political voice on these issues. Some of those discussions did involve Mr. Soros, as was reported at the time. As Mr. Soros himself wrote in the New York Review of Books, he decided that his personal involvement in the launch of such an effort would, on balance, not help the effort so he decided to step out of the discussions. Question: Wasn't your initial strategy for a two or three-way merger among the Israel Policy Forum, Americans for Peace Now and Brit Tzedek V'Shalom? What happened? How do you see your organization dovetailing, cooperating or coexisting with these groups now? www.reiner-bernstein.de 345 – Chronologie 2008

Ben-Ami: J Street is a political effort consisting of a PAC and a 501(c)(4) lobby. The existing pro-Israel, pro-peace groups are [according to formal regulations] 501(c)(3) organizations and cannot organizationally be part of such an effort. However, as individuals and outside of their roles with those organizations, the leaders of all three organizations as well as of Meretz USA, Ameinu, New Israel Fund and other progressive Jewish organizations are members of the Advisory Council for J Street. We are very pleased at the broad support for the creation of J Street among progressive activists on this issue and their recognition that a unified political voice and arm will be an important complement to the work of the existing groups. Question: In light of the writings of Mearsheimer and Walt on AIPAC and the "Israel Lobby," what would you like to say to progressive Americans about the purpose of your group and how this would impact the political scene? Ben-Ami: For too long, the loudest voices in the American political and national policy debates when it comes to Israel and the Middle East have belonged to the far right – neoconservatives, right wing American Jewish leaders, and right wing Christian Zionists. These voices do not represent the mainstream of the American Jewish community or reflect its values. J Street will provide the first political voice for progressives on Israel. For the first time, candidates for political office and current office holders will know that there is organized support for sensible, mainstream positions on Israel and the Middle East – backing a two-state solution, opposing further settlement expansion, pursuing diplomatic opportunities to resolve conflicts rather than immediate resort to military options. These aren’t actually left or right positions; they are sensible, smart ways to be pro-Israel and to remain true to the values that the American Jewish community has always promoted of justice and peace for all. b) James D. Besser: New PAC To Offer Pols a Dovish Mideast View, in „The Jewish Week“ 26.03.2008: Almost a year after reports of an “alternative AIPAC” emerged in the middle of the Jewish political world, many of the same players are on the verge of announcing a revised initiative intended to get the message to politicians that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee is not the only pro-Israel voice in town, The Jewish Week has learned. Dubbed the J-Street Project – “K Street” has become a cipher for Washington’s lobbying establishment and “J Street,” missing from Washington’s downtown grid, has become a local “in” joke – the new project kicks off with a hush-hush fundraiser next Monday hosted by former Clinton administration official Jeremy Ben Ami and Daniel Levy, director of the Prospects for Peace Initiative of the Century Foundation. The group will be publicly launched around the middle of April; organizers said they will not speak publicly about the group until then. “For too long, the loudest American voices in political and policy debates have been those on the far right – often Republican neoconservatives or extreme Christian Zionists,” according to the invitation. “J Street aims to change that. We are the first and only lobby and PAC (political action committee) dedicated to ensuring Israel’s security, changing the direction of American policy in the Middle East and opening up American political debate about Israel and the Middle East.” While sources say the structure and initial goals of the new group are still in flux, it is expected to raise money for congressional candidates who advocate a stronger U.S. leadership role in ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and multilateral solutions to the region’s problems. www.reiner-bernstein.de 346 – Chronologie 2008

The group will be headed by Ben-Ami, who served as deputy domestic policy adviser in the Clinton administration and later as a media consultant. Ben-Ami has worked with several Jewish peace groups, including the Center for Middle East Peace and the Geneva Initiative-North America. The J-Street board of advisers includes a number of lay and professional leaders of Americans for Peace Now (APN), including CEO Debra DeLee, as well as Marcia Freedman, founder and former president of Brit Tzedek v’Shalom. Several activists with ties to Democratic presidential contender Sen. Barack Obama are on the panel, as well. They include Robert Malley, whose involvement in Obama’s broad foreign policy advisory team has generated criticism from Republicans and some pro-Israel groups, and Alan Solomont, a top Obama fundraiser and major player in Democratic politics. Also on board: David Kimche, a former deputy chief of the Mossad and a member of the advisory council of the Israel Policy Forum (IPF) – another pro-peace process group that was connected with last year’s efforts but which, several source say, is not directly involved in the current project. Several activists associated with the project say the goal is to offer lawmakers an alternative perspective that they say is closer to the consensus positions of American Jews than that offered by major pro- Israel groups like AIPAC, which they say have not supported aggressive U.S. peacemaking in the region. “I signed on because I think this is a worthwhile endeavor,” said Samuel Lewis, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel. “I’m very sympathetic with the core principles: to provide a voice in favor of an active U.S. role in promoting negotiations and peacemaking, and a somewhat more balanced approach to the parties than some other Jewish organizations.” Like several other supporters of the new project, Lewis stressed that J-Street is “not meant as an alternative to AIPAC, or anything on that scale. But I see it as a useful addition to the debate; it may offer more energetic efforts in terms of lobbying on the Hill, where a lot of education has to be done.” He said the new group will be more “politically purposeful” than IPF or other pro-peace process groups. Turf issues among the various pro-peace process groups have slowed the creation of the new organization, according to several activists involved in discussions about the new group, but they expressed the view that Ben- Ami has largely finessed that by creating a group that will serve to broaden political activism by peace process advocates without stepping on the feet of individual groups that have their own lobbying operations and agendas. “It will be separate from the dovish organizations and not competitive with them,” said a source familiar with the discussions that created the new group. “The goal is to add another, more political layer to support for peace negotiations.” Organizers refuse to talk to the media until the official launch, but activists close to the process say it will focus initially on political fundraising aimed at helping incumbents and candidates who support a more active U.S. peacemaking role. The project is the result of a lengthy process to “figure out what to do to help organizations that are dovish within the American Zionist fold,” said a knowledgeable source. “It is very ambitious, but it is starting modestly.” This source said an initial goal was to raise $1.5 million – presumably with the intention of having an impact in the current election cycle. Planners remain secretive in large part to avoid a repetition of last year’s controversy. Early reports about an AIPAC competitor that would amalgamate the efforts of the major pro-peace process groups, with www.reiner-bernstein.de 347 – Chronologie 2008

possible funding by mega-philanthropist and progressive activist George Soros, produced a storm of unwanted publicity and scared off some potential participants. In fact, Soros had never committed to the original project, and the current iteration includes no Soros involvement, according to several players. New Group Faces Big Obstacles The idea of creating an alternative lobbying voice on Mideast issues goes back at least 20 years. In 1988, leaders of the American Jewish Committee, the American Jewish Congress and the Anti-Defamation League signed a letter criticizing AIPAC as not reflecting the consensus views of the Jewish community on Mideast peace issues. In the privately circulated letter, the groups specifically objected to AIPAC’s efforts to deny Yasir Arafat a visa allowing him to address the United Nations. But that initiative went nowhere. AIPAC established closer working ties to the other major Jewish organizations and during the Oslo years it was the Jewish left that argued AIPAC was out of step because of what activists charged was lukewarm support for the peace process, a political focus that emphasized building political opposition to the Palestinians and resistance to any U.S. pressure on Israel. AIPAC’s preeminence on Capitol Hill – and the vital role played by networks of pro-Israel campaign givers who take cues from the lobby group – “misleads a lot of people into thinking there is only one ‘Jewish’ position on the Middle East,” said University of Florida political scientist Ken Wald. “So it makes sense for those who don’t like that particular voice to do something more systematic than just talk about it. And the theory is that dollars are the currency of doing that.” But the new group faces big obstacles, he said, including a limited fundraising pool and the view by many community leaders that “Jews must present a united front” on Israel-related matters to government bodies. It also faces a political challenge because “AIPAC has been recognized by non-Jewish politicians as the voice of the Jewish community,” he said. An alternative voice “may be hard to sell to non-Jewish politicians who don’t want to be tarred as anti-Israel.” Jews on the left, he said, are less likely to put Israel-related politics at the top of their list of giving priorities – something AIPAC supporters and supports of pro-Israel political action committees have traditionally done. And the new group will face aggressive attacks from the Jewish right. “I’m a realist; these people will get hammered and accused of being anti-Israel,” Wald said. “A lot will have to do with the way they actually frame their arguments.” Kean University political scientist Gilbert Kahn said the new group is part of a broader trend: the effort by groups with different Mideast perspectives to be heard despite the dominance of a handful of big groups like AIPAC. “The most important point here is that there are significant portions of the Jewish community that feel dissatisfied with the way their views are being represented,” Kahn said. “The same is true on the other side, with the Orthodox Union and its decision to challenge the policies of the Israeli government. It’s the outgrowth of the growing awareness that there is legitimacy to differences in advocacy.” The idea has less to do with creating “alternate” AIPACs, some say, than ending the view in the political world that the Jewish community speaks as one on controversial Mideast policy issues. Editor at Large Larry Cohler-Esses contributed to this report. www.reiner-bernstein.de 348 – Chronologie 2008

143 Offener Brief von Dr. Meir Margalit, israelischer Historiker, an Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel anlässlich ihrer Reden und ihres (Nichts- )Tuns auf der Israel-Reise. Mittwoch, 26. März 2008, in „Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung“ 22.04.2008, S. 8: Sehr geehrte Frau Merkel, Schon seit langem hat man in Israel keine Reden gehört, die solchen zionistischen Pathos hatten, wie die Reden, die Sie bei Ihrem Besuch in Israel vor einer Woche gehalten haben. Sie haben es während Ihres dreitägigen Besuchs sehr klar gemacht, wie sehr Sie den Staat Israel unterstützen und gegen seine Feinde an seiner Seite stehen. Acht Minister, unzählige Regierungsangestellte und Sicherheitskräfte haben Sie mitgenommen, um mit großem Aufwand bei Ihren Gastgebern einen guten Eindruck zu hinterlassen. Trotz dem obengenannten muss ich Sie jedoch, mit allem Respekt, darauf hinweisen, dass Sie uns keine gute Tat erwiesen haben: Wenn Sie nämlich wirklich nur Israels Wohl im Sinne gehabt hätten, dann hätten Sie die Palästinenserfrage zumindest erwähnt. Stattdessen taten Sie so, als ob es Sie überhaupt nicht gäbe. Sie hätten mit klaren Worten erwähnen müssen, dass die israelische Besatzung der Palästinensergebiete unmenschlich ist und enden muss, dass Israel die besetzten Gebiete räumen, die Siedlungen auflösen, und die Belagerung des Gazastreifens beenden muss. Wenn Sie nämlich wirklich nur Israels Wohl im Sinne gehabt hätten, dann hätten Sie Abu Mazen [Machmud Abbas] zumindest einen Besuch abstatten sollen, und sich mit dem palästinensischen Kampf um Unabhängigkeit solidarisch zeigen sollen. Wenn Sie wirklich an der Seite Israels gegen seine Feinde stehen wollten, dann hätten Sie zuallererst den Staat Israel selbst kritisiert. Die größte Gefahr, die Israel zu fürchten hat, ist nämlich ironischerweise nicht Iran, sondern Israel selbst. Seit 1967 betreibt der Staat Israel nämlich ein System der Selbstvernichtung. Jeder, der sich um das Wohl des Staates Israel bemüht, muss ihm helfen, dieses System zu beenden. Ich bin mir sicher, dass Sie gebildet genug sind, das zu wissen. Auch weiß ich, dass das Schuldbewusstsein des deutschen Volkes Ihnen nicht die Möglichkeit gestattet, den jüdischen Staat offen zu kritisieren. Zudem kann angenommen werden, dass in einem solchen Fall israelische Politiker Ihnen vorwerfen hätten, eine Antisemitin zu sein. Trotzdem sollten Sie sich nicht davon abbringen lassen, denn der wirkliche Antisemit ist der, der angesichts der Menschenrechtsverletzungen in den besetzten Gebieten schweigt, da es jedem klar ist, dass die Fortsetzung der Besatzung das Ende des Staates Israels auf sich ziehen wird. Und falls man Ihnen vorwirft, ein Antisemit zu sein, können Sie ja Ehud Olmert selbst zitieren, der vor drei Monaten sagte, dass, wenn die Besatzung nicht beendet wird, wird der Staat Israel beendet werden. Ich würde Sie gerne darauf hinweisen, Frau Merkel, dass die Mehrheit der Israelis eingestehen, dass die Besatzung untragbar ist und uns nicht weniger Schaden zufügt als den Palästinensern. Jedoch fehlt der israelischen Regierung die Kraft, die einzige Operation durchzuführen, die unser Leben retten kann: Die Entfernung des Tumors, der sich “[besetzte] Gebiete” nennt. Durch diesen Tumor bluten wir ununterbrochen, und er macht uns von Tag zu Tag schwächer. Und daher brauchen wir keine Solidaritätsbekundung und auch keine pro- zionistische Reden, sondern internationalen Druck, der die Besatzung beenden kann. Alleine schaffen wir das nämlich nicht. Jedoch mit Hilfe www.reiner-bernstein.de 349 – Chronologie 2008

unserer europäischen Freunde gibt es eine Chance, Ruhe und Frieden für beide Völker zu erreichen. Zum Schluss würde ich Sie gerne darauf hinweisen, dass ich zwar kein Moralist bin, aber dennoch denke, dass Sie eine der wichtigsten moralischen Lektionen des Zweiten Weltkrieges vergessen haben: Nämlich, dass man bei Menschenrechtsverletzungen nicht schweigen darf, und dass man gegen jedes Regime, das ein anderes Volk unterdrückt, kämpfen muss. Heute sind wir leider die Unterdrücker. Es ist daher Ihre Aufgabe, mit lauter Stimme zu sagen, dass das 21. Jahrhundert keinen Platz für Besatzungsmächte und Unterdrücker hat, und dass jedes Volk ein Recht auf Selbstbestimmung hat. Israel braucht diesen Druck, um seiner selbst willen. Wer Israel liebt, muss Druck auslösen, bis die Besatzung beendet ist. Mit freundlichen Grüssen, Dr. Meir Margalit, Historiker, Aktivist der israelischen Friedensbewegung und ehemaliges Stadtratsmitglied von Jerusalem, von der Meretz-Partei. Übersetzt aus dem Hebräischen von Benjamin Rosendahl. Der Offene Brief ist bereits am 31.03.2008 im Internet-Portal „hagalil“ dokumentiert worden.

144 a) HCON 322 EH 110th CONGRESS 2d Session H. CON. RES. 322 CONCURRENT RESOLUTION Whereas on November 29, 1947, the United Nations General Assembly voted to partition the British Mandate of Palestine and create a Jewish state; Whereas on May 14, 1948, the people of Israel proclaimed the establishment of the sovereign and independent State of Israel, and the United States Government established full diplomatic relations with Israel; Whereas the desire of the Jewish people to establish an independent modern State of Israel is an outgrowth of the existence of the historic kingdom of Israel established in the Land of Israel 3,000 years ago, with the city of Jerusalem as its capital; Whereas for over 2,000 years, there has been continuous Jewish presence and residence in the land comprising the modern State of Israel; Whereas the establishment of the modern State of Israel as a homeland for the Jewish people followed the slaughter of more than 6,000,000 European Jews during the Holocaust; Whereas since its establishment 60 years ago, the modern State of Israel has rebuilt a nation, forged a new and dynamic democratic society, and created a thriving economic, political, cultural, and intellectual life despite the heavy costs of war, terrorism, and unjustified diplomatic and economic boycotts against the people of Israel; Whereas the people of Israel have established a vibrant, pluralistic, democratic political system, including freedom of speech, association, and religion; a vigorously free press; free, fair and open elections; the rule of law; a fully independent judiciary; and other democratic principles and practices; Whereas Israel has developed some of the leading universities in the world, and 8 Israeli citizens have been awarded the Nobel Prize; Whereas Israel has developed an advanced, entrepreneurial economy, is among the world's leaders in the high-tech industry, and is at the forefront of research and development in the field of renewable energy sources; www.reiner-bernstein.de 350 – Chronologie 2008

Whereas Israel regularly sends humanitarian aid, search-and-rescue teams, mobile hospitals, and other emergency supplies, to help victims of disasters around the world, including the 1994 Rwandan civil war, the 1998 bombing of the United States Embassy in Kenya, the 1999 earthquakes in Turkey, the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, the 2005 hurricanes along the southern coast of the United States, and the 2007 fires in Greece; Whereas Israel has absorbed millions of Jews from countries throughout the world and fully integrated them into Israeli society; Whereas Israel has bravely defended itself from repeated terrorist and military attacks since its independence; Whereas successive leaders of Israel have sought to achieve peace with Israel's Arab neighbors; Whereas Israel has established peaceful bilateral relations with neighboring Egypt and Jordan and has made its desire to establish peaceful relations with all Arab states abundantly clear; Whereas for 6 decades, the United States and Israel have maintained a special relationship based on mutually shared democratic values, common strategic interests, and moral bonds of friendship and mutual respect; Whereas the American people feel a strong affinity for the Israeli people based on common values and shared cultural heritage; and Whereas the United States continues to regard Israel as a strong and trusted ally and an important strategic partner: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That Congress— (1) recognizes the historic significance of the 60th anniversary of the reestablishment of the sovereign and independent State of Israel as a homeland for the Jewish people; (2) reaffirms its enduring support for Israel as Israel pursues peace with its neighbors; (3) reaffirms its support for Israel's right to defend itself against threats to its security and existence; (4) commends the people of Israel for their remarkable achievements in building a new state and a pluralistic, democratic society in the face of terrorism, as well as hostility, ostracism, and belligerence from many of their neighbors; (5) reaffirms the bonds of friendship and cooperation which have existed between the United States and Israel for the past 60 years, and commits to strengthening those bonds; and (6) extends the warmest congratulations and best wishes to the State of Israel and the Israeli people for a peaceful, prosperous, and successful future. Passed the House of Representatives April 23, 2008. Attest: Clerk. 110th CONGRESS 2d Session H. CON. RES. 322 CONCURRENT RESOLUTION Recognizing the 60th anniversary of the founding of the modern State of Israel and reaffirming the bonds of close friendship and cooperation between the United States and Israel. Dem Rep Independent Ayes: 417 (97%) 225 192 0 Nays: 0 (0%) 0 0 0 No Vote: 15 (3%) 9 6 0 www.reiner-bernstein.de 351 – Chronologie 2008

b) Speech of Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) April 22, 2008: Mr. Speaker, today I join my colleagues in Congress in celebrating Israel’s accomplishments over the past 60 years. I am happy to be co-sponsor of this congratulatory resolution. However, like many Israelis and Palestinians, I have concerns about Israel’s future, its stability, its security and the prospect for peaceful coexistence for both Palestinians and Israelis. One of those concerns relates to the ongoing lack of resolution on the dispossession of Palestinian property and the dislocation of Palestinians after Independence. It must be remembered that about 700,000 Palestinians became exiled. Much Arab property was appropriated. And about 500 Arab villages were destroyed. On December 11, 1948, the United Nations passed Resolution 194, affording Palestinian refugees the right to return to their homes in Israel, or to compensation for their property should they choose not to return. To this day, the mandate of U.N. Resolution 194 has not been fulfilled. Unfortunately, this failure remains as one of the most significant barriers to the realization of a two-state negotiated solution. I am also concerned for those Palestinians who did not flee and who became Israeli citizens after Independence. According to the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, today there exist 20 Israeli laws which explicitly discriminate against the Palestinian minority in Israel, who constitute 20 percent of its population. In its 2005 Annual Report, the U.S. State Department said that “There is] institutionalized legal and societal discrimination against Israel’s [Arab] Christian, Muslim and Druze citizens. The government does not provide Israeli Arabs with the same quality of education, housing, employment and social services as Jews.” Finally, Israel has a right to security and a right to defend itself. Accordingly, I am concerned that the 40 year military occupation of the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem has been and continues to be brutal and unjust and undermines the security of Israel. It is a fact that the government of Israel continues to support the construction of settlements on Palestinian land, perpetuating the consequences of dispossession and exile. Additionally, I am concerned that the government of Israel has increased the number of checkpoints which destroy a viable Palestinian economy and a vibrant civil society. I am concerned that the Israeli government has erected a wall, often on Palestinian land, that divides Palestinians from Palestinians, rather than divide Israel from the West Bank. As stated by Judge Elaraby of the International Court of Justice in his 2004 Advisory Opinion on the legality of Israel’s separation barrier, “The fact that occupation is met by armed resistance cannot be used as a pretext to disregard fundamental human rights in the occupied territory.” This conundrum of a dialectic of conflict further separates Israelis and Palestinians alike from hopes for peace.

H. Con. Res. 322 eloquently states the many reasons why I celebrate Israel’s accomplishments and I sincerely wish it a bright future. I only wish to add that, in my opinion, and in the opinion of many Israelis and Palestinians as well, Israel’s future will be bright only if it includes an open dialogue with Palestinians, a respect for human rights and international law, and a society built on coexistence and tolerance. Israelis and Palestinians deserve to live in peace with justice and I encourage the United States government to help Israel achieve that so the joy of future anniversaries will be unalloyed. I support the resolution in the spirit of reconciliation to which we must all inevitably turn, to achieve peace and justice with our brothers and sisters from whom we may be estranged. www.reiner-bernstein.de 352 – Chronologie 2008

145 Text der Erklärung in der Menüleiste „Erklärungen, Interviews und Anzeigen” dieser Zeitleiste.

146 Ari Shavit: A deal with thugs, in „Haaretz“-Online 17.04.2008: We have a neighbor who is a murderer. Not the criminal kind, thank God. Not a psychopath, God forbid. No, our neighbor is a religious murderer. A murderer in the name of God and for God. A murderer who wants to eradicate us and get rid of us so that we will not pollute his sacred soil with our presence. A murderer who believes that the world will be better, purer, if we are not here. A serious murderer, a murderer with values, a murderer with a mission. Our killer-neighbor is not heartless. He is not without compassion. It would not occur to him, for example, to slaughter our children and wives. It would not occur to him to drown us all in the sea. Because of his human virtues and morals, he does not wish for each and every one of us to die a strange death. Instead, the neighbor wants to kill our national existence. In the term used by the late Yehoshafat Harkabi, his declared goal is politicide, not genocide. Lying in his bed at night, our neighbor fantasizes about the death of the State of Israel. In his actions during the day, the neighbor tries to hasten the death of the State of Israel. In the name of God, the neighbor wants to murder the State of Israel. The neighbor is a murderer, but the neighbor is not delusional. He has good reasons to hate us. Exactly 60 years ago, we deprived his mothers and fathers of their land. We emptied out their villages. We destroyed their homes. We wiped their Palestine off the face of the earth. And in the great heat of May-July 1948, we sent them south, in long columns. We sent them all the way to Gaza, like the biblical Hagar, leaving in their hearts that deep pain that over the years became a deep hatred, a deep hatred that became a claim for absolute justice. An absolute justice that leaves no room for life. Certainly not for our life. That is why we have such difficulties with the neighbor. The guilt and the terror are profound. The cultural gaps are unbearable. For although we live closely, side by side, we are very far apart. Opposites, really. The neighbor from Hamas is dispossessed, and we have property. The neighbor is hungry, and we are well-fed. The neighbor is a zealot, and we are godless. The neighbor demands justice-to-the-death, and we are looking for some deal that will let us live. He is no sucker, that neighbor. In 2006 he surprised us by triumphing over Mahmoud Abbas. In 2007 he surprised us by driving out Mohammed Dahlan and taking over Gaza. In 2008 he surprised us by creating a balance of deterrence against the hollow bragging of the Israeli government. True, the neighbor is still fairly weak. He cannot rise up and kill us today, nor will he be able to do so tomorrow. But with every year he grows stronger. With every year, he advances and makes incursions, slowly crumbling the settlements we built over the ruins of those villages. We, for our part, ignore him. We act like a wealthy man who lives a life of comfort on his estate without realizing that a disenfranchised, angry neighbor is watching him the whole time. For the good bourgeoisie that we are, after all, the most convenient way to cope with a murdering neighbor is to ignore him. Not to see him, not to hear him, not to speak with him. To pretend that he is not there, at the edge of the garden, just outside the garden. To pretend that there is another, more polite neighbor with whom we can speak. And to believe, truly to believe, that peace and security can www.reiner-bernstein.de 353 – Chronologie 2008

one day be obtained in this neighborhood without solving the problem of the neighbor. Without seeing that he is here. Here all along. And not going anywhere. There are only two ways to deal with a killer-neighbor: to hit him or to disarm him. Perhaps one day there will no longer be any choice. Despite the terrible cost involved, Israel may eventually have to enter the neighbor's crowded trailer and beat him senseless. But before we are dragged into Gaza, we must exhaust the other possibility. We should offer Hamas a deal: an Islamic republic in Gaza in exchange for full demilitarization. A full and fulfilling life for a Muslim community of brothers, in exchange for giving up violence and arms altogether. Hamas will probably say no. The neighbor tends to prefer the deaths of Israelis over the lives of Palestinians. But if there is any chance of a frank negotiation with Hamas, this is the path the talks should take. Not a Carter- style illusion, not the temporary tactic of a passing tahadiyeh [truce], but a tough deal with tough terms. A street deal. A deal with thugs. A deal meant to give those who live on the other side of the fence a genuine opportunity to lay down the sword, pick up the Koran and become real neighbors.

147 Mahmoud al-Zahar: No Peace Without Hamas, in “Washington Post” 17.04.2008: GAZA – President Jimmy Carter’s sensible plan to visit the Hamas leadership this week brings honesty and pragmatism to the Middle East while underscoring the fact that American policy has reached its dead end. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice acts as if a few alterations here and there would make the hideous straitjacket of apartheid fit better. While Rice persuades Israeli occupation forces to cut a few dozen meaningless roadblocks from among the more than 500 West Bank control points, these forces simultaneously choke off fuel supplies to Gaza; blockade its 1.5 million people; approve illegal housing projects on West Bank land; and attack Gaza City with F-16s, killing men, women and children. Sadly, this is "business as usual" for the Palestinians. Last week's attack on the Nahal Oz fuel depot should not surprise critics in the West. Palestinians are fighting a total war waged on us by a nation that mobilizes against our people with every means at its disposal–from its high-tech military to its economic stranglehold, from its falsified history to its judiciary that "legalizes" the infrastructure of apartheid. Resistance remains our only option. Sixty-five years ago, the courageous Jews of the Warsaw ghetto rose in defense of their people. We Gazans, living in the world's largest open-air prison, can do no less. The U.S.-Israeli alliance has sought to negate the results of the January 2006 elections, when the Palestinian people handed our party a mandate to rule. Hundreds of independent monitors, Carter among them, declared this the fairest election ever held in the Arab Middle East. Yet efforts to subvert our democratic experience include the American coup d'etat that created the new sectarian paradigm with Fatah and the continuing warfare against and enforced isolation of Gazans. Now, finally, we have the welcome tonic of Carter saying what any independent, uncorrupted thinker should conclude: that no "peace plan," "road map" or "legacy" can succeed unless we are sitting at the negotiating table and without any preconditions. Israel's escalation of violence since the staged Annapolis "peace conference" in November has been consistent with its policy of illegal, often deadly collective punishment–in violation of international conventions. Israeli military strikes on Gaza have killed hundreds of Palestinians since then with unwavering White House approval; in 2007 alone the ratio of www.reiner-bernstein.de 354 – Chronologie 2008

Palestinians to Israelis killed was 40 to 1, up from 4 to 1 during the period from 2000 to 2005. Only three months ago I buried my son Hussam, who studied finance at college and wanted to be an accountant; he was killed by an Israeli airstrike. In 2003, I buried Khaled–my first-born – after an Israeli F-16 targeting me wounded my daughter and my wife and flattened the apartment building where we lived, injuring and killing many of our neighbors. Last year, my son-in-law was killed. Hussam was only 21, but like most young men in Gaza he had grown up fast out of necessity. When I was his age, I wanted to be a surgeon; in the 1960s, we were already refugees, but there was no humiliating blockade then. But now, after decades of imprisonment, killing, statelessness and impoverishment, we ask: What peace can there be if there is no dignity first? And where does dignity come from if not from justice? Our movement fights on because we cannot allow the foundational crime at the core of the Jewish state–the violent expulsion from our lands and villages that made us refugees–to slip out of world consciousness, forgotten or negotiated away. Judaism – which gave so much to human culture in the contributions of its ancient lawgivers and modern proponents of tikkun olam–has corrupted itself in the detour into Zionism, nationalism and apartheid. A "peace process" with Palestinians cannot take even its first tiny step until Israel first withdraws to the borders of 1967; dismantles all settlements; removes all soldiers from Gaza and the West Bank; repudiates its illegal annexation of Jerusalem; releases all prisoners; and ends its blockade of our international borders, our coastline and our airspace permanently. This would provide the starting point for just negotiations and would lay the groundwork for the return of millions of refugees. Given what we have lost, it is the only basis by which we can start to be whole again. I am eternally proud of my sons and miss them every day. I think of them as fathers everywhere, even in Israel, think of their sons–as innocent boys, as curious students, as young men with limitless potential–not as "gunmen" or "militants." But better that they were defenders of their people than parties to their ultimate dispossession; better that they were active in the Palestinian struggle for survival than passive witnesses to our subjugation. History teaches us that everything is in flux. Our fight to redress the material crimes of 1948 is scarcely begun, and adversity has taught us patience. As for the Israeli state and its Spartan culture of permanent war, it is all too vulnerable to time, fatigue and demographics: In the end, it is always a question of our children and those who come after us. Mahmoud al-Zahar, a surgeon, is a founder of Hamas. He is [the] foreign minister in the government of Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, which was elected in January 2006.

148 Barak Ravid: Hebron settlers threaten German MPs, in „Haaretz“- Online 18.04.2008: A group of Jewish settlers in Hebron insulted and threatened a visiting German parliamentary delegation touring the West Bank city yesterday. The German embassy in Israel protested to the Foreign Ministry that Israel Defense Forces soldiers and police officers did nothing to stop the settlers' attacks. The German group cut short its visit to the city after the incident. The IDF declined to comment on the incident, while the Israeli embassy in Berlin issued an apology. www.reiner-bernstein.de 355 – Chronologie 2008

Seven members of the German parliament's law committee toured Hebron, the West Bank's largest city. The IDF control the center of the city to protect several hundred Jewish settlers living there. At the start of the visit, the legislators were cursed, insulted and threatened by a small group of settlers, the visitors said in a statement yesterday. "The Israeli police and army showed no willingness to step in and said they couldn't guarantee the safety of the delegation," the statement said. "In order to give the peace process a chance, the members of the law committee, as friends of Israel, appeal to the Israeli authorities to rein in the fanaticism of Jewish settlers." The legislators, headed by German Green Party deputy Jerzy Montag, leader of a German-Israeli parliamentary group, said the settlers swore at them, threatened them, called them "Nazis" and poured paint on their cars. Following the attacks the delegation members decided to cut their visit short and left Hebron. They said were so shocked and upset that they considered leaving Israel immediately in protest. The Israeli ambassador in Germany, Yoram Ben-Zeev, spoke to the lawmakers by phone and expressed his regret for the incident. Ben-Zeev said he will meet personally with every committee member in the delegation upon their return to Germany this week, to express his feelings and to apologize. The German embassy in Israel protested to the Foreign Ministry in the name of the German government, saying the IDF soldiers at the site did nothing to stop the settlers. "We're still looking into the circumstances of the incident," a senior Foreign Ministry source said. "This is not the first time that such things have happened and we can only regret it, especially since these are great friends of Israel." A Foreign Ministry official said members of the German delegation called the ministry for help during the incident. The ministry contacted police and asked them to intervene, but by that time the delegation had already left. Foreign Ministry officials said the delegation did not coordinate their Hebron visit with Israeli authorities, and therefore no preparations had been made for their arrival. However, German diplomats said the Israeli embassy in Berlin had been given complete details of the visit even before the lawmakers arrived in Israel. Noam Arnon, the spokesman for Hebron's settlers, said that while he does not agree or sympathize with the settlers' actions in this incident, "one must take into consideration that these were not innocent tourists." The parliamentarians were accompanied by "an extreme left-wing organization that incites to drive the Jewish settlers out of Hebron and slanders the IDF and Israel," Arnon said. "It's like the tours of the National Jewish Front I used to lead in Arab villages." Arnon invited the "representatives of European states" to visit Hebron without the "hostile escort" to see things as they really were.

149 Henry Siegman: Israels falsche Freunde, in „Süddeutsche Zeitung“ 10.04.2008, S. 2: Die Europäer glauben, aus Sühne für den Holocaust müssten sie alle Taten des jüdischen Staats dulden – doch damit schaden sie ihm. Der Gesandte des Nahost-Quartetts, Tony Blair, und Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel wollen also eine weitere Friedenskonferenz organisieren, diesmal im Juni in Berlin. Nach der langen Reihe fehlgeschlagener Friedensinitiativen, die mindestens bis 1991, bis zur Konferenz von Madrid, zurückreicht, fällt es schwer zu glauben, dass www.reiner-bernstein.de 356 – Chronologie 2008

Staats- und Regierungschefs tatsächlich die gleichen Fehler noch einmal begehen wollen. Und dass sie keine Ahnung haben, warum dieser Konflikt heute noch auswegloser erscheint als einst. Der eigentliche Skandal ist, dass die Völkergemeinschaft zwar genau weiß, wo die Probleme liegen, aber nicht genug Mut aufbringt, sie zu benennen, geschweige denn sie zu lösen. Die nächste Friedenskonferenz in Deutschland – oder in Moskau, wo die Russen sie gerne machen würden – wird an derselben Feigheit scheitern, die auch alle früheren Bemühungen kennzeichnete. Es wird über alles gesprochen werden, außer über das eigentliche Problem. Dieses Problem sieht so aus: Selbst wenn man von allen Sünden absieht, die man den Palästinensern zuschreiben kann – ihre desaströse Führung, der missglückte Aufbau politischer Institutionen, die mörderische Gewalt der Widerstandsgruppen: Es gibt keine realistische Perspektive für einen souveränen palästinensischen Staat. Und dies vor allem deshalb, weil die zahlreichen israelischen Regierungen von 1967 bis heute nie die Absicht hatten, einen solchen Staat Wirklichkeit werden zu lassen. Es ist das eine, dass Israels Regierungen darauf bestehen, den Palästinenser-Staat so lange hinauszuzögern, bis bestimmte Sicherheitsbedürfnisse erfüllt sind. Das andere aber ist, dass eine Regierung, die den Konflikt ernsthaft lösen wollte, niemals die Räumung und Teilung palästinensischen Landes auf eine Weise weiterbetreiben würde, bei der jedes Kind weiß, dass sie einen palästinensischen Staat unmöglich macht. Angesichts der überwältigenden Ungleichheit der Kräfte zwischen Besatzern und Besetzten wundert es wenig, dass israelische Regierungen einen regelrechten Heißhunger auf palästinensisches Land entwickelt haben. Erstaunlich ist etwas anderes: dass die Völkergemeinschaft so tut, als nehme sie Israel die Behauptung ab, das Opfer zu sein, die von ihm besetzten Menschen aber die Aggressoren. Deshalb erlaubt sie weiterhin die Enteignung der Palästinenser, dass hier die Gesetze des Dschungels walten. Solange Israel glaubt, sich mit dem Hinauszögern des Friedensprozesses Zeit kaufen zu können, um unwiderruflich Fakten zu schaffen – solange kann kein Friedensprozess gelingen. Und wenn die Völkergemeinschaft Israel weiterhin die Behauptung abkauft, sein Wunsch nach einer Zwei-Staaten- Lösung werde durch die Palästinenser enttäuscht, wird deren Vertreibung in der Tat unumkehrbar. Und wenn westliche Länder vor dem Hintergrund ihrer Schuld am Holocaust glauben, ihre Hinnahme eines solchen Ergebnisses sei ein Akt der Freundschaft mit dem jüdischen Volk, so könnte es keinen größeren Irrtum geben. Die Palästinenser aufzugeben, kann keine Sühne dafür sein, die Juden Europas aufgegeben zu haben. Und es würde auch nicht der Sicherheit des Staates Israel dienen. Die geradezu uneingeschränkten Bekundungen der Unterstützung durch Merkel und Frankreichs Präsident Nicolas Sarkozy sind nach den Worten des Publizisten John Vinocur "der Versuch, Israel zur Mäßigung mit einer Botschaft zwischen den Zeilen anzuhalten, nämlich: Die EU ist nicht oder nicht mehr euer reflexhafter Widersacher." Aber die Erwartung, unkritische Unterstützung werde zu einer größeren Bereitschaft Israels führen, für den Frieden Risiken auf sich zu nehmen, steht im Widerspruch zur Geschichte dieses Konflikts. Diese hat vielmehr gezeigt: Je kleiner der Widerspruch ist, den Israel von seinen Freunden im Westen erhält, desto kompromissloser wird sein Verhalten gegenüber den Palästinensern. Und genauso reagierte Premier Ehud Olmert auf die Erklärungen von Sarkozy und Merkel: Er kündigte neue Bauprojekte in Ostjerusalem an und genehmigte damit Wohnungsprojekte, die frühere Regierungen wegen ihrer negativen Wirkungen auf ein Friedensabkommen eingefroren hatten. Zudem erklärte Verteidigungsminister Ehud Barak kurz nach Merkels Abreise im März, www.reiner-bernstein.de 357 – Chronologie 2008

dass er die 500 Kontrollpunkte und Straßensperren nicht auflösen werde, die ein Gedeihen der palästinensischen Wirtschaft verhindern – was Israel schon wiederholt versprochen und ebenso wiederholt nicht erfüllt hatte. Welche Hoffnung die Palästinenser auch immer gehabt haben mögen, nachdem ihnen die internationale Gebergemeinschaft im Dezember mehr als sieben Milliarden Dollar zugesagt hatte: Mit Baraks Ankündigung wurde sie zerstört. Die Geberländer, von der Privatwirtschaft gar nicht zu reden, werden unter diesen Umständen dem schlechten Geld nicht auch noch gutes hinterherwerfen; das haben sie früher schon oft genug getan. Was von den Staats- und Regierungschefs nun verlangt wird, sind keine weiteren Friedenskonferenzen oder clevere Korrekturen früherer Erklärungen – sondern der moralische und politische Mut, ihre Kollaboration mit jenem Riesenschwindel zu beenden, zu dem der Friedensprozess geworden ist. Selbstverständlich muss die palästinensische Gewalt verurteilt und gestoppt werden, vor allem, wenn sie Zivilisten trifft. Auf der anderen Seite aber: Barrikaden und Checkpoints der Armee, Kampfhubschrauber und Düsenjäger, gezielte Ermordungen und militärische Übergriffe, ganz zu schweigen vom massiven Diebstahl palästinensischen Lands. Ist es nicht vollkommen unehrlich, so zu tun, als wäre Israels Besetzung nicht selbst ein unerbittlicher Akt der Gewalt gegen drei Millionen palästinensische Zivilisten? Könnte die Besetzung auch nur einen Tag länger währen, wenn Israel seine Gewalt aufgeben würde? Dessen Pläne für das Westjordanland sind nicht viel anders als die der arabischen Streitkräfte, als sie 1948 den Staat Israel angriffen – ihr Ziel war die Annullierung des UN-Teilungsplans von 1947. Dieses Problem muss beim Namen genannt werden (und das ist etwas völlig anderes als so hohle Statements wie: „Siedlungen helfen nicht dem Frieden"). Und es muss gemeinsam gegen einen Kolonialismus vorgegangen werden, der den einstigen noblen jüdischen Befreiungskampf entwertet. Oder die Teilnehmer von Friedenskonferenzen, egal welch guter Absicht, sind nur Staffage bei einer grausamen Täuschung.

150 Drucksachen 16/8747 vom 08.04.2008 und 16/8993 vom 25.04.2008.

151 Judith Bernstein: Bemerkungen zur Kleinen Anfrage von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen „Politik der Bundesregierung und EU im israelisch- palästinensischen Konflikt angesichts der Krise im Gazastreifen“ und zur Antwort des Auswärtigen Amtes vom 23.04.2008: 1. In der Antwort der Bundesregierung fehlt jeglicher Hinweis auf den politischen Beitrag, den Berlin und die EU zur Realisierung der Zweistaatenregelung zu leisten willig sind. 2. Die Antwort der Bundesregierung begnügt sich mit der ausführlichen Berichterstattung über bilaterale und multilaterale humanitäre und entwicklungsorientierte Finanzhilfen für die Palästinenser. Der Anschlag im Zentrum Jerusalems am 22. Juli 2008 belegt hingegen erneut, dass diese Hilfen weder Palästinenser vor Terroranschlägen zurückhalten noch den Frieden zwischen beiden Völkern fördern. 3. Indem sich die Bundesregierung nicht zu den politischen und ideologischen Kontexten der Hilfen (Siedlungen, Grenzen, Ost-Jerusalem, Flüchtlinge, „Trennungsmauern“, militärische Sperrgebiete) äußert, sondern nur deren Folgen anspricht, stellt sie sich hinter die israelischen Ansprüche auf die palästinensischen Gebiete. 4. In der Antwort der Bundesregierung fehlt jeglicher Hinweis auf die Verantwortung der israelischen Politik für die eingeräumten Notlagen der www.reiner-bernstein.de 358 – Chronologie 2008

palästinensischen Bevölkerung. Das ist um so erstaunlicher, als die Bundesregierung darlegt, dass a) die humanitäre Lage im Gazastreifen „besorgniserregend“ ist (…); b) die palästinensische Zivilbevölkerung gemäß dem humanitären Völkerrecht, das in der IV. Genfer Konvention (von 1949) niedergelegt ist, auf deren Schutz Anspruch hat und dass „Israel als militärische Besatzungsmacht effektive Herrschaftsgewalt über die besetzten Gebiete ausübt“ – wozu die Bundesregierung also auch den Gazastreifen rechnet (…); b) Israel „nach den Regeln des humanitären Völkerrechts verpflichtet (ist), die Versorgung der (palästinensischen) Bevölkerung mit Lebens- und Arzneimitteln sicherzustellen“ und dass Kollektivstrafen verboten sind (Antworten auf die Fragen 18 + 19), sich gleichzeitig jedoch weigert, zu angeblich „abstrakten Rechtsfragen Stellung“ zu nehmen (…). 5. Die Kleine Anfrage von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen ist so formuliert, dass sich die Bundesregierung ihrer politischen Verantwortung entziehen kann, die sie regelmäßig betont. Die Konsequenzen des Versäumnisses werden besonders an den Stellen deutlich, an denen sich die Bundesregierung zur Geltung der IV. Genfer Konvention bekennt. Indem diese zum Schutz einer Zivilbevölkerung „in Kriegszeiten“ aufruft, übersieht die Bundesregierung, dass es sich nach vorherrschendem israelischem Verständnis bei der Konfrontation mit den Palästinensern nicht um Krieg, sondern um die Niederschlagung eines „Aufstandes“ handelt. Diese Interpretation hat zwei Ergebnisse nach sich gezogen: Zum einen bewegt sich das Verständnis zur Westbank zwischen der biblischen Bezeichnung „Judäa und Samaria“ und aktuell „terra nullius“ – wonach der arabische Angriff auf Israel 1967 völkerrechtliche Ansprüche auf dieses Territorium verwirkt habe. Zum anderen wird palästinensischen Gefangenen – von denen nur wenigen die Mitgliedschaft bei „Hamas“ vorgeworfen werden kann – nicht der Kombattanten-Status gewährt, so dass ihnen ein rechtsförmiges Verfahren vorenthalten werden kann.

152 Yariv Oppenheimer: Settlement bloc expansion is the most destructive, in „bitterlemons“ 07.04.2008: Recently, the Israeli and international media has featured reports on progress in peace negotiations. Chief negotiators Ahmed Qurei and Tzipi Livni maintain silence about the details, but allow that the talks are ongoing, detailed and purposeful. Now of all times, when the core issues never before discussed appear to be on the agenda, the negotiating theater seems to be infinitely distant from the reality unfolding on the ground. While the negotiating teams are discussing the ways and principles for partitioning the Land of Israel, the reality on the ground makes it increasingly difficult to establish a sovereign Palestinian state. From week to week, there are more voices on both sides arguing that it has become physically impossible to remove the West Bank settlements and that accordingly the two-state solution is history. The original goal of the settler leaders to prevent any future national leadership from dividing the land is closer than ever to fruition, as the settlements continue to spread. Like its predecessors, the Olmert government is operating in two contradictory directions: on the one hand it issues declarations regarding the existential need to achieve a peace agreement with the Palestinians, but on the other, it approves more construction beyond the green line, particularly the expansion of existing settlements. This pattern is repeated especially when Israeli governments decide to advance courageously toward a political settlement. It is then, perhaps stemming from a desire to placate right-wing protests, that the government decides to move ahead www.reiner-bernstein.de 359 – Chronologie 2008

with construction plans and alter the lay of the land almost irreversibly. The codename that legitimizes every act of expanding existing settlements and establishing new ones is the broad concept of "settlement blocs". As if in recognition of a fait accompli, government spokespersons justify every new initiative to build in the territories with the excuse that the areas involved are settlement blocs that in any event will come under future Israeli sovereignty. During the first three months of 2008, at the height of the Annapolis process, construction took place in 101 West Bank settlements; about 500 structures, comprising thousands of housing units, are currently being built. New construction plans were approved by the government to build a new neighborhood at Agan Haayalot next to Givat Zeev, north of Jerusalem. Tenders were released for the construction of 750 units in East Jerusalem. The regional planning commission approved submission of construction plans for 3,600 additional units in East Jerusalem. Most of these new construction plans are intended for empty areas located adjacent to Palestinian villages and neighborhoods in the eastern part of the city. In contrast to the pronouncements of official spokespersons, the ramifications of additional construction in the settlement blocs are often more destructive than expansion of isolated settlements in the West Bank heartland. While construction in the isolated settlements is usually limited in scope and in any case destined for eventual removal, the "settlement bloc" concept is a green light for building thousands of housing units near the borderline, in areas where the chances of reaching agreement to evacuate settlements are slim. Removal of settlements like Ofra, Bet El and Har Bracha, which are located deep inside Palestinian territory in the mountain heartland, will enjoy far broader public support than removal of communities inside the settlement blocs, like Maaleh Adumim, Betar Illit and the Etzion settlements. Moreover, Palestinian agreement to leaving part of the settlement blocs under Israeli sovereignty within the framework of a peace agreement is conditioned on territorial swaps, meaning transfer of Israeli sovereign territory to the Palestinian state. Every built-up acre in the settlement blocs constitutes an additional, complicated problem area when it comes to determining the future borders of the two states. The settlement of Modiin Illit, which in early March was declared a full-fledged municipality, offers an excellent example of the way Israeli governments have obliterated the green line and de facto annexed territory while simultaneously proceeding with peace negotiations. In 1993 when the Oslo accord was signed, the land adjacent to the Palestinian village of Bil'in was empty. Yet within three years, even as a process unfolded whereby Israel recognized the right of the Palestinian people to a state in the West Bank, construction began on the Modiin Illit settlement to provide housing solutions for the ultra orthodox sector. Today, this settlement comprises 37,500 residents. Plans are advancing to expand it deeper into the West Bank; just this week two new enlargement plans were released. The settlement construction dynamic, including in East Jerusalem and the blocs adjacent to the green line, should first and foremost concern the Israeli mainstream that aspires to separate from the Palestinians within the framework of a two-state solution. The consistent policy of expanding settlements renders the two-state vision that much more distant and is maneuvering Israel and the Palestinians into a situation where both will have to coexist in a single bi-national state. Die Bewegung „Frieden jetzt“ wurde im Gefolge eines Briefes von 348 Reserveoffizieren vom 6. März 1978 an Ministerpräsident Menachem Begin gegründet. Darin schrieben sie, dass eine „Regierung, die die Existenz des Staates Israel in den Grenzen Groß-Israels dem Frieden vorzieht und www.reiner-bernstein.de 360 – Chronologie 2008

guten nachbarlichen Beziehungen, (…) bei uns schwere und tiefe Sorge aus(löst“).

153 In den 1980er Jahren verabschiedete die Knesset ein „Kontaktsperregesetz“ ähnlichen Inhalts. Es stellte Beziehungen zur PLO unter Strafe. Nach der Prinzipienerklärung vom September 1993 („Oslo I“) wurde das Gesetz kassiert.

154 Ed Abington: First-hand report on current conditions in the "Holy Land": I got back Saturday morning from ten days in Jerusalem and Ramallah where I met with many Palestinians and Israelis. I came back convinced more than ever that the two-state solution is dead as a doornail. There is absolutely no willingness on the part of the IDF to change the situation on the ground from the stranglehold they now have. In fact several Israelis said that there are an increasing number of IDF officers serving in the West Bank who live in the settlements and do everything they can to frustrate any dismantlement of roadblocks or other barriers. The head of a well- respected Israeli organization told me that former Defense Minister Amir Peretz's advisor for the West Bank said that the IDF does everything it can to frustrate positive changes on the ground per the Roadmap and Tony Blair's mission. The Israeli said Peretz's advisor said that the IDF had recruited Palestinian youngsters from Nablus to try to get through the Hawara checkpoint wearing a suicide belt. They were caught (since it was a set-up), the IDF trumpeted their arrest and used that to justify the continuing seige of Nablus. The boys were released within a short time after their arrest. The Office of the UN Coordinator for Humanitarian Affairs has the absolute best – and most depressing – power point presentation of the situation on the West Bank that I have seen, layering information on a map showing Palestinian cities and villages, areas a, b and c, closed military areas, Israeli-declared nature reserves, the separation barrier, settlements, including their master plan for development, the Israeli road network for settlements, barriers and roadblocks – all of which puts forty percent of the West Bank off limit to Palestinians. When one looks at the presentation and sees how fragmented and disjointed the West Bank has become, and how East Jerusalem is almost totally surrounded by Israeli settlements, it is beyond imagination that there can ever be a viable Palestinian state. There is a sense of despair among almost all Palestinians I talked to. They see no willingness on the part of the Israelis to engage in meaningful final status talks. In fact, they say, the talks are frozen, yet settlement expansion is going on at a steady and growing rate. Tenders for new housing units are being approved almost every day, not only in East Jerusalem but elsewhere in the West Bank. No Palestinian building for any purpose is allowed in area c, even if Palestinians have owned the land for generations. The IDF destroys any building done by Palestinians in area c. The West Bank is now truly fragmented by checkpoints, Israeli-only roads, closed military areas and permanent "border-crossing"-like terminals around all the major Palestinian cities. Someone shipping goods to or from Nablus, for example, must off-load/on-load their trucks at least twice on any trip. The IDF has clamped down even tighter on the daily lives of Palestinians. Nabil Kassis, the president of Bir Zeit University, said that he has not been able to hire foreign faculty for the university for several years. The Israelis refuse to give foreign faculty work permits. In the past, foreigners would get a three month visa at the Israeli point of entry and after three months, go out to Jordan or elsewhere for a day or two and then come back in and get www.reiner-bernstein.de 361 – Chronologie 2008

another three month visa. That practice has now stopped by the Israelis, making it even more difficult for anyone in the West Bank who overstays their visa. I found no Palestinian who had anything positive to say about Tony Blair's mission. One Palestinian involved in negotiations said Blair comes two or three days a month and spends only a couple of hours with the Palestinians. They see no positive changes on the ground as a result of his efforts. I heard that a State Department official will shortly join the Blair mission as chief of party. One wag unkindly commented that his assignment was a rare example of a rat jumping on a sinking ship. The situation in Gaza is truly horrific and on the brink of a humanitarian disaster. UNRWA says fully 80 percent of the people in Gaza depend on food aid to meet the absolute minimum daily caloric intake. UNRWA only supplies 60 percent of daily food requirements to the refugees to whom it distributes food packets and depends on a functioning economy to supply the rest. The economy in Gaza, however, is close to collapse. Unemployment is over 50 percent and rising. Many factories have closed down altogether and have laid off their workers because they can't get inputs into Gaza nor distribute their products. The agricultural sector is collapsing. The IDF allows no fertilizer into Gaza, nor chicken feed, very little fuel, no spare parts for the water and sewage systems and is increasingly cutting off supplies of electricity. At least forty percent of Gaza City is permanently without electricity and the situation is even worse in other parts of the Gaza Strip. The Palestinians are pumping tens of thousands of cubic meters of raw, untreated sewage into the Med because sewage plants are breaking down. There is a huge reservoir of raw sewage in northern Gaza that could flood villages at any time. Ground water is increasingly being contaminated (it has been increasingly saline for some time). Drinking water is increasingly untreated because of a deterioration in the water treatment system due to a lack of spare parts, creating the danger of a pandemic in Gaza. UNRWA is worried about malnutrition and seeing signs of stress in pregnant women, usually the harbinger of malnutrition. Undernutrition is widespread among children and adults. In general, Palestinians recognize that it is only the international community that is keeping Gaza from collapsing altogether, but Palestinians hold out little hope that the international community will do much to make the situation better. And the Bush Administration is seen as aligning itself totally with Israel on punishing Gaza and unwilling to do much of anything to persuade Israel to ease the pressure on Gaza. I heard one anecdote that summarized US impotence vis-a-vis Israel. The Consulate in Jerusalem sent a Palestinian from Gaza to the US on a Fulbright fellowship. The Palestinian scholar returned to Amman almost a year ago but has been unable to get back to Gaza. The US has been putting him up in a hotel in Amman and paying him per diem for close to a year. His plight reminds me of the Tom Hanks movie, The Terminal, of someone who got stuck at JFK for a year because his country went out of existence. There seems to be a sense that, sooner or later, the IDF will go into Gaza in a big way to try to destroy the Hamas government and its infrastructure, which will make the humanitarian situation even worse, as well as result in heavy casualties. Despite the grim situation in Gaza, no Palestinian I talked to thought Hamas was in the slightest danger of being overthrown. Fatah in the West Bank has done little or nothing to rehabilitate itself, some two years after the 2006 parliamentary elections. There is uncertainty what will happen when Mahmoud Abbas' term of office expires in January 2009. One Palestinian said that the Presidency is www.reiner-bernstein.de 362 – Chronologie 2008

considering a draft election law, which would be promulgated by president decree since the Legislative Council has not met (and cannot meet) for over a year. Interestingly, the draft election law states that legislative and presidential elections will be held in 2010, thereby giving Abu Mazen another year in office. I don't know whether this is true or not, but so much for the Bush Administration emphasis on democracy. Palestinians to whom I spoke could see no way, in any case, that elections could be held, given the political fragmentation between the West Bank and Gaza. And elections held only in the West Bank (and perhaps East Jerusalem) would have zero credibility. Palestinians see Salam Fayyad as imposed upon them by the Bush Administration. Some Fatah members were critical of Fayyad, probably because Fatah no longer feeds at the public trough. Other Palestinians praised his efforts but suggested that if neither the US nor the Israelis (much less other members of the Quartet) were doing much to make Fayyad succeed, then what hope is there? I first went to Gaza and the West Bank and have been returning regularly for the past fifteen years, although this is my first visit for 14 months. I always think the situation could not get worse, at least since 2000 and the outbreak of the second intifada, but somehow it does. I fully expect that conditions will be even worse on the ground when I next visit.

155 Ari Shavit: The man without substance, in „Haaretz“-Online 27.03.2008: Ehud Olmert has many good qualities. The prime minister is a good friend to his comrades, a devoted father to his children, and is loyal to his followers. He is not brilliant, but he is intelligent. He is not profound, but he is pragmatic. Energetic, diligent and level-headed. Olmert has many of the traits required of a decision maker. He also has a virtuoso ability to create networks of power, reinforce them and activate them in times of need. Olmert is a gifted and multifaceted politician. He knows how to be charming and how to be threatening, to play a man of the world but also to relate to ordinary people. It is doubtful if there is anyone in Israel with more connections. It is doubtful if there is anyone like him who knows how to woo the powerful and pal around with criminals. And nevertheless, the prime minister has one shortcoming that overshadows all his good qualities: The man lacks substance. He has no worldview and no overall picture of reality. He has no ethical foundations and no structural principles. Olmert has no core. He has no Tablets of Stone. In the most profound sense, he does not know where he came from and where he is going. That is why today he can say the opposite of what he said yesterday, without batting an eyelash. Nor does he have any difficulty saying one thing and doing another. Since he is guided by litigation rather than the truth, the prime minister is capable of changing his skin and changing his policy like a chameleon. That is why he is a serial exploiter of opportunities and a brilliant survivor, but a hopeless shaper of reality. As a captain without direction and without a compass, Olmert stretches his opportunism to the absurd and his pragmatism to the point of losing the way. He arouses passions and engages in sleight of hand and is occasionally hypnotic, but in his 40 years in politics he has not left any mark. Even in his two years as prime minister he has not done anything genuine. These were two important years during which Israel's prime minister was supposed to strengthen the country before the major historic test of the www.reiner-bernstein.de 363 – Chronologie 2008

end of the decade. During these years he was supposed to pursue peace and prepare for war. To prepare the ground for dividing the country and prepare people's hearts for a struggle for the country. To stop Iran, test Syria and exhaust Hamas. To establish Israel's legitimacy as a Jewish and democratic nation state. To restore to Israel the qualities of a country characterized by excellence. To rehabilitate statesmanship and renew meaningfulness. To provide the state with diplomatic tools, national pride and a sense of direction. Olmert did none of this. He promised convergence, and changed his mind. He promised an end to the conflict, and disappointed us. He failed in the Second Lebanon War and failed to understand its significance. He did something, but not enough, on the crucial issue of Iran. He is losing precious time before entering negotiations with Syria, he did not formulate an overall and consistent strategy vis-a-vis Hamas and did not prepare the country for a future evacuation of the settlements. He did not spur the nation to stand behind the Israel Defense Forces and strengthen them. So as far as foreign affairs and security are concerned, the prime minister has stagnated over the past two years. But as far as domestic affairs and society are concerned, Olmert caused tremendous damage. He did not carry out the necessary revolution in the school system. He brought about a destructive revolution in the justice system, surrendered unconditionally to Shas, encouraged centralization in the economy and accepted the widening gaps in society. Under Olmert, Israel has become a reckless country that abandons the weak and helpless. Mutual responsibility has been eroded, social justice has been trampled. Corruption has become widespread. In another country or another period it may have been possible to be more forgiving of the failures of the 12th prime minister. After all, he is still a neophyte. Maybe he will learn. Look, according to foreign sources, he has learned how to make decisions in the area of national security. According to economic sources, he is leading the economy in a reasonable manner. Not everything is black. Nor have the worrisome suspicions of personal corruption been proven. But in this country in this period being forgiving toward the government is a luxury. Israel today needs excellence in every area; most of all in the area of leadership. Olmert lacks this excellence. Nor will he ever have it. Even if he makes an effort to rehabilitate himself, a person without substance cannot rehabilitate what he does not have in himself. A person without a core cannot navigate toward peace and cannot withstand a war. A person without moral authority cannot be a leader in a time of trial. Therefore, although Olmert is a good guy and a good friend, he does not belong in the Prime Minister's Office. Two more critical years of Olmert at the helm means a dangerous gamble.

156 Ari Shavit: Will the real Barak please stand up?, in “Haaretz”-Online 3.4.2008: [Former Minister of Defense] Amir Peretz is pathetic but right: Ehud Barak has no agenda. More accurately, deep inside, Barak has a definite agenda, but it is a secret. Since his return to politics, Barak has not given a name to his truth. And since he became defense minister, he has not voiced his credo in public. But a leader who does not tell the public the truth is not a leader. Publicly and politically he is directionless, pointless and redundant. So if Barak wants to live, he must emerge from the bunker immediately, face Israel and speak out. He must finally address his agenda in a speech. Here is a draft: Dear citizens, www.reiner-bernstein.de 364 – Chronologie 2008

This is a time of trial. Israel is facing unprecedented challenges. Iran is on the verge of nuclearization, Syria and Hezbollah are growing stronger, Hamas is heading toward conflagration. The Israel Defense Forces is doing everything to prepare for the developments, but this is not enough. Israeli society must muster all its inner strength both to prevent war and to endure a war. Such mustering cannot take place unless we are honest with ourselves and take a hard look at reality. Therefore I'm addressing you as a statesman rather than a politician. As a patriot rather than a party functionary. For many years, our leaders have thrown sand in your eyes and led you astray, but now I am here to speak the truth, and only the truth, no matter how difficult it is. Just as Camp David 2000 burst the peace bubble, the Hamas victory and Second Lebanon War in 2006 put an end to any concept of a solution by unilateral action. After the shattering of those two great illusions, is it absolutely clear that in the years to come no one- sided Israeli pullout to the Green Line will be possible. As the leader of the peace camp and as one who did more than anyone else to achieve peace, I say today with pain that we will not achieve true peace in our generation. Therefore our generation's duty is to manage the conflict, while reducing the occupation and setting its limits. Our generation's role is to build the infrastructure that will enable Israelis and Palestinians to achieve peace – but not in our time. Our Palestinian neighbors must follow Salam Fayyad's way – they must build the emerging Palestine and adopt a positive life ethos. We Israelis must establish a strong government and form broad national agreements, which will enable us, when the time comes, to dismantle our Algeria as France dismantled hers. But the ripening process will take time for both Palestinians and Israelis. The shelf-agreement idea is surreal and dangerous. The Annapolis process is reckless and groundless. Don't let the cynics mislead you: Those racing toward peace are the enemies of peace. Those wishing to win the next elections with a meaningless piece of paper are the ones jeopardizing the two-state solution. However, there is another truth, which is even more difficult to accept. The Second Lebanon War laid bare the real challenge Israel now faces – its intentions don't count, only what may be achieved counts. There's really no argument about where the national train hopes to head. But the train is going nowhere – its engine has been lost and the first-class coaches have been de-coupled from all the rest. Facing today's challenge cannot be delayed. It obliges us to demand excellence of ourselves, to change the government's function and improve the administration with 1,000 quality appointments. To revolutionize education and strengthen the rule of law, to bolster the IDF and stand behind it, to define the national goals and shared values we live by and fight for. To rejuvenate the Israeli spirit. Citizens of Israel, during the state's 60 years Israel has reached breathtaking achievements. As a fighter, commander and citizen I have learned to recognize the merits of the society we have created here. I believe in us, in our hidden power. But to implement these powers we need an accurate view of the situation, a definite action plan and an honest leadership. This is why I am ending my long silence today. This is why I stand before you tonight to tell each and every one of you what the state of the nation is and what the national agenda is. This is the draft, more or less. It could be shortened or lengthened. It could be dulled or sharpened. But if there is a Barak, if he still exists – let him appear immediately. For as Barak knows better than anyone, only he who dares, wins. www.reiner-bernstein.de 365 – Chronologie 2008

157 Theo Sommer: Militärischer Beistand? Angela Merkel hat bei ihrem Besuch in Israel bewegende Worte gefunden. Doch deren Bedeutung ist auslegungsfähig, in „Die Zeit“ 19.03.2008: Bei ihrem Besuch in Israel hat die Bundeskanzlerin das Verhältnis von Deutschland und Israel auf eine neue Grundlage gestellt. Es ist ein schwieriges Verhältnis, auf ewig überschattet von dem millionenfachen Mord an Europas Juden, mit denen das Hitlerregime die Deutschen auf Generationen hinaus zu Schuld und Scham verurteilt hat. Angela Merkel hat darüber bewegende Worte gefunden – Worte freilich, die sie kaum ausbuchstabiert hat. So versicherte sie, die historische Verantwortung Deutschlands für die Sicherheit Israels sei Teil der Staatsräson unseres Landes. Sie setzte hinzu: „Die Sicherheit Israels ist für mich als deutsche Bundeskanzlerin niemals verhandelbar, und wenn das so ist, dann dürfen das in der Stunde der Bewährung keine leeren Worte bleiben.“ Was aber soll dies konkret bedeuten? Nur, dass wir die Raketenangriffe der Hamas verurteilen? Und dass wir iranische Drohungen gegen Israel ernst nehmen? Oder macht eine Unterabteilung des Führungsstabs der Bundeswehr bereits contingency plans für militärische Aktionen „in der Stunde der Bewährung"? In welchem Rahmen – UN, Nato, Koalition der Willigen – müsste man sich derlei Unternehmen vorstellen? Nach welchen Kriterien soll darüber entschieden werden? Und wie gedenkt Berlin das deutsche Volk auf solche eventuelle Notwendigkeiten vorzubereiten? Auch eine weitere Frage hat die Kanzlerin offen gelassen: Wie handelt die Bundesregierung, wenn eine schwere Krise abermals durch israelische Fehlkalkulation wie den letzten Libanon-Krieg ausgelöst wird? Impliziert die Verpflichtung auf die Sicherheit Israels in jeglichem Fall unsere automatische Unterstützung – auch wo israelische Unklugheit den Widerstand der Palästinenser hervorruft, beispielsweise in der Besatzungs- und Besiedlungspolitik? Natürlich ist Israels Sicherheit „nicht verhandelbar“ – eine befremdliche Formulierung übrigens, denn wer wollte oder sollte schon Israels Sicherheit wegverhandeln wollen. Aber eine diplomatische Lösung, für die Angela Merkel wiederum eingetreten ist, für die Verwirklichung der „Vision von zwei Staaten in sicheren Grenzen und Frieden“ reicht es nicht aus, den Israelis Carte blanche zu erteilen. Eine einseitige Pauschalfestlegung Berlins zugunsten Israels, die als Freibrief verstanden werden mag, kann den Friedensprozess lediglich erschweren, nicht jedoch ihn befördern. Wer einen sicheren Staat Israel und einen sicheren palästinensischen Staat im friedlichen Nebeneinander der Völker will, der muss sowohl Israelis als auch Palästinensern offene Worte sagen. Leere Worte, um den Begriff Angela Merkels aufzugreifen, helfen in der Stunde der Bewährung nicht weiter, aber auch nicht in normalen Zeiten. Floskeln, deren Bedeutung auslegungsfähig vage bleiben, mögen einem Staatsbesuch zum Erfolg verhelfen. Für einen Frieden braucht es mehr.

158 Rede von Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel vor der Knesset in Jerusalem, 18.03.2008: Sehr geehrter Herr Staatspräsident, sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrter Herr Premierminister, sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin des Obersten Gerichtshofes, sehr geehrte Mitglieder der Knesset, sehr geehrte Damen und Herren, www.reiner-bernstein.de 366 – Chronologie 2008

Frau Präsidentin, Anni modda lachem – sche-nittan li – le-dabber ellechem – kaan be-bait mechubad se. Se kawwod gadol awurri. [Ich danke Ihnen, hier zu Ihnen sprechen zu dürfen. Ich empfinde dies als eine große Ehre.] Ich danke allen Abgeordneten der Knesset dafür. Ich danke allen, dass ich in meiner Muttersprache heute zu Ihnen sprechen darf. Ich spreche zu Ihnen in einem besonderen Jahr. Denn in diesem Jahr – 2008 – feiern Sie den 60. Jahrestag der Gründung Ihres Staates, des Staates Israel. 60 Jahre Israel – das sind 60 Jahre großartiger Aufbauarbeit der Menschen unter schwierigen Bedingungen. 60 Jahre Israel – das sind 60 Jahre Herausforderungen im Kampf gegen Bedrohungen und für Frieden und Sicherheit. 60 Jahre Israel – das sind 60 Jahre Integration von Zuwanderern in das Gemeinwesen dieses Staates. 60 Jahre Israel – das ist ein Land voller Vitalität und Zuversicht, mit technologischen Spitzenleistungen, mit kulturellem Reichtum und Traditionen. 60 Jahre Israel – das ist somit vor allem ein Anlass zu großer Freude. Im Namen der Bundesregierung und der deutschen Bevölkerung gratuliere ich allen Bürgerinnen und Bürgern Israels zu diesem Jubiläum. Meine Damen und Herren, Deutschland und Israel sind und bleiben – und zwar für immer – auf besondere Weise durch die Erinnerung an die Shoah verbunden. Genau deshalb haben wir die ersten deutsch-israelischen Regierungskonsultationen gestern mit dem Gedenken in Yad Vashem begonnen. Der im deutschen Namen verübte Massenmord an sechs Millionen Juden hat unbeschreibliches Leid über das jüdische Volk, über Europa und die Welt gebracht. Die Shoah erfüllt uns Deutsche mit Scham. Ich verneige mich vor den Opfern, ich verneige mich vor den Überlebenden und vor all denen, die ihnen geholfen haben, dass sie überleben konnten. Der Zivilisationsbruch durch die Shoah ist beispiellos. Er hat bis heute Wunden hinterlassen. Er schien Beziehungen zwischen Israel und Deutschland zunächst geradezu unmöglich zu machen. In den israelischen Pässen stand lange Zeit der Satz: „Gilt für alle Länder mit Ausnahme Deutschlands." Umgekehrt habe ich selbst die ersten 35 Jahre meines Lebens in einem Teil Deutschlands – in der DDR – gelebt, der den Nationalsozialismus als westdeutsches Problem betrachtete. Auch den Staat Israel hat die DDR bis kurz vor ihrem Ende nicht anerkannt. Es dauerte über 40 Jahre, bis sich ganz Deutschland sowohl zu seiner historischen Verantwortung als auch zum Staat Israel bekennen konnte. Meine Damen und Herren, ich bin zutiefst davon überzeugt: Nur wenn sich Deutschland zu seiner immerwährenden Verantwortung für die moralische Katastrophe in der deutschen Geschichte bekennt, können wir die Zukunft menschlich gestalten. Oder anders gesagt: Menschlichkeit erwächst aus der Verantwortung für die Vergangenheit. Wir sagen oft: Deutschland und Israel verbinden besondere, einzigartige Beziehungen. Was aber ist damit genau gemeint – einzigartige Beziehungen? Ist sich gerade mein Land dieser Worte bewusst – und zwar nicht nur in Reden und Festveranstaltungen, sondern dann, wenn es darauf ankommt? Wie gehen wir zum Beispiel ganz konkret damit um, wenn die Gräueltaten des Nationalsozialismus relativiert werden? Hierauf kann es nur eine Antwort geben: Jedem Versuch dazu muss im Ansatz entgegengetreten werden. Antisemitismus, Rassismus und Fremdenfeindlichkeit dürfen in Deutschland und in Europa nie wieder Fuß fassen, und zwar weil alles andere uns insgesamt – die deutsche Gesellschaft, das europäische www.reiner-bernstein.de 367 – Chronologie 2008

Gemeinwesen, die demokratische Grundordnung unserer Länder – gefährden würde. Oder wie gehen wir damit um, wenn in Umfragen eine deutliche Mehrheit der Befragten in Europa sagt, die größere Bedrohung für die Welt gehe von Israel aus und nicht etwa vom Iran? Schrecken wir Politiker in Europa dann aus Furcht vor dieser öffentlichen Meinung davor zurück, den Iran mit weiteren und schärferen Sanktionen zum Stopp seines Nuklearprogramms zu bewegen? Nein, wie unbequem es auch sein mag, genau das dürfen wir nicht; denn täten wir das, dann hätten wir weder unsere historische Verantwortung verstanden noch ein Bewusstsein für die Herausforderungen unserer Zeit entwickelt. Beides wäre fatal. Genauso wäre es fatal, wenn wir die Frage ausblenden würden, wie wir die Erinnerung an die Shoah wach halten können, wenn eines Tages keine Zeitzeugen der Shoah mehr am Leben sein werden. Ja, es ist wahr: Orte des Gedenkens sind wichtig, Orte wie das Holocaust-Mahnmal in Berlin oder Yad Vashem. Sie halten die Erinnerung wach. Aber wahr ist auch: Orte allein reichen noch nicht aus, wenn Erinnerung Geschichte wird. Erinnerung muss sich immer wieder neu bewähren. Aus Gedanken müssen Worte werden und aus Worten Taten. Der erste Premierminister Ihres Landes, David Ben Gurion, und der erste Bundeskanzler meines Landes, Konrad Adenauer, haben uns genau das vorgemacht. Deshalb war es mir wichtig, am Sonntag in den Kibbuz Sde Boker zu fahren und dort am Grab von Ben Gurion einen Kranz niederzulegen. Denn es waren Ben Gurion und Adenauer, die den Gedanken Worte, den Worten Taten folgen ließen. Sie legten mit Vorsicht und Weitsicht die Grundlage für die Beziehungen zwischen unseren Staaten. Heute ist es an uns, an meiner Generation, zusammen mit der jungen Generation das Bewusstsein für eine Erinnerungskultur zu wecken, eine Erinnerungskultur, die auch dann trägt, wenn die Überlebenden der Shoah nicht mehr unter uns sein werden. Natürlich gibt es dafür kein Patentrezept. Aber diese Herausforderung zu erkennen und sie anzunehmen – genau das ist der erste entscheidende Schritt, um zusammen mit der Jugend kreative Wege für eine Erinnerungskultur der Zukunft zu entwickeln, und zwar in Israel und in Deutschland gemeinsam. Helfen kann uns dabei eine Kraft, die uns auch in den vergangenen Jahrzehnten geholfen hat: Es ist die Kraft zu vertrauen. Diese Kraft zu vertrauen hat ihren Ursprung in den Werten, die wir, Deutschland und Israel, gemeinsam teilen: den Werten von Freiheit, Demokratie und der Achtung der Menschenwürde. Sie ist das kostbarste Gut, das wir haben: die unveräußerliche und unteilbare Würde jedes einzelnen Menschen – ungeachtet seines Geschlechts, seiner Abstammung, seiner Sprache, seines Glaubens, seiner Heimat und Herkunft. Meine Damen und Herren, das Bewusstsein für die historische Verantwortung und das Eintreten für unsere gemeinsamen Werte – das bildet das Fundament der deutsch-israelischen Beziehungen von ihren Anfängen bis heute. Heute nun leben wir – die Deutschen wie die Israelis – wie alle Völker dieser Welt in einer Zeit mit gewaltigen Umbrüchen. Das Gefüge der Welt verändert sich. Die Vernetzung von Staaten, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaften erreicht ein bisher unbekanntes Maß. Viele Menschen haben Angst vor dieser Entwicklung. Sie spüren: Das Zusammenleben der Nationen, der Religionen und Kulturen gehört zu den großen, alles überragenden Themen der Gegenwart. Großartige Perspektiven stehen dicht neben erheblichen Risiken. Das ist Globalisierung. www.reiner-bernstein.de 368 – Chronologie 2008

Es ist meine feste Überzeugung: Angesichts dieser bahnbrechenden globalen Entwicklung brauchen wir über nationale Grenzen hinweg ein globales, ein gemeinsames Bewusstsein für die zentralen Herausforderungen unserer Welt – den fairen Anteil aller am Wohlstand, den Schutz des Klimas, den Kampf gegen die neuen Bedrohungen durch Terror und Massenvernichtungswaffen. Aber wir brauchen dieses Bewusstsein nicht nur dafür, die Herausforderungen zu erkennen, sondern wir brauchen es, um die Herausforderungen zu meistern. Das geht heute in vielen Bereichen kaum noch allein, sondern nur noch im Miteinander von Staaten, und zwar solchen Staaten, die als Partner durch Werte und Interessen verbunden sind. Für mich steht außer Frage: Israel und Deutschland, Israel und Europa sind solche Partner – verbunden durch gemeinsame Werte, verbunden durch gemeinsame Herausforderungen und verbunden durch gemeinsame Interessen; denn Stabilität, wirtschaftliche Prosperität, Sicherheit und Frieden in Europa wie in dieser Region sind in unserem beiderseitigen Interesse. Genau in diesem Bewusstsein haben wir mit den ersten deutsch- israelischen Regierungskonsultationen ein neues Kapitel in der Geschichte der Beziehungen unserer beiden Staaten aufgeschlagen. Genau in diesem Bewusstsein haben wir ein ganzes Bündel von Projekten und Vorhaben verabschiedet: in der Außen- und Verteidigungspolitik, im Bereich der Wirtschaft, für den Austausch der Jugend, in der Zusammenarbeit von Justiz und Umweltschutz und nicht zuletzt auch im Bereich von Wissenschaft und Forschung. Es ist keine Übertreibung, wenn wir feststellen: Die Beziehungen unserer beiden Länder sind ausgezeichnet. Aber wir wollen diese Verbindungen und das Vertrauen zwischen unseren Völkern noch weiter stärken. Wir wollen unsere Partnerschaft noch weiter festigen: in der Jugendarbeit – zum Beispiel durch ein gemeinsames deutsch-israelisches Zukunftsforum, das in einer gemeinsamen Stiftung junge Deutsche und Israelis in Wirtschaft, Wissenschaft und Kultur einander noch näher bringen wird –, im Wissenschaftsbereich – zum Bespiel durch das gemeinsame Deutsch- Israelische Jahr der Wissenschaft und Technologie –, auf dem Gebiet der wirtschaftlichen Beziehungen – zum Beispiel, indem Unternehmen in beiden Ländern das Potential vor allem in den zukunftsweisenden Branchen noch stärker als bisher nutzen – und im Bereich von Umwelt- und Klimaschutz – zum Beispiel, indem das Hochtechnologieland Israel sein umfassendes Know-how insbesondere auch im Bereich Wasser und Bewässerungswirtschaft einbringen kann und indem eine neue Form der trilateralen Zusammenarbeit zwischen Deutschland, Israel und Afrika entwickelt wird. Meine Damen und Herren, über all diese und weitere Zukunftsprojekte und Vorhaben haben wir gestern beraten. Aber all diese Projekte spielen sich nicht im luftleeren Raum ab; denn während wir beraten haben, ist Israel bedroht. Während wir hier sprechen, leben Tausende von Menschen in Angst und Schrecken vor Raketenangriffen und Terror der Hamas. Ich sage klar und unmissverständlich: Die Kassam-Angriffe der Hamas müssen aufhören. Terrorangriffe sind ein Verbrechen, und sie bringen keine Lösung in dem Konflikt, der die Region und das tägliche Leben der Menschen in Israel und das Leben der Menschen in den palästinensischen Autonomiegebieten überschattet. Ich habe wiederholt zum Ausdruck gebracht und sage es auch hier: Deutschland tritt entschieden für die Vision von zwei Staaten in sicheren Grenzen und in Frieden ein, für das jüdische Volk in Israel und das www.reiner-bernstein.de 369 – Chronologie 2008

palästinensische in Palästina. Nachdrücklich unterstützen wir deshalb in der Folge der Annapolis-Konferenz alle Bemühungen – insbesondere auch die der amerikanischen Regierung –, die dazu beitragen, diese Vision in die Tat umzusetzen, und die helfen, Frieden in der Region herzustellen. Ich weiß sehr wohl: Sie brauchen keine ungebetenen Ratschläge von außen und schon gar nicht von oben herab. Eine Lösung kann am Ende nur durch Sie hier in Israel und die Palästinenser selbst erfolgen. Aber Unterstützung durch die internationale Gemeinschaft will ich Ihnen und Ihren Verhandlungspartnern auf palästinensischer Seite, vorneweg Präsident Abbas, ausdrücklich anbieten. Denn wir wissen, dass es zur Umsetzung der Vision von zwei Staaten Kompromisse bedarf, die von allen Seiten akzeptiert werden. Es bedarf auch der Kraft zu schmerzhaften Zugeständnissen. Wir wissen, dass es nicht nur im Interesse der Region hier ist, diesen schwierigen Prozess zum Erfolg zu führen, sondern in unser aller Interesse; denn Instabilität hier bleibt auch für uns in Deutschland und Europa nicht ohne Folgen. So birgt gerade auch die Lage im Libanon große Unsicherheit. Deutschland unterstützt die Bemühungen der Arabischen Liga, um die Krise dort zu lösen. Das aber wird nur gehen, wenn auch Syrien die legitime Regierung des Libanon endlich anerkennt und einen konstruktiven Beitrag zur Lösung der Krise leistet. Dazu fordere ich Syrien auch von dieser Stelle aus auf. Meine Damen und Herren, besonderen Anlass zur Sorge geben ohne Zweifel die Drohungen, die der iranische Präsident gegen Israel und das jüdische Volk richtet. Seine wiederholten Schmähungen und das iranische Nuklearprogramm sind eine Gefahr für Frieden und Sicherheit. Wenn der Iran in den Besitz der Atombombe käme, dann hätte das verheerende Folgen – zuerst und vor allem für die Sicherheit und Existenz Israels, dann für die gesamte Region und schließlich – weit darüber hinaus – für alle in Europa und der Welt, für alle, denen die Werte Freiheit, Demokratie und Menschenwürde etwas bedeuten. Das muss verhindert werden. Dabei muss eines klar sein – ich habe es bereits vor den Vereinten Nationen im vergangenen September gesagt und ich wiederhole es heute –: Nicht die Welt muss Iran beweisen, dass der Iran die Atombombe baut. Iran muss die Welt überzeugen, dass er die Atombombe nicht will. Gerade an dieser Stelle sage ich ausdrücklich: Jede Bundesregierung und jeder Bundeskanzler vor mir waren der besonderen historischen Verantwortung Deutschlands für die Sicherheit Israels verpflichtet. Diese historische Verantwortung Deutschlands ist Teil der Staatsräson meines Landes. Das heißt, die Sicherheit Israels ist für mich als deutsche Bundeskanzlerin niemals verhandelbar – und wenn das so ist, dann dürfen das in der Stunde der Bewährung keine leeren Worte bleiben. Deutschland setzt gemeinsam mit seinen Partnern auf eine diplomatische Lösung. Die Bundesregierung wird sich dabei, wenn der Iran nicht einlenkt, weiter entschieden für Sanktionen einsetzen. Die vor wenigen Tagen verabschiedete neue Resolution des UN- Sicherheitsrates hat die Entschlossenheit und die Geschlossenheit der internationalen Gemeinschaft erneut unter Beweis gestellt. Die internationale Gemeinschaft wird und muss diesen Weg fortsetzen. Ich werde mich auch in der Europäischen Union für eine klare Haltung einsetzen. Für mich ist es wichtig, dass Israel über die Mittelmeerkooperation der Europäischen Union und die europäische Nachbarschaftspolitik eng mit der Europäischen Union verbunden ist. Diese Verbindung können und werden wir weiter intensivieren. Ich sagte es: Israel und Europa sind durch gemeinsame Werte, Herausforderungen www.reiner-bernstein.de 370 – Chronologie 2008

und Interessen verbunden. Deshalb unterstütze ich ausdrücklich die von Israel gewünschte stärkere Annäherung an die Europäische Union. Sie wäre für beide Seiten ein Gewinn. Sie böte eine Vielzahl neuer Chancen. Frau Präsidentin, meine Damen und Herren, in der Geschichte ihres Kontinents haben die Europäer erfahren: Frieden ist auch nach Jahrhunderten gewalttätiger Auseinandersetzungen möglich. Insbesondere wir Deutsche haben durch das Wunder des Mauerfalls und der Wiedervereinigung erlebt: Auch nach Jahrzehnten, wenn schon viele den Gedanken daran verloren haben, können sich tiefgreifende politische Veränderungen ergeben. Ich könnte heute nicht vor Ihnen stehen, und ich könnte heute nicht als Bundeskanzlerin der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, die in der ehemaligen DDR aufgewachsen ist, zu Ihnen sprechen, wenn es nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg in der damaligen Bundesrepublik nicht Politiker wie Konrad Adenauer, Willy Brandt und Helmut Kohl gegeben hätte. Sie haben an die Kraft der Freiheit, an die Kraft der Demokratie und an die Kraft der Menschenwürde geglaubt. Sie haben es so vermocht, das scheinbar Unmögliche möglich zu machen: die Vollendung der Einheit Deutschlands in Frieden und Freiheit und damit die Versöhnung des europäischen Kontinents. Aus der Erfahrung, dass das Unmögliche möglich werden kann, können wir die Entschlossenheit und die Zuversicht schöpfen, dass sich auch jede Anstrengung lohnt, die den Nahen Osten einen großen Schritt näher zu einem friedlichen Miteinander bringt. Oder um es mit den bekannten Worten von David Ben Gurion zu sagen: "Wer nicht an Wunder glaubt, der ist kein Realist." Wenn wir heute, zum 60. Jahrestag der Gründung des Staates Israel, auf die deutsch-israelischen Beziehungen schauen, dann wissen wir: Sein Satz hat sich als ebenso realistisch wie richtig erwiesen. Ja, es sind besondere, einzigartige Beziehungen – mit immerwährender Verantwortung für die Vergangenheit, mit gemeinsamen Werten, mit gegenseitigem Vertrauen, mit großer Solidarität füreinander und mit vereinter Zuversicht. In diesem Geist feiern wir das heutige Jubiläum. In diesem Geist wird Deutschland Israel nie allein lassen, sondern treuer Partner und Freund sein. Masal-tov le-chagigot schischim schana le-medinat Israel. Shalom. [Herzlichen Glückwunsch zu 60 Jahren Staat Israel! Shalom!] Quelle: www.bundesregierung.de .

159 Tom Segev: Merkel condemns Qassams, but ignores Israel’s actions, in “Haaretz”-Online 19.03.2008: German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier left Israel only hours before Chancellor Angela Merkel took to the Knesset podium Tuesday afternoon. The Germans meticulously calculated that the entourage of ministers accompanying Merkel might make her seem imperious, as though she were a ruler surrounded by subjects. Indeed, there was something imperious about the inclusion of so many ministers in Merkel's delegation. The Germans already have held joint government sessions with other governments, such as France and Poland. No foreign government has held a session in Jerusalem since the British mandate. Prior to her arrival, Merkel made an effort to call Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad. But her joint session with Olmert's government was a show of complete and unequivocal support for its policies. Threatening Israel's existence is www.reiner-bernstein.de 371 – Chronologie 2008

akin to threatening Germany's, Merkel said during her visit. Even U.S. politicians never have made such a statement. During her Knesset speech, Merkel spoke extensively about the Holocaust and her country's friendship with Israel; these were heart-warming, yet predictable, remarks. It is often said the two countries have a special relationship. Beforehand, such a remark always related to the Holocaust, which loomed large; nowadays, it refers to the two countries' affinity in almost every field, including security, cultural and economic ties. One cannot imagine Israel's cultural scene without the millions invested by Germany. MK Avishay Braverman (Labor), formerly the president of Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, said Tuesday that at times, Germany aided his institution more than the Israeli government did. With that in mind, it seems curious that the two countries failed to sign a cultural ties agreement during Merkel's trip, but the deal was not thwarted because of emotional residues. Rather, what prevented it were perfectly prosaic issues: The Germans asked that the Goethe Institute receive tax breaks, which Israel rejected. Anyone unaware of where Merkel was speaking (Jerusalem) would never have known it is a city where a third of its citizens have been living under occupation for more than 40 years, a city divided by a wall reminiscent of the Berlin Wall. Merkel spoke of the need for "painful concessions" from both sides in the name of peace. Olmert has used this term as well. She rightfully described the Qassam rocket fire on Sderot as a crime, but did not say a word about repeated human rights abuses in the West Bank, the bombing of residential areas in Gaza or the settlements. Olmert was caught on camera telling Merkel that all the construction workers building a house in front of his residence are Arabs, and the chancellor gave a concerned nod in return. Had she been more balanced, Merkel might have made life in Israel and the occupied territories less intolerable. Perhaps she made an error. Either way, her unrestrained support for Israeli policy is a result of her biography. As she said Tuesday, she came from East Germany, which used to ignore its part in Nazi crimes and act as though it were West Germany's fault alone. After German unification, Merkel discovered that the moral and political responsibility for the genocide of the Jews rested equally on all Germans. Most West Germans already had grown accustomed to that knowledge. One of her insiders equated her stance on Israel to that of a convert embracing a new set of beliefs. But either way, Merkel's stance does not represent Germany's or Israel's public discourse.

160 Meron Rapoport: Police arrest rabbi for ‘inciting Palestinians in East Jerusalem, in “Haaretz”-Online 14.03.2008: Israel Police on Thursday arrested Arik Ascherman, the executive director of Rabbis for Human Rights, for "inciting Palestinians to oppose the police" in East Jerusalem. Heated tensions between residents of the Silwan village in East Jerusalem and the Israel Police erupted over excavation works that have recently began in the village. The excavations are being carried out by the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) and are sponsored by Elad association, which promotes the "Judaization" of East Jerusalem. Silwan residents say the excavation work is being carried out directly underneath their homes, and have proceeded to set up a demonstration tent on a private lot belonging to one of the village residents. A few www.reiner-bernstein.de 372 – Chronologie 2008

confrontations subsequently broke out, and the residents maintained that the police deliberately harassed them. On Wednesday another spat occurred between the local residents and settlers on behalf of Elad, and the police detained Ascherman for questioning. The police requested that Ascherman promise to stay away from Silwan for 15 days and upon his refusal to oblige, he was arrested and will be brought in front of a judge Friday for his remand to be extended. Ascherman's attorney on Thursday said the investigator had accused her client, a well-known human rights' activist, of encouraging Palestinians to oppose police forces, and also of preventing the evacuation of a wounded settler to hospital. The attorney further stated that Ascherman adamantly denies the allegations. "This is a ridiculous arrest," his attorney said. "In the past, the court has refused to adhere to police demands for issuing restraining orders against Israeli activists in Silwan."

161 Reuven Kaminer, Jerusalem: The Personal is the Political. Dafna is active in Women in Black in Jerusalem. If Dafna is in the country, then rain or shine, she and her sisters take up their position in Hagar (Paris) Square denouncing the occupation and violence. I must admit that if there is any serious security tension in Jerusalem towards the end of the week, I become fraught with concern over the possibility that the vigil may be attacked. The criminal attack at the Merkaz Ha’rav Yeshiva occurred on Thursday at 8 PM. The country, the media and many ordinary citizens were seething with anger, most of it blatantly racist. If you are planning to go to the streets to continue the weekly protest, you are worried about Israelis who might be looking for revenge. There are settler crazies out there plotting away, though they really prefer taking out their frustrations on Palestinians. But there are any number of Jerusalemites, who can become unhinged. It was clear early Thursday evening that the vigil would be tense. The vigil does enjoy a modicum of police protection, but it is very lay back. Their goal is more to protect the peace than anything else. Still, better than nothing. There were indeed 3-4 passers by that felt the need to scream and curse. Pretty ugly, but this is par for the course, when it looks like you can assume that the verbal attack will not get physical. But on Friday, March 7, 2007, the women were accosted by an extraordinarily viscous brute. The hooligan, who seems to have been an American, was brandishing the front page of a newspaper brandishing the photographs of the eight Merkaz HaRav victims right in the faces of the women and screaming Hamas Whores, Hamas Whores. He was of course working himself into a frenzy and screaming (in English). A policeman did gently move him away from direct physical contact with the women, but then the thug took up a position in the middle of the street and continued his harangue, explicitly demanding that the Hamas Whores submit to his crazed sexual demands. The police did not see this as a reason to interfere. He was still uncomfortably close to the vigil when it began to break-up. The women had previously decided to have a very small party at the end of the vigil for one of the participants who was marking her 99 th birthday. The thug had by this time gathered around him a few local fanatics. These grouped into a small gang of hooligans which accosted three groups of women on their way from the vigil, pushing and shoving and banging on the car of one woman. The police were gone by then. www.reiner-bernstein.de 373 – Chronologie 2008

During the week, a delegation of women met with the police and requested a firmer hand against any form of harassment, which can easily set the stage for really violent attacks. Things were generally quiet this last Friday. So if you want to know the meaning of courage and steadfastedness in the face of mounting chauvinist tension, come then, in body or spirit, to their vigil and stand with the Women in Black who are standing in Paris Square for peace, against hatred and racism.

162 Vgl. www.pcpsr.org .

163 Amira Hass: The PA’s hollow protests. In “Haaretz”-Online 13.3.2008: Senior Palestinian Authority officials can justifiably say that settlement construction continues despite everyone's protests and condemnations – not only theirs. Europe is protesting, Peace Now is protesting, the United Nations is protesting and even Condoleezza Rice protests occasionally, not to mention Israel's literary elite. The settlements continue to expand, along with the number of roads closed to Palestinians. PA officials will say that the antithetical tactics to negotiations and protests – the Qassam rockets, guerrilla operations and suicide attacks – have not helped matters. In fact, they have only provided Israel with more excuses to confiscate land. The evacuation of the settlements in the Gaza Strip, it should be said again, was a brilliant move by Israel to speed up the political separation between the West Bank and Gaza; it all the while masqueraded as "the beginning of the pullout." The condemnations heard from the PA camp are for internal purposes only. It is a way of telling the Palestinian public that its representatives are in the same boat as the weak population that suffers under occupation, just as the armed struggle is intended to show the Palestinian public which organization really knows how to exact revenge. The PA's condemnations prove how ridiculous and impotent they truly are. They signal to both Israel and the Palestinians that it does not matter how many new settlement homes will be erected, a Palestinian partner will always take his place at the "peace process" show. Negotiations and armed struggle are not the only means of fighting the occupation. The question of why the Palestinians have not adopted Mahatma Gandhi's non-violent resistance should be addressed to PA leaders – not the millions of Palestinians who every day wage an unarmed struggle against the sophisticated and advanced methods of oppression. The protests would sound completely different if the protesters were to organize a calculated public revolt against Israel's tactics of annexation. There is no lack of opportunities. There are hundreds of concrete barriers blocking exits to villages. The PA could send a bulldozer to remove one of them every day. Senior officials could come along: Mahmoud Abbas or someone from his bureau, heads of security organizations, members of the PLO central committee, senior Fatah representatives, ministers and directors general. There are roads that are forbidden to Palestinian cars. PA officials and West Bank residents could form a long convoy of cars and drive on these roads. Many Israelis would be happy to join them. Building and development are banned in Area C. The Palestinian planning office could order the appropriate Palestinian ministries to put up electricity lines, to prepare the infrastructure to connect villages to the water carrier, to dig cisterns to collect rainwater, to build schools, clinics and houses. Maybe even dig wells. All of the things that the Israeli occupation www.reiner-bernstein.de 374 – Chronologie 2008

authorities forbid to do on 60 percent of the West Bank. Here, too, there will be no small number of Israelis opposed to the occupation who will join up. The Civil Administration will come and destroy it all. Then build it again. The senior officials accompanying the work will be arrested. Even better. Should only the residents of Bil'in be arrested for their unarmed struggle against the occupation? It is possible to come up with hundreds of other measures of this kind, which could replace the official Palestinian governmental plan, and force the leadership away from their "make-believe state," and bring them back to battle for liberation. True, these measures alone cannot end the colonization, but they have the potential to end the status quo that is so convenient for Israel: expanding settlements, endless negotiations, protests and shootings. There is a potential here to change the alienated relations between the people and their representatives, to create a new type of Palestinian diplomacy. But it is also true that such a vision has no chance. The present PA and PLO leadership has grown accustomed to living as a nomenclature. They are confusing the interests of their own people with their relatively comfortable ceremonial status; a status that is their reward for being willing to participate in a spectacle of respectability scripted by the Americans and Europeans for the benefit of Israel.

164 Shavit spielt darauf an, dass „Shas” den Ausbau der jüdischen Vorstädte Jerusalems als ihren politischen Sieg reklamiert. Vgl. dazu die Eintragung am 09.03.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

165 Ari Shavit: Meretz needs Gal-On’s moral compass, in „Haaretz“-Online 10.3.2008: Israel needs Meretz more than ever. With prospects for peace receding on the horizon, Israel needs a peace party like Meretz. When the rule of law is under attack, Israel needs a party of law like Meretz. When the rich do as they please in this country, Israel needs a social-democratic party like Meretz. When the prime minister surrenders unconditionally to Shas, Israel needs a secular party like Meretz. Even those who are not comfortable with every jot and tittle of the Geneva Initiative ought to hope that next week's Meretz leadership primary renews and strengthens Israel's human rights party. Meretz's current situation is not bright. The party that was once chic and popular has, over the years, become gray and dusty. The party of radical youth has become established and calcified. Premature aging overtook this party of the sane left. It lost the fighting spirit that was its heart and soul. It lost its relevance and immediacy. It lost its ability to offer real tidings to the young, the subversive, the Greens and the seekers of justice. Therefore, if it does not choose wisely next week, Meretz is liable to turn into a pocket edition of its elder sister, Labor. The Meretz establishment believes that the best person to rehabilitate the party is Haim (Jumas) Oron. Yossi Beilin, Shulamit Aloni and Amos Oz all announced their support for him yesterday. Oron is indeed a worthy candidate – judicious, responsible and pleasant-mannered. He is someone whom everyone loves to love. But is Jumas really the man of principle who can reignite Meretz's fire? Does Oron offer the new face that will win the confidence of the young and compete with the rise of the Greens? The man who, together with Haim Ramon, dismantled Hevrat Ha'ovdim (the Histadrut labor federation's www.reiner-bernstein.de 375 – Chronologie 2008

holding company) is more establishment than any member of the ruling establishment. His virtues are those of Labor's top brass, not those of the leader of a radical, value-based party that needs a fresh spirit. Zahava Gal-On is the opposite of Oron. Not everyone loves Gal-On. Gal- On does not wrap the country's leaders in cotton wool; she fights them. Yet in an era of debased politics, she proves, day after day, that a different way is possible. Gal-On (like Shelly Yachimovich [Knesset member of the Labor Party]) has an anatomical part that most of the men in the Knesset lack: a spine. And where there is a spine, there is also a voice. A voice that speaks out for the rights of women, Palestinians and foreign workers. A voice that speaks out against those who corrupt and are corrupted. A voice that speaks out for the rule of law and against those who assail it. A voice that spoke out against the last war and against the government of cynics that is liable to drag us into the next war. Meretz members must be honest with themselves: They do not currently have a single leadership candidate who is capable of restoring the party's past glory. Only a joint leadership of Oron and Gal-On is capable of doing the job. And because the establishment will put Oron on top, the rank-and- file membership must ensure that Gal-On is there as well. Without Gal- On’s moral compass and strong voice, Meretz will not find its way.”

166 Yossi Beilin, Tel Aviv 22 March 2008: Dear friends, With the election of Haim Oron (also known as "Jumes") to the leadership of the Meretz party last week, I stepped down as Meretz chairman after four years in office. I supported Jumes in this race, and I am confident that under his leadership the party will be in good and able hands. As I said last December when I announced my decision not to seek another term, I feel an ideological closeness with Jumes, and I look forward to working with him, both in the Knesset and outside, in pushing the Meretz agenda of peace and social justice. As always, but perhaps with a particular urgency in the next few months, will be our efforts to press on the Israeli government to reach an historic agreement with the Palestinians. As I see it, 2008 (and the months are ticking) presents us with a window of opportunity. If we do not reach an agreement before the year is over, we may again find ourselves in a long period of deadlock, be it because the new administration in Washington, which will take over in January 2009, will need a substantial period of time before it decides to invest itself in a solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; or because the new Palestinian president, who will succeed Mahmoud Abbas next year, might turn out to be someone uneager to make peace; or because Israel itself will have a new and rightist government, one that will be wary of reaching an agreement that entails giving up territory. To be sure, the complexities on the ground are enormous, and the odds for an Israeli-Palestinian agreement by the end of 2008 are, at best, limited. But I believe that even a small chance for a historic agreement warrants a great effort. At the same time, and in parallel to our efforts to reach an agreement with the PLO, we will focus on two additional fronts. The first is to encourage Egypt to facilitate a ceasefire agreement between Israel and the Hamas, which would include arrangements at the border crossings of the Gaza Strip as well as the release of Gilad Shalit. The second involves negotiations on a comprehensive agreement with Syria. There is today a real opportunity for a major breakthrough between Israel and Syria, and this opportunity should not be missed. To this effect, Israel should respond favorably to the announcement made last week by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov www.reiner-bernstein.de 376 – Chronologie 2008

that Russia would like to host a peace summit in Moscow later this year. Such a summit would follow up on last November's Annapolis conference and aim specifically at launching Israeli-Syrian talks. In view of all these challenges, I know that Meretz will continue acting as the responsible opposition that it has been over the past few years. For my part, I will use my time to dedicate myself even more than I have in the last four years to advancing the prospects of peace. Thank you, as always, for your continued support.

167 Assaf Uni: For German media, Gaza is not an issue, in „Haaretz“- Online 10.3.2008: MUNICH – No one mentioned the Gaza Strip. The eight senior reporters of Bayerischer Rundfunk (Bavarian Broadcasting) sat Tuesday facing Israel's ambassador to Germany, Yoram Ben-Ze'ev. They asked him about the special relationship between the two countries, the conflict with Hezbollah and Iran's nuclear program. But the latest escalation in the Gaza Strip, in which three Israelis and more than 100 Palestinians were killed, whose shocking photographs were broadcast the world over and forced the Foreign Ministry to initiate a public relations offensive, was not mentioned in the television station's conference room near Munich. On this issue, Germany is unusual compared with the media throughout Europe, and Ben-Ze'ev understands this. The Qassam attacks against Israel and the offensive in the Gaza Strip received limited coverage here, perhaps because the events took place during the weekend, perhaps because of the severe storm that struck the region, or the Russian elections. Or maybe, just like the current German political leadership, most of the media is careful not to be excessively critical of Israel. Only the leftist newspaper TAZ published pictures of a dead Palestinian baby on its front page under the headline: "The Bombing of Gaza." The rest moved the photos and reports to the inside pages. "We cannot compare the media coverage in Germany to that in Britain or France," the ambassador said. "Israel's position here enjoys greater support than any other country in Europe. Of course, we need to constantly take action to sustain this situation, because it may change." And this is the purpose of the meetings held with the three main media outlets in Munich – Bavarian Broadcasting, whose Israel-based reporter serves as the correspondent for the public network ARD, senior editors of the center-left daily Sueddeutsche Zeitung, and the editors of the conservative magazine Focus. The ambassador, who took up his post four months ago, says he does not use the term "public relations" and talks of "cooperation." But his meetings to present Israel's position took on an air of urgency in light of the Gaza operation and the continued rocket barrage against Israel. So what interests German television when it meets Israel's ambassador? "How concerned is Israel about the threat posed by Arab population growth?" the editors asked. "Does the UN decision to impose further sanctions on Iran satisfy Israel?" "How do you see the differences in the treatment of Israel in Germany compared with other European countries?" "What is Israel's reaction to the meeting between the German foreign minister and his Syrian counterpart?" In the end, Ben-Ze'ev decided to raise the issue of Gaza on his own. "We want to make clear that we have nothing to apologize for," he said. "What are we supposed to do when we are faced with the daily bombing of www.reiner-bernstein.de 377 – Chronologie 2008

Sderot for years? There is no country in the world that has taken so many risks to the lives of its citizens to achieve peace as Israel has." The ambassador says his aim is to share with people the dilemmas facing Israel. "When I sit with the editors, I want them to sense the misgivings Israelis face, the fact that there is no black and white."

168 „Hoffnung“ bzw. Akronym für „Bataillone des libanesischen Widerstandes“. Militärischer Flügel der „Bewegung der Entrechteten“ („harakat al-mahrumin“), die von dem aus Iran stammenden Imam Musa Sadr gegründet wurde.

169 Vgl. dazu die Eintragung am 10.02.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

170 Talmud-Thora-Schule benannt nach dem von den Briten 1921 eingesetzten ersten aschkenasischen Oberrabbiner Abraham Isaac Kook (1865 – 1935). Von der Yeshiva ging im Februar 1974 die Gründung der Siedlerbewegung „Gush Emunim“ („Block der Glaubenstreuen“) aus. Vgl. Reiner Bernstein: Der verborgene Frieden. Politik und Religion im Nahen Osten. Berlin 2000, Kap. III.

171 Shahar Ilan: The great defeat of secularism, in „Haaretz“ 05.02.2009.

172 Abed Rabbo spielt damit auf die virtuelle Unabhängigkeitserklärung Palästinas seitens der PLO im November 1988 an.

173 Vgl. die gleichgerichteten Aussagen von Gershon Baskin am 13.07.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

174 Al-Haq Press Release, 10 July 2008: Seeking Justice Abroad: Bil’in Village Council Submits Case before Canadian Court Against Canadian Corporations for Involvement in Illegal Settlement Construction: In a continuation of their struggle for justice in the face of unlawful appropriation of their land, the people of Bil’in village yesterday commenced legal proceedings before the Superior Court of Quebec against Green Park International Inc. and Green Mount International Inc. The defendants are Canadian corporations registered in the Province of Quebec who have been involved in constructing, marketing and selling residential units in the illegal Jewish-Israeli settlement of Modi’in Illit in the occupied West Bank, on the land of the village of Bil’in. The land in question has been appropriated by the Israeli military authorities in violation of the laws of occupation. The defendants, on their own behalf and as de facto agents of the State of Israel, are constructing residential units on this Palestinian land for the purpose of housing Israeli settlers. The petitionfiled by the Village Council’s lawyer in Canada, Mark Arnold, demonstrates that in so doing, the defendants are aiding, abetting, assisting and conspiring with Israel, the Occupying Power in the West Bank, in carrying out an illegal act. Under the Fourth Geneva Convention, an Occupying Power is prohibited from transferring part of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies. Such transfer of settlers into occupied territory is a war crime under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, as well as under Canada’s Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act of 2000. The petition thus argues that through their actions, the defendant companies have wilfully or negligently participated in the violation of international humanitarian and criminal law, as well as domestic Canadian www.reiner-bernstein.de 378 – Chronologie 2008

law. As such, Bil’in Village Council is entitled to obtain the cessation of the illegal activities of the defendants, and to reparation for injury caused, under both the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms and the Civil Code of Quebec. On this basis, and on the basis of the fact that matters at issue in the case are not justiciable before the Israeli High Court of Justice (which instead defines settlements as a “political” issue, per Bargil v. Government of Israel , HCJ 4481/91), the petition seeks: – a declaration from the Superior Court of Quebec that the conduct of the defendants in constructing residential units in an illegal settlement is unlawful; – a permanent injunction and order requiring the defendants and their directors, officers and agents to forthwith cease all construction and related activity with regard to the land of Bil’in village; and – punitive damages of CAD$2 million, to be paid by the defendants to the plaintiffs, as a result of injury wilfully caused. The defendants have 10 days to file an appearance at the Montreal Court House. If they do so, the action will be presented before the Court on 11 August 2008. Should they fail to do so, a judgment by default may be rendered against them. Press conferences regarding the case will be held today, Thursday 10 July, at 1:00 pm local time at Ramattan Studios in Ramallah, and at 12:00 pm local time at the offices of Gardner Miller Arnold LLP in Toronto. All media are invited to attend. Al-Haq will continue to keep you informed of any further developments in the case. Please do not hesitate to contact haq(a)alhaq.org should you have any questions, comments or require further information. Background/Related Information Israel’s construction of the Annexation Wall in the area has facilitated the appropriation of Bil’in’s land, keeping the illegal Israeli settlement on the western side of the Wall and cutting off the Palestinian villagers from their land. Since 2005, the village’s resistance to the appropriation of its land has been marked by weekly non-violent demonstrations against the Wall. In September 2007, the Israeli High Court of Justice (HCJ) adjudged that the route of the Wall in Bil‘in was designed not for genuine security purposes, as claimed by the Israeli authorities, but rather to accommodate plans for the future expansion of the settlement of Modi‘in Illit, and was causing unjustified harm to the residents of Bil‘in. The Court ordered the Israeli authorities to propose an alternative route for the Wall in the area, such that unapproved settlement planning schemes were not taken into account. This decision, which has yet to be enforced, failed to give due regard to the 2004 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice, which held that the Wall inside the West Bank is illegal in its entirety and should be dismantled. The case in Canada regarding the Canadian corporations’ involvement in the unlawful settlement construction was filed yesterday, 9 July 2008, to mark the fourth anniversary of the issuing of the Advisory Opinion.

175 Vgl. die Eintragung am 16.05.2008 in dieser Zeitleiste.

176 Bei einem Bombenattentat auf die US-Botschaft in Beirut am 23.10.1983 wurden 241 US-Marines getötet. Am selben Tag sterben bei einem Selbstmordanschlag im Libanon 58 französische Soldaten. www.reiner-bernstein.de 379 – Chronologie 2008

177 Die Anschläge in Buenos Aires fanden am 17.03.1992 mit 29 Toten und am 18.07.1994 mit 85 Toten statt.

178 IDF Spokespersons announce detentions, 12 February 2008: During a joint IDF, ISA, Civil Administration and Israeli Police operation overnight, the forces searched homes and offices belonging to 14 Palestinian money changers suspected of being involved in transferring money for the financing of terrorist activity in Jenin, Nablus, Tulkarem, Hebron and Ramallah. IDF forces arrested five money changers and confiscated money, documents and magnetic media. A total of three million NIS was confiscated and transferred to the legal authority of the Bank of Israel. In addition, three handguns and other gun parts were discovered in the possession of four of the money changers. In recent years, terror organizations have raised millions of dollars and distributed the funds in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip. The money is transferred in various ways, mainly via money changers. During 2007 there was a marked increase in the sums of money transferred to Palestinian terror organizations. These funds enable terrorist organizations to maintain and expand their infrastructure, to finance and train terror operatives and to purchase and manufacture weapons for the perpetration of terrorist attacks against Israel. These finances "fuel the wheels of terrorism," and motivate the terror organizations to develop various conduits to allow the transfer of the funds from abroad. Regional money changers maintain direct relations with foreign money changers, located in Arab countries, who are connected to various global terrorist organizations. The transfer process occurs in the following manner: Money changers abroad deliver funds to money changers in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip, who then deliver them to terror operatives. It is important to emphasize that there is no supervision of money changers by the Palestinians Authority, which means that the money changers can take part in terrorist activity without restrictions or fear of sanctions. This operation is part of ongoing operations carried out in recent years by the IDF, the ISA, the Israel Police and other authorities, against the sources financing terror organizations, including: – In 2007 a Hamas financing operation was discovered in Jerusalem. This discovery revealed the Hamas fundraising routes from abroad, in addition to evidence of intensive Hamas activity in Jerusalem financed by the sources abroad. In the third quarter of 2007, a sum of approximately 12 million NIS was transferred to terror organizations. Most of the finances, approximately 8 million NIS, were transferred to the Hamas terrorist infrastructure in Judea and Samaria. – December, 2005 – The "Abu Akar" Company from Gaza was declared illegal by the Minister of Defense due to its assistance in funding terror organizations. – February, 2004 – 37 million NIS belonging to terror organizations were confiscated from main bank branches in Ramallah. These terror organizations provide "rewards for terror" – financial support to the families of terrorists injured, killed or imprisoned as a result of terrorist activity. These incentives encourage Palestinians to conduct terror attacks. Due to the provision of these funds, terrorists need not worry about the future of their families after a terror attack. www.reiner-bernstein.de 380 – Chronologie 2008

The IDF will continue to operate using all legal measures against anyone involved in assisting or funding terrorism in order to defend the security and lives of the citizens of Israel.

179 Marwan M. Kraidy: Arab States: Emerging Consensus to Muzzle Media, in “Arab Reform Bulletin” March 2008: After years of rhetoric about the need for a pan-Arab satellite television framework, Arab information ministers on February 12, 2008 adopted a charter that provides the tools to penalize broadcasters who attack leaders or air socially unacceptable content. The charter is broad ranging, covering news, political shows, and entertainment—even sports programs. In the weeks before the emergency meeting in Cairo, the Egyptian and Saudi information ministers lobbied their colleagues to pass the document, prepared by a committee of experts during the preceding six months. Even Syria, currently engaged in a media war with Saudi Arabia over Lebanon, signed off on the charter. While the charter’s passage seemed sudden, momentum toward action against satellite media has been building since the 2006 Lebanon war. When hostilities broke out, Egyptian and Saudi leaders at first condemned Hizbollah’s “adventurism,” then back-pedaled in light of Hizbollah’s resilience and the mounting civilian casualties of Israel’s onslaught. In the meantime, Hizbollah’s al-Manar television climbed to the top ten in pan- Arab ratings, and live talk-show hosts struggled to prevent callers from heaping verbal abuse on pro-U.S. Arab leaders. Though not criticized as harshly as the Saudi government, the Egyptian government has been contending with an increasingly media-savvy Muslim Brotherhood whose views are aired on al-Jazeera, Hamas’s al-Aqsa television, and throughout the Arabic-language blogosphere. Thus placing political restrictions on Arab airwaves was a shared Saudi-Egyptian interest. The resulting charter attempts to appeal to several constituencies. By penalizing content that allegedly promotes sexual activity and alcohol consumption, it placates socially conservative Islamists, including Egypt’s Brotherhood, which for years has advocated such restrictions. By purporting to protect “Arab identity from the harmful effects of globalization,” it appeals to Arab nationalists as well as Islamists. Finally, the charter has a populist provision, stipulating Arab viewers’ rights to information, including the right to watch some sports competitions on free- to-air government channels even when commercial channels hold exclusivity agreements. In addition to reasserting the rights of state television channels, this gives the charter some street credibility with Arab publics. The core of the charter is the prohibition of content that would “damage social harmony, national unity, public order, or traditional values”—echoing media laws in most Arab countries, virtually all of which have ambiguously worded language that penalizes criticism of leaders and thereby buttresses authoritarian rule. The ominous catchall provision against harming “national reputation” justifies a wide range of repressive measures. The charter also affirms current practice; several Arab states have revoked Arab satellite channels’ licenses to report from their territories. However consistent the charter may be with current laws and practices, implementation is likely to be uneven among Arab countries. Egypt and Saudi Arabia own Nilesat and Arabsat and can in theory disconnect undesirable channels. Although such actions carry political and business risks, Egypt has already demonstrated its intent to implement the charter by closing down the business channel al-Baraka on a flimsy pretext on www.reiner-bernstein.de 381 – Chronologie 2008

February 24. But Qatar declined to sign the charter, citing potential conflict with its own laws, and the Lebanese Information Minister called the charter a “guiding, not binding” document. Journalist unions are up in arms, and many writers are expressing suspicion that the charter is intended to silence criticism of U.S. policy and align Arab countries further with the U.S.-Israel axis in order to counter the rise of Iran. Responding to these accusations, Saudi Information Ministry Director Abdullah al-Jasir explained that the charter “distinguishes between incitement to violence and resistance to occupation.” Journalists are asking whether the charter will be applied to foreign Arabic-language satellite channels such as the U.S. al- Hurra, the Kremlin’s Russia Today, and Iran’s al-‘Alam. Also, commercial channels are likely to sue governments for infringing on their exclusive sports agreements. It remains unclear whether the charter is merely a symbolic gesture or whether it constitutes a concrete step toward a repressive pan-Arab media policy regime. With over 400 channels peddling fortune-tellers, alternative medicines, Jihadi ideas, titillating bodies, and stock market schemes alongside more mainstream news and entertainment, a regulatory framework is not in itself a bad idea. But Arab governments’ record on finding the fine line between preventing harmful content and protecting freedom of expression is dismal. With growing harassment and arrest of bloggers in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere, there is the troubling possibility of similarly sweeping charters regulating the Arab internet and mobile phones. Syrian comedian Durayd Lahham once quipped that “the only Arab officials who can agree on things are interior ministers,” who exchange information in order to harass each others’ dissidents as well as terrorists. Journalists, intellectuals, and dissidents are now worried that although Arab regimes disagree on many issues, their information ministers are finding common ground on muzzling speech. Marwan M. Kraidy is an expert on Arab media and Associate Professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg School for Communication.

180 Press Conference with Prime Minister Olmert and Chancellor Merkel, Berlin 12 February 2008: Thank you very much Chancellor Merkel for your invitation and the very warm hospitality which you have accorded to me and my delegation. It's not the first time, you have done it before and I have always enjoyed coming here and listening to your very interesting and deep perceptions of the realities that we face in our part of the world. I am particularly happy that we decided, following talks that we had in the past, to expand and broaden the base of relations between Germany and the State of Israel. As you have so correctly said, and we dealt with it in our private talks, deeply, that there is a very unique history to the relations between the German people and the Jewish people in the State of Israel. And you are fully aware, and deeply aware, of the enormous historical responsibility of Germany, for our past and therefore also for building up a different future. And the decision to broaden the base of relations between Germany and Israel, on the occasion of the 60th Anniversary of the State of Israel, is a very important development which would allow both of us not just to strengthen the relations but also to deepen the understanding – on both sides – of the significance of those relations given the history and at the same time given the future challenges which the State of Israel and the Jewish people face at this time in our lives. www.reiner-bernstein.de 382 – Chronologie 2008

We have discussed the issues which are on top of the agenda, first and foremost of course the peace process between us and the Palestinians. We have touched on the prospects for further understanding which hopefully will lead to a basis of an agreement between us and the Palestinian Authority, but at the same time we have discussed at some length the complexities, the sensitivities, the constraints within which we have to operate, particularly the continued terrorist actions against Israeli citizens coming from the south, but not only from the south, but in other parts of the territories. This is a very unique situation; how to keep a certain balance, one hand to carry on the battle against terror and at the same time not to stop the momentum of negotiations between us and the Palestinians. The only way which I think it can be done is to indeed carry on the negotiations with the Palestinians in order to help build a basis of hope that things would look better in the future, but at the same time not to stop our campaign against terrorists in Gaza and in other places. And I think our position has been made very clear: we will continue to fight the terrorists. We will not stop, we will not make any discount to anyone, we'll reach out for everyone and we will do it with strength, determination, and without any delays. I don't think we have to go into more details precisely how we are going to do it, and I know there are lots of speculations, lots of discussions, lots of suggestions, and propositions everywhere on what we should do exactly. That, I'm afraid, I will not share with you, but I can say one thing: the Israeli Government under my leadership is absolutely determined to respond to the challenge of terror from Gaza in every possible manner which will be effective. We will not hesitate, we will not stop, we'll do what's necessary to be done so that terrorists will understand that that leads nowhere. At the same time we will continue our negotiations with the Palestinian Authority lead by Abu Mazen, and Salam Fayad, and Abu Ala, people who have manifested over a long period of time that they are committed to the commitments made by the Palestinian Authority, that they want to fulfil the agreements signed between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, and that they are opposed to terror, and that they are prepared to share with us the burden that is necessary in order to carry on towards a peaceful, and fair and just understanding that will lead to peace between us and the Palestinians. These negotiations are going on, they are not easy, we try to move on forward with the easier, if one can describe, or this easy relative to what is more difficult in this very delicate complex. Well we try to move on forward through those issues that can be resolved perhaps faster than others, some other issues are on the agenda, but they will be discussed later including the issue of Jerusalem. But we are hopeful that we can make this movement and we'll make every possible effort to continue our discussions and I am scheduled to meet next week with Abu Mazen as part of this effort in the negotiations between us and the Palestinians on levels will continue. Finally, Chancellor mentioned the issue of Iran. Israel is on the opinion that the Iranians are moving forward with their plans to create a capacity for no conventional weapons. Nothing that we know has changed our attitude on this issue. We are certain that Iranians are engaged in a serious – part of it is clandestine – operation to build up a non conventional capacity. There is no other reason why, while they receive from Russia nuclear fuel for civilian use they continue their enormous efforts to enrich uranium which can be of use for one purpose only: for the building up of nuclear power. There are other evidence that we posses, and we share this evidence naturally with our friends, that the plans of the Iranians are not as naive and innocent as www.reiner-bernstein.de 383 – Chronologie 2008

they pretend them to be. And therefore every possible effort to stop it through the diplomatic channels, through the international institutions, through the United Nations Security Councils, through the European Union, is of great significance and we welcome the leadership that has been manifested by Chancellor Merkel in this direction together with President Sarkozy, with Prime Minster Gordon Brown, and with other leaders of course in America and other parts of the world. This is mainly the challenge of the big powers, Israel inevitably is very sensitive and very interested in these efforts, and we will join forces and cooperate with our senior friends in order to help bring a possible solution that will deter the Iranians from continuing their programs. And again Chancellor Merkel, it's always very pleasant to be your guest and to enjoy your hospitality and your friendship. I mentioned to you yesterday night while we had dinner, that anywhere so gracious to offer Israeli wine to your guests, which was wonderful, that you were the first foreign leader that came to visit with me, immediately after I was catapult in the position of Prime Minister of Israel in January of 2006, and your friendship and your deep emotional attitude to the State of Israel and the Jewish people has greatly affected me and my people and I wish to thank you for this.

181 1) Dan Izenberg: Peace Now loses registrar’s approval, in „Jerusalem Post”-online 12.02.2008: The Registrar of Nonprofit Organizations has decided to withdraw the certificate of proper administration from the organization that provides funding for Peace Now, a Justice Ministry official said Monday. According to the official, the registrar, Yaron Keidar, recently conducted an in-depth examination of the nonprofit organization, known as Sha'al Educational Enterprises. The official added that Keidar found several problems involving the organization. The most serious was the fact that the aims of the organization, as it defined them, did not tally with the activities of Peace Now, which is a political-ideological activist movement calling for a two- state solution along the 1967 Green Line boundaries. This is problematic, as it may lead to misrepresentation regarding what the money of Sha'al's donors would be used for. The official added that unless Sha'al Educational Enterprises corrects the faults that Keidar discovered in his investigation, the organization would be dismantled. Peace Now Director-General Yariv Oppenheimer told The Jerusalem Post in response to the report that "we have been operating for 30 years under these arrangements, and no one has ever found fault until now. Everything is transparent and nothing has changed. It seems that someone in the registrar's office, for political reasons, has decided to cause us harm. I hope the matter will be resolved quickly." It is possible that the investigation of Peace Now by the registrar was sparked by a petition filed in November by Aryeh King, a member of the Moledet Party and head of the self-styled Office for Public Complaints Regarding East Jerusalem. In his petition, King demanded that the High Court cancel petitions filed by Peace Now because the movement is not a legal entity. The petitions he referred to call for dismantling the illegal outposts of Migron, Hayovel and Haresha. King wrote in the petition that "Peace Now is a brand name used by the public and the media. It is not now, and never was, a legal entity. As a result, it should never have been allowed to have its day in court. It www.reiner-bernstein.de 384 – Chronologie 2008

should furthermore be clarified that distinct from Peace Now, there is a registered nonprofit organization called 'Sha'al Educational Enterprises.'" King charged that in the petition, Peace Now identified itself as "Peace Now–Sha'al Educational Enterprises," an entity that does not exist. He said Peace Now used that name to cover up the fact that it did not have the right to petition the court. In its response to King's petition, Peace Now said it had added its own name to that of Sha'al so that everyone would know who was behind the petitions regarding the illegal outposts, as the name Peace Now is universally recognized. Peace Now's lawyer, Michael Sfard, also pointed out that the High Court had already rejected similar petitions filed by King in other cases involving Peace Now. 2) Judith Bernstein, Vorsitzende des Vereins „Jüdische Stimme für gerechten Frieden in Nahost”, Pressemitteilung vom 12.02.2008: Laut Presseberichten ist der israelischen Bewegung „Frieden Jetzt“ der Status der Gemeinnützigkeit entzogen worden. Die lächerliche Begründung lautet, dass sich „Peace Now“ mit ihrer Abteilung für politische Bildung für die israelisch-palästinensische Zweistaatenregelung einsetze. Wir fordern das israelische Justizministerium nachdrücklich auf, für die Aufhebung dieser unverständlichen Entscheidung zu sorgen. Die „Jüdische Stimme für gerechten Frieden in Nahost“, die deutsche Sektion der „European Jews for a Just Peace“, unterstützt alle Friedensgruppen von Israelis und Palästinensern. In einer Zeit, in der zwischen den Regierungen in Jerusalem und Ramallah Gespräche über die Beilegung des Jahrhundertkonflikts stattfinden, ist es unerträglich, dass einer Bewegung wie „Frieden Jetzt“ administrative Fesseln angelegt werden sollen, um zu verhindern, dass sie für die Ideen der nationalen Koexistenz zwischen beiden Völkern öffentlich wirbt.

182 1) Khaled Abu Toameh: ‚Rice to return to revive peace talks,’ in „The Jerusalem Post“-online 10.02.2008: US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is scheduled to return to the region soon in yet another attempt to prevent the collapse of peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, a senior PA official in Ramallah has told The Jerusalem Post. The official said the PA was seeking greater US involvement in the current negotiations with Israel, especially with regards to those that are being conducted secretly. "The negotiations are moving too slowly," he said. "There are still too many difficulties, although one can say that some progress has been achieved." He said Rice was due to visit Israel and Ramallah before the end of the month. According to the official, the Palestinian negotiating team headed by former PA Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei had been holding secret talks with Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and other government officials in the past few weeks. "There are public meetings and there are secret ones," the PA official explained. "The main progress has been achieved during the secret talks, particularly on the issue of Jerusalem. Today we can say that Israel is prepared to withdraw from almost all the Arab neighborhoods and villages in Jerusalem. Israel is prepared to redivide Jerusalem and this is a positive development." The PA is worried that a massive Israeli military operation in the Gaza Strip would sabotage the negotiations and has appealed to the US to intervene with Israel on this matter, another PA official said. He expressed fear that such an operation would boost Hamas's standing and turn the Palestinian public against the PA leadership in Ramallah. "Hamas wants to be in the position of the victim," the official noted. "They want to drag Israel into the Gaza Strip so that they can score www.reiner-bernstein.de 385 – Chronologie 2008

points on the Arab and Islamic street. An Israeli invasion will serve their interests." The official said the US administration had promised to pressure Israel to refrain from carrying out a massive attack in the Gaza Strip. He said the PA believed that Israel's policy of "collective punishment" also served Hamas's interests because it drove more Palestinians into their open arms. "When you deprive a Palestinian from gas and electricity, he will hate Israel and the Palestinian Authority, and not Hamas," he added. Assistant US Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs David Welsh, who met on Saturday separately with PA President Mahmoud Abbas and Qurei, reiterated Washington's commitment to advancing the peace process. Abbas briefed the US official on his latest initiative for a cease-fire between the Palestinians and Israel. He also reiterated his readiness to assume control over the Rafah border crossing between the Gaza Strip and Egypt. Qurei briefed Welsh on the outcome of the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. He urged Washington to exert pressure on Israel to fulfil its commitments in line with the first phase of the road map. These commitments, he added, included a cessation of settlement construction, an IDF withdrawal to pre- September 28, 2000 positions, reopening all closed PLO institutions in Jerusalem, the removal of illegal outposts and IDF checkpoints and the release of Palestinian prisoners. Qurei said he was convinced that an agreement could be reached with Israel before the end of this year "provided that there were good intentions and that the international community was actively involved in pushing the peace process forward." 2) Ezra Halevi: Abbas and Livni Say Jerusalem Being Negotiated, Shas Denies, in “Arutz 7 News” 10.02.2008: Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas insists that negotiations taking place between Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and former PA Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei (Abu Ala) are dealing with the status of Jerusalem. Livni confirmed the claim. If true, it runs contrary to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's promise to the Shas Party that such talks are not taking place. Shas has declared that it will bolt the coalition and bring down the government the moment talks over Jerusalem ensue. Abbas made the statements before meeting with European Parliament members in Ramallah Thursday. FM Livni herself confirmed the negotiations in a meeting with foreign diplomats a few days ago. Makor Rishon reported that FM Livni explicitly confirmed that in negotiations with Qurei they are dealing with "all core-issues, including Jerusalem." She acknowledged that the negotiations contradict commitments given to Shas by the prime minister. Shas Spokesman Roi Lachmanovitch dismissed the report. "Nobody is talking about Jerusalem," he told Arutz Sheva. "The moment Jerusalem is being discussed Shas will leave the government – period." Asked if he is saying that Foreign Minister Livni is lying, he said: "I am not saying she is lying – but I am saying that absolutely nobody is negotiating over Jerusalem." Shas Party Chairman Eli Yishai seemed to be heralding his party's eventual exit from the government Thursday, telling party activists in Tiberias that he expects new national elections to take place before the local municipal elections in November. 3) Gil Hoffman, Talia Dekel and Khaled Abu Toameh: Politicians infuriated over secret talks on J'lem's fate, in “The Jerusalem Post”-online 10.02.2008: Reactions over secret talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority as reported by the Jerusalem Post began to surface among politicians on Sunday. Saturday's report cited a top Ramallah official as saying that the Palestinian negotiating team headed by former PA Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei had been holding undisclosed negotiations with Livni and other www.reiner-bernstein.de 386 – Chronologie 2008

government officials in the past few weeks. "The cat is out of the bag," MK Zevulun Orlev (NU/NRP) told the Post. "The fact that [Prime Minister Ehud] Olmert's government is not telling the truth over the negotiations with the Palestinians has been revealed. "Shas will no longer be able to say they didn't know. Even if the prime minister isn't telling them the truth, they can thank the Jerusalem Post for revealing it to them. I hope Shas keeps its promise and leaves the government that is dividing Jerusalem," Orlev said. Jerusalem Municipality opposition leader Nir Barkat called on Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni to reveal any agreements reached during negotiations with the Palestinians following a report on Sunday in the Jerusalem Post which revealed that secret Israeli-PA talks have resulted in progress over the issue of Jerusalem. "I demand that the foreign minister, who heads the negotiations with the Palestinians, publicly disclose all secretive and other agreements that the state of Israel has reached with the Palestinians," Barkat told the Post. In response to the report, which quoted a senior PA official in Ramallah, Barkat insisted that Jerusalem was not the subject of secret talks. Barkat, who leads a public campaign against the proposed division of the capital, said "any such agreement achieved on behalf of an Israeli official would constitute an absolute deviation to Kadima's basic principles, a violation to the basic law of Jerusalem, betrays the trust of the voter and undermines the sovereign basis of the Israel's Knesset. "The Palestinians must understand that neither the government of Israel, nor any other body on its behalf, have the right to promise to give up areas where Israeli law, governance and legislation has been implemented," he said. United Torah Judaism MK Avraham Ravitz criticized the negotiations, saying that if "the story is true, then the Jerusalem's fate is being decided like a thief in the night. It cannot be that while Olmert is denying that there are any talks about Jerusalem at all, Tzipi Livni is negotiating in back rooms with Abu Ala (Qurei) about the state of our capital." Meanwhile, Shas reiterated that it "would not stay in a government that divides" the Jewish capital. A spokesperson for the group told the Post that Shas would have no part in a coalition that gave away parts of Jerusalem. A spokesperson from Livni's office said that he was "not allowed to respond to anything going on in the [negotiating] room." The Palestinian official told the Post that "Israel is prepared to withdraw from almost all the Arab neighborhoods and villages in Jerusalem. Israel is prepared to redivide Jerusalem and this is a positive development. "The negotiations are moving too slowly," he said. "There are still too many difficulties, although one can say that some progress has been achieved." 4) Nadav Shragai: Housing Min. denies delays in East Jerusalem construction, in “Haaretz”-Online 12.02.2008: Housing Minister Ze'ev Boim denied Tuesday reports that the government is barring new housing construction for Jews in East Jerusalem, saying Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's order to freeze all construction that does not have his personal approval applies only to the West Bank. On Monday, Jerusalem city manager Yair Ma'ayan told the Knesset Economics Committee that the government was holding up construction of hundreds of apartments in Jewish neighborhoods of East Jerusalem due to the negotiations with the Palestinians. "There is no delay, limitation, or suspension of the construction of Jewish neigbhorhoods in East Jerusalem," Boim told Israel Radio. Jerusalem Mayor Uri Lupoliansky also weighed in on the issue Tuesday, saying he "won't allow Jerusalem to be turned into an illegal outpost.” Following the Annapolis conference last fall, several media reports about ongoing construction in the West Bank and East Jerusalem angered the www.reiner-bernstein.de 387 – Chronologie 2008

Palestinians and Americans. In response, Olmert ordered all building in the settlements frozen, including those settlements that are part of the greater Jerusalem area. But with regard to East Jerusalem, which was formally annexed to Israel in 1967, he merely ordered that he be kept informed of any building plans, and he recently promised Shas Party Chairman and Industry Minister Eli Yishai that there was no freeze on construction in the capital. At Monday's Economics Committee meeting, however, Ma'ayan said that the Housing Ministry has postponed marketing 750 apartments in East Jerusalem's Pisgat Ze'ev neighborhood and another 150 apartments in the Har Homa neighborhood. In both cases, he said, the ministry told him that Olmert had not yet approved the projects. Boim denied this, however, saying the tenders for the Pisgat Ze'ev construction were in the final stages of coordination with the Jerusalem Municipality, and that the tenders for Har Homa – which he said were for 360 units – would be published soon. Dov Gal, deputy director of the Housing Ministry's Jerusalem District, also denied the report, saying there was no order that construction in East Jerusalem needed approval from the government. But Ma'ayan said that Gal was behind the times – and several Knesset members said that Ma'ayan's statements had been confirmed to them by Boim himself. Gal did confirm that he had been ordered to freeze construction in the settlements around Jerusalem, including Efrat, Gush Etzion, Givat Ze'ev, Adam and Beitar Ilit. MK Uriel Ariel (National Union–National Religious Party), who requested Monday's meeting, said that altogether, the Housing Ministry has halted marketing of some 2,300 apartments in and around Jerusalem. In response, the Prime Minister's Office said that construction in East Jerusalem has not been frozen, but because of its diplomatic sensitivity, Olmert has asked to be informed of all building plans there, so that he will not be taken by surprise. After the meeting, Ma'ayan told Haaretz that despite this directive, the municipality is moving forward with plans to build some 10,000 apartments in Jewish neighborhoods of East Jerusalem, including Ramot, Ramat Shlomo, Pisgat Ze'ev, Neveh Ya'akov, East Talpiot, Har Homa and Gilo. The largest of these calls for building some 4,000 apartments in Givat Hamatos, in the city's southern section. That plan is currently being discussed by the regional planning and building committee. Negative migration Nir Barkat, who heads the opposition in the Jerusalem city council, told the Economics Committee that the capital continues to suffer from a negative balance of migration, in part because of soaring apartment prices. This conclusion was echoed in a study by the Knesset's research division that was presented to the committee on Monday. The study also found that while all governments talk about developing Jerusalem, few actually do anything about it. Barkat, who belongs to Olmert's Kadima Party, also asked Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni to deny recent claims by Palestinian officials that Israel has already agreed to concessions in Jerusalem, including ceding the city's Arab neighborhoods to the Palestinians. Alternatively, if the reports are true, he demanded that she "reveal all the secret agreements on the floor of the Knesset." Livni's media advisor, Gil Messing, responded that the minister does not comment on reports about her talks with the Palestinians, and therefore www.reiner-bernstein.de 388 – Chronologie 2008

refused to either confirm or deny that the future of Jerusalem had been discussed. But the Palestinian comments increased pressure on Shas to quit the government, as it has repeatedly pledged to leave the moment negotiations on Jerusalem begin. 5) Gil Hoffmann: Atias says Shas believes 'Post' report, in „The Jerusalem Post”-online 12.02.2008: Communication Minister Ariel Atias, the number two man in Shas, said Tuesday morning that he believes the Jerusalem Post Report that secret talks have been taking place between the Israeli and Palestinian negotiating teams on the issue of Jerusalem. Shas Chairman Eli Yishai had said that if the Post story was true the party would leave the government. "We get the impression that Jerusalem is being discussed," Atias said. "The foreign minister doesn't deny it. [Prime Minister Ehud Olmert] has to decide whether he wants Shas in the government or whether he wants what Livni is doing." In Tuesday's Maariv a Shas official claimed that Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni was holding the covert talks with the Palestinians behind the prime minister's back in order to force Shas to quit the coalition and bring down the government. "Tzipi Livni is creating upheaval [around] Olmert and pushing Shas out [of the coalition], the source said. Yishai will meet Olmert when the prime minister returns from Germany and will try to find out whether Livni "is the conductor and is acting on her own volition or whether she is being directed from above", Atias told Army Radio. "We cannot disregard what is happening. We cannot bury our heads in the sand." On Monday Yishai indicated that his party's days in the government were numbered, due to Post's story that the Palestinian and Israeli negotiating teams were conducting secret talks on the future of Jerusalem. Yishai told reporters who attended his faction's weekly meeting that he would speak about the story in Sunday's paper with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni. He had not spoken to either one by press time and the Olmert associates he did reach downplayed the report. "I will check the story and if it's true, Shas will leave the government," Yishai told the Post. Yishai also issued a new threat that any diplomatic progress on any issue while Kassams fall on Sderot could lead to the party's departure from the coalition. Yishai escalated his warning beyond previous threats, which focused solely on Jerusalem. But Yishai's threat to leave over the Post story was seen as more serious, because it applied to negotiations that have already taken place, while the new threat deals with potential future talks. Yishai wrote a letter to Cabinet Secretary Ovad Yehezkel requesting that all decisions about what Israel should negotiate be made in the forum of seven ministers that met regularly during the Second Lebanon War. He postponed a visit to Jerusalem's controversial Har Homa neighborhood until Thursday, when he will be joined by MKs from the right wing National Union-National Religious Party. Sources in Shas said the Post story added to what they said was already tremendous pressure on the party to leave the coalition sooner rather than later. A Shas MK complained privately that he felt increasingly uncomfortable with the party remaining in a government that was conducting negotiations that he believed would leave Israel "naked" without key strategic assets. An official close to Olmert expressed confidence that Shas would remain in the coalition. The official vowed to do everything possible to keep the party www.reiner-bernstein.de 389 – Chronologie 2008

satisfied. "If Shas wants to have an influence and prevent moves it opposes, it needs to remain in the government," the official said. "Leaving would have no value, because Shas cannot accomplish anything in the opposition." Opposition leader Binyamin Netanyahu on Monday criticized Yishai for questioning the report's veracity. He called on Shas to leave the coalition due to the report and the security situation. "Olmert's government is acting with weakness and confusion," Netanyahu said. "It's allowing rockets to fall on Sderot while they engage in negotiations that will result in more rockets falling in Jerusalem and the center of the country. I call on our friends in Shas: You share our opinions, our concern for Jerusalem, our concerns for security – I call on you to do the right thing. And the right thing is to stop these dangerous moves and quit the government." Israel Beiteinu leader Avigdor Lieberman and United Torah Judaism chairman Ya'acov Litzman mocked Yishai, saying that he would leave the coalition after Kadima. Yishai responded that their criticism did not matter to him. Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz, who is Olmert's most serious foe on the Right within Kadima, is waiting for developments in Shas before making a decision about whether to use the talks on Jerusalem to attack Olmert. Jerusalem mayor Uri Lupoliansky declined to comment on the negotiations about the city's fate. His spokesman said he would not comment unless Livni verified the report. 6) Mazal Mualem: Senior officials: Rabbi Yosef not ready to quit coalition, in “Haaretz”-Online 13.02.2008: Senior Shas officials have criticized the escalation in recent days by party chairman and Industry, Trade and Labor Minister Eli Yishai of his threats to quit the coalition. They say that the party's spiritual leader, Rabbi , does not want to leave the government at this stage. In addition, they say, the calls to leave contradict the position taken by the Council of Torah Sages three weeks ago, according to which Shas will leave the cabinet only if and when the issue of Jerusalem is discussed in negotiations with the Palestinians. The Shas sources say that because Yosef does not believe that the negotiations will lead to real results on their current trajectory, due to the weak position of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, he sees no need for Shas to intensify its threats. The sources emphasized, however, that Yosef is aware of recent statements ascribed to Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, to the effect that Jerusalem has already been put on the negotiating table, and that he asked Yishai to request clarifications from Prime Minister Ehud Olmert after he returns from Germany. Since Yisrael Beiteinu left the government last month, over its objections to the "core issues" being addressed in the negotiations with the Palestinians, leaving Shas as the lone right-wing party in the coalition, Yishai has moved Shas's foreign policy positions farther to the right and stepped up its threats to leave the coalition. At first, Shas, with the approval of the Council of Torah Sages, made the discussion of Jerusalem its red-line issue. Later, Yishai implied that the raising of other core issues, such as the Palestinian refugees and the permanent borders of the state, were also problematic for Shas. On Monday he announced at a meeting of the Shas MKs that if progress was made in the negotiations while Qassam fire continued at its current rate, Shas would leave the coalition immediately. The Shas officials said that Yishai's latest threats point to his preparing the ground for pulling the party out of the government, despite Yosef's www.reiner-bernstein.de 390 – Chronologie 2008

objections. Last week Yishai said at a conference of party activists that new Knesset elections could take place before the mayoral elections, currently scheduled nationwide for November. The decision to hold a joint Shas-National Union tour Thursday of the Jerusalem neighborhoods of Har Homa and Ir David also met with criticism from within Shas. The officials said it would be better to hold a separate tour for Shas, as originally planned. 7) Gil Hoffman: Shas surprised by Livni–Qurei meeting, in „The Jerusalem Post”-online 13.02.2008: Shas chairman Eli Yishai was surprised to hear about the frequency of Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni's negotiations with former Palestinian Authority prime minister Ahmed Qurei, Shas sources said Tuesday. Yishai had been promised that he would be kept up to date on the talks with the Palestinians by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Livni, but he learned from Ma'ariv that Livni had met with Qurei on both Monday and Tuesday. Hearing about the meetings from the press reinforced for Shas officials that The Jerusalem Post's reports about secret negotiations on Jerusalem were correct. Yishai said on Monday that if the story were true, his party would leave the government. Shas officials said Yishai would meet with Olmert after the latter returned from his trip to Germany. Olmert told reporters in Berlin that Jerusalem and other sensitive subjects would be left until the end of talks, after agreements had been reached on other matters. "I wouldn't say that we have pushed the Jerusalem issue aside, but we don't want to corner ourselves at the beginning of negotiations," Olmert said. Sources close to Yishai said Olmert's statement was unsatisfying in light of the Shas's new threat that any diplomatic progress on any issue while Kassam rockets were falling on Sderot could lead to the party's departure from the coalition. Livni's associates said her meetings with Qurei were not secret, and denied reports about tension between herself and Shas. Ma'ariv reported that Shas officials believed Livni was holding covert talks with the Palestinians behind the prime minister's back to force Shas to quit the coalition and bring down Olmert's government. "We don't expect Olmert to scold Livni," a Shas official said. "We just want to know if she is conducting secret negotiations on Jerusalem." Communications Minister Ariel Attias, the No. 2 man in Shas's Knesset faction, said Tuesday morning he believed that secret talks on Jerusalem had been taking place. "We get the impression that Jerusalem is being discussed," Attias said. "The foreign minister doesn't deny it. Olmert has to decide whether he wants Shas in the government or whether he wants what Livni is doing." 8) Khaled Abu Toameh: PA officials: J’lem talks taking place openly and secretly, in „The Jerusalem Post”-online 13.02.2008: Hatem Abdel Qader, the Jerusalem affairs adviser to Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salaam Fayad, confirmed Tuesday that Jerusalem is one of the issues currently being discussed by Israeli and PA negotiators. In an interview with The Jerusalem Post, Abdel Qader said Jerusalem "is not only on the table, it's also under the table." Asked to explain the second part of his remark, he said: "This means that the negotiations with the Israelis are taking place both openly and secretly." The Palestinians made it clear during the negotiations they were insisting on a full Israeli withdrawal from the eastern part of Jerusalem that was captured by Israel in 1967. www.reiner-bernstein.de 391 – Chronologie 2008

"Jerusalem is one of the main core issues," Abdel Qader, who is also a top Fatah leader, told the Post. "Although we haven't reached the stage of a breakthrough in the negotiations on Jerusalem, we can say that the talks are continuing. The Israeli government knows that there will be no solution without solving the problem of Jerusalem." Abdel Qader dismissed the idea that Israel would retain control of some parts of east Jerusalem. "Our position is, 'Take it all or leave it,'" he said. "We have also made it clear to the Israelis that we won't accept any partial solutions for Jerusalem. As far as we are concerned, Jerusalem must be one geographic, political and religious unit." He said the parties were still trying to reach an agreement over which Jerusalem they were talking about – the city that's mentioned in United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 in 1947, the one that was occupied in 1967 or the one that was expanded by Israel afterward. "On this issue, there hasn't been any progress yet," he said. Abdel Qader said the negotiations were not only focusing on the Arab part of Jerusalem, but on its west as well. "There are Jews who say they have rights and property in the eastern part of Jerusalem, and that's fine with us," he said. "At the same time, there are Arabs who have a lot of property in the western section of Jerusalem. So the talks are not only over the eastern part." As for Shas's threat to quit the coalition over the negotiations on Jerusalem, the PA official said he could not understand why the Haredi party was upset. "Shas is not new to Israeli politics," he said. "I can't understand why they're so upset. What did they think that peace could be achieved without [dividing] Jerusalem? Have they forgotten that [then-prime minister] Ehud Barak already offered us large parts of Jerusalem at the Camp David summit [in 2000]?" Abdel Qader complained that Israeli and Palestinian negotiators were paying the price for Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's coalition problems. "Olmert's position is very weak and we have sensed this in the current negotiations," he said. "He's like a woman who is dying to get married, but is afraid of becoming pregnant." An Israeli official on Tuesday denied that the question of Jerusalem is being discussed at this juncture in the talks between Israel and the Palestinians. The official told The Jerusalem Post that Jerusalem is one of the most contentious and sensitive issues and will therefore be raised only towards the end of the negotiations. Mark Weiss contributed to this report. 9) Gil Hoffman: Olmert: Shas won’t quit coalition, in “The Jerusalem Post”- online 13.02.2008: Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said Wednesday that he did not believe Shas would quit the coalition over reports that Jerusalem was already on the table in talks with the Palestinians. "I see no danger to the integrity of the coalition," Olmert told political reporters in the Knesset. "It is clear to all of the sides that the issue of Jerusalem will be the last issue on the agenda with the Palestinians." Meanwhile, Army Radio reported that the prime minister promised Shas Chairman Eli Yishai that construction would continue in Jewish neighborhoods of east Jerusalem. Olmert reportedly said that he would contact the authorities charged with planning and construction in the Housing Ministry and inform them of the decision in the upcoming days. Earlier Wednesday, Rabbi Yaakov Yosef, the eldest son of Shas spiritual leader Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, said that the party should quit the government forthwith and if it fails to do so, it bears responsibility for putting Israel in grave danger. www.reiner-bernstein.de 392 – Chronologie 2008

In the statement, which was revealed on Army Radio and will be run in the Eretz Yisrael Shelanu (Israel is Ours) Shabbat leaflet over the weekend, Yosef also warns of missiles on Jerusalem. Shas, Yosef implies, cannot use the excuse that the negotiations are still far from fruition. "We [also] didn't believe it would happen so fast that Judea and Samaria would be on the negotiating table," he writes. "We can't let it happen. We have to struggle. We cannot give up." "I hope they wake up and leave as the Council of Torah Sages promised," Yosef says. "By remaining in the government, Shas is betraying the decision of the Council and putting the entire Jewish people in danger." In quitting the coalition, Yosef claims, Shas would also reap electoral benefit by garnering support from groups that traditionally vote for other, more staunchly right-wing parties. "If Shas leaves now it will help politically by winning support from traditional voters who are struggling against concessions on Jerusalem." "I say unequivocally: Shas will never forgive itself if it doesn't leave the government now. Every moment in this government is dangerous," Yosef says. Sources within Shas were quoted as saying that the statement by Yosef, who has already confronted his father in various political matters – as well as halachic issues – in the past, did not reflect in any way the views of the party or of its spiritual leader, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef. Meanwhile, Yishai was surprised to hear about the frequency of Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni's negotiations with former Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei, Shas sources said Tuesday. Yishai had been promised that he would be kept up to date on the talks with the Palestinians by Olmert and Livni, but he learned from Ma'ariv that Livni had met with Qurei on both Monday and Tuesday. Hearing about the meetings from the press reinforced for Shas officials that The Jerusalem Post's reports about secret negotiations on Jerusalem were correct. Yishai said on Monday that if the story were true, his party would leave the government. Shas officials said Yishai would meet with Olmert after the latter returned from his trip to Germany. Olmert told reporters in Berlin that Jerusalem and other sensitive subjects would be left until the end of talks, after agreements had been reached on other matters. Also Tuesday, Hatem Abdel Qader, the Jerusalem affairs adviser to Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salaam Fayad, confirmed that Jerusalem is one of the issues currently being discussed by Israeli and PA negotiators. In an interview with The Jerusalem Post, Abdel Qader said Jerusalem "is not only on the table, it's also under the table." Khaled Abu Toameh contributed to this report. 10) Barkat: Plan agreed on dividing Jerusalem, in “The Jerusalem Post”- online 13.02.2008: "Vice Premier Haim Ramon and PA negotiator Mohammad Rashid have agreed on a plan to divide Jerusalem," Jerusalem municipal opposition leader Nir Barkat said Wednesday, following a letter he received from Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni. Livni was answering Barkat's request that she respond to the Jerusalem Post report about secret negotiations on the future of capital. Barkat, a former Kadima member, has led a public campaign against the proposed division of the capital. On January 22, he said that a decision to freeze building in east Jerusalem would make Prime Minister Ehud Olmert the first Israeli prime minister since the end of the British mandate in 1948 to enact 'a White Paper' for the capital, a reference to the infamous 1939 British policy which limited Jewish immigration to Palestine. www.reiner-bernstein.de 393 – Chronologie 2008

In her letter, Livni wrote: "At Annapolis, it was agreed that Israel and the Palestinians would conduct negotiations on all the core issues without exception. "The negotiations between the Israeli and Palestinian delegations are being conducted with agreement from both sides that until there is an accord on every issue there will be no accord on any issue and that the contents of the negotiations must not be disclosed." She said that from past experience, Israel had learned that conducting negotiations "under the floodlights" will not contribute to Israel's goals and that "for this reason, and this reason only, I have neither related to reports about agreements seemingly reached during negotiations and nor will I do so in the future." "You cannot conclude anything from my lack of response and the absence of a denial is not any form of confirmation," stressed the foreign minister. Following the foreign minister's response, Barkat said: "Livni's letter exposes more than anything the fraudulent peace process led by Ramon and the prime minister. Livni refuses to reveal the vital information she knows, of which I was informed by senior officials, that there is a secret channel led by Haim Ramon and Mohammad Rashid and not by the Foreign Ministry." Barkat went on to say that the fact that Livni was aware of the reported secret channel and refused to admit it to the public "turns her into an active partner in the fraudulent peace process of which the true aim is to divide Jerusalem."Ramon denied the report, saying Barkat's claims were "absurd and unfounded." 11) Gil Hoffman: 'Qurei doesn't decide talks' agenda', in “The Jerusalem Post”-online 13.02.2008: The coalition crisis over Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni's secret negotiations on Jerusalem with former Palestinian Authority prime minister Ahmed Qurei ended on Thursday when Shas chairman Eli Yishai received reassurances from Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Livni that the capital's fate was not on the table. Livni told Yishai there was no secret channel of meetings with Qurei, denying statements to the contrary by senior PA officials to The Jerusalem Post. Olmert promised the Shas leader that Jerusalem would not be discussed until the end of the negotiations with the Palestinians and that he would make sure Livni abided by that vow. "We are satisfied for now, but if secret negotiations begin tomorrow, we are leaving," a source close to Yishai said following his meetings with Olmert and Livni. "He believes the prime minister and the foreign minister. If he didn't, we would leave the coalition." Olmert also promised Yishai that construction would continue in Jewish neighborhoods in east Jerusalem. He reportedly said that he would contact the authorities charged with planning and building in the Construction and Housing Ministry and issue new directives. The prime minister told reporters in the Knesset following the meeting with Yishai that he was not concerned about Shas leaving the government. "I don't feel that my coalition is being threatened," Olmert said. "There is no reason for Shas to leave. I don't think Shas really intends to leave the government. Shas will stay in the government for a long time." Asked about reports that Qurei personally confirmed that there had been secret talks about Jerusalem, Olmert responded: "With all due respect, Abu Ala [Qurei] doesn't decide the agenda for the talks. We established a rule that Jerusalem would be discussed last and that's clear to both sides." Kadima officials close to Olmert suggested that when he said that Qurei did not decide the talks' agenda, he was also sending a message to Livni that www.reiner-bernstein.de 394 – Chronologie 2008

she could not get away with changing the order of the negotiations set by the prime minister. Coalition Chairman intends to use next Monday's Kadima faction meeting to scold Livni and to formally decide that Jerusalem's fate will not be discussed without the approval of Kadima's institutions. "If Tzipi wants to sell out Jerusalem, she will have to pass it in Kadima – but she won't succeed," a Kadima official loyal to Olmert said. "She has an interest in elections. She wants to topple Olmert. But we will restrain her." Livni's associates responded that any attempts to target her in the faction were for ulterior political motives and would not succeed. She intends to return from her current trip to the US in time to attend the faction meeting and defend herself. The foreign minister already started fighting back Wednesday in a letter she sent to Jerusalem City Council opposition leader Nir Barkat. Livni responded to Barkat's request that she react to the Post's reports about secret negotiations on the future of the capital. She said that from past experience, Israel had learned that conducting negotiations "under the floodlights" would not contribute to Israel's goals and that "for this reason, and this reason only, I have neither related to reports about agreements seemingly reached during negotiations nor will I do so in the future." Livni said she had decided with Qurei that "until there is an accord on every issue there will be no accord on any issue and that the contents of the negotiations must not be disclosed." But "you cannot conclude anything from my lack of response and the absence of a denial is not any form of confirmation," she stressed in the letter. Barkat said he was unsatisfied with the foreign minister's response. He said he was still convinced that Livni was negotiating Jerusalem's future and that he had been told about another channel of talks between Vice Premier Haim Ramon and PA businessman Muhammad Rashid. "Livni's letter exposes more than anything the fraudulent peace process led by Ramon and the prime minister," Barkat said. "Livni's refusal to reveal the vital information she knows turns her into an active partner in the fraudulent peace process of which the true aim is to divide Jerusalem." Ramon denied the report, calling Barkat's claims "absurd and unfounded." Jonny Hadi contributed to this report. 12) ‘The issue of Jerusalem will not be postponed in talks, in “The Jerusalem Post”-online 15.02.2008: "The issue of Jerusalem will not be postponed until the end of negotiations," Ahmed Qurei, head of the Palestinian negotiating team was quoted by Israel Radio as saying Friday. Qurei was responding to statements by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert earlier this week. Asked about reports that Qurei personally confirmed that there had been secret talks about Jerusalem, Olmert said: "With all due respect, [Qurei] doesn't decide the agenda for the talks. We established a rule that Jerusalem would be discussed last and that's clear to both sides." However, Qurei said Thursday evening that all 'core issues' would be on the table without exception and without giving precedence to any of them. Saeb Erekat, head of the PLO's negotiating department, said Thursday that there was no option to discuss certain issues without discussing Jerusalem too. "As far as we're concerned, Har Homa, Givat Ze'ev and Ma'ale Adumim are not part of Jerusalem and also Jewish neighborhoods like Ramot and Gilo are settlements for all intents and purposes." Erekat's statement, if truly reflective of the Palestinian Authority's position, places a serious hindrance to any progress in talks. The neighborhoods he mentioned are all held in www.reiner-bernstein.de 395 – Chronologie 2008

wide Israeli consensus and contain the bulk of the city's Jewish residents. In an interview with the The Jerusalem Post to inaugurate 2008, Olmert said that even Israel's "good friends" see the country's future based on the pre-Six Day War 1967 borders, including a divided Jerusalem; but he added that he did not envisage a permanent accord along the precise '67 lines, describing Ma'ale Adumim, for example, as an "indivisible" part of Jerusalem and Israel.

183 Winograd Committee Press Release – January 30, 2008: Good Evening. 1. About an hour ago we submitted the Final Report of the Commission to Investigate the Lebanon Campaign in 2006 to the Prime minister, Mr. Ehud Olmert, and to the Minister of Defense, Mr. Ehud Barak. 2. The task given to us was difficult and complex. It involved the examination of events in 34 days of fighting, and the scrutiny of events before the war, since the IDF had left Lebanon in 2000. This covered extensive, charged and complex facts, unprecedented in any previous Commission of Inquiry. 3. The fact that the Government of Israel opted for such an examination, and that the army conducted a large number of inquires of a variety of military events, are a sign of strength, and an indication that the political and military leaders of Israel are willing to expose themselves to critical review and to painful but required mending. 4. We have included in the classified version of the Report all the relevant facts we have found concerning the 2nd Lebanon war, systematically and in a chronological order. This presentation of the factual basis was an important part of our work. It is reasonable to assume that no single decision maker had access to a similar factual basis. In this task we had a unique advantage over others who have written about this war, since we had access to a lot of primary and comprehensive material, and the opportunity to clarify the facts by questioning many witnesses, commanders and soldiers, including bereaved families. 5. For obvious reasons, the unclassified Report does not include the many facts that cannot be revealed for reasons of protecting the state's security and foreign affairs. We tried, nonetheless, to balance between the wish to present the public with a meaningful picture of the events and the needs of security. We should note that we did not take the mere fact that some data has already been published in the media as a reason for including it in our unclassified Report. 6. We, the members of the Commission, acted according to the main objectives for which the Commission was established – to respond to the bad feelings of the Israeli public of a crisis and disappointment caused by the results of the 2nd Lebanon war, and from the way it was managed by the political and military echelons; and the wish to draw lessons from the failings of the war and its flaws, and to repair what is required, quickly and resolutely. We regarded as most important to investigate deeply what had happened, as a key to drawing lessons for the future, and their implementation. 7. This conception of our role was one of the main reasons for our decision not to include in the Final Report personal conclusions and recommendations. We believe that the primary need for improvements applies to the structural and systemic malfunctioning revealed in the war – on all levels. Nonetheless, it should be stressed that the fact we refrained from imposing personal responsibility does not imply that no such responsibility exists. We also wish to repeat our statement from the Interim www.reiner-bernstein.de 396 – Chronologie 2008

Report: We will not impose different standards of responsibility to the political and the military echelons, or to persons of different ranks within them. 8. Let us emphasize: when we imposed responsibility on a system, an echelon or a unit, we did not imply that the responsibility was only or mainly of those who headed it at the time of the war. Often, such responsibility stemmed from a variety of factors outside the control of those at the head. In addition, a significant part of the responsibility for the failures and flaws we have found lies with those who had been in charge of preparedness and readiness in the years before the war. 9. The purpose of this press release is not to sum up the Final Report. Rather, it is to present its highlights. The Report itself includes discussions of many important issues, which are an inseparable part of the Report, its conclusions and recommendations. 10. In the Final Report we dealt mainly with the events of the period after the initial decision to go to war, which we had discussed in the Interim Report. Yet the events of the period covered by the Final Report took place under the shadow of the constraints created by the decision to go to war, with all its failings and flaws. We want to stress that we stand behind everything we said in the Interim Report, and the two parts of the Report complement each other. 11. Overall, we regard the 2nd Lebanon war as a serious missed opportunity. Israel initiated a long war, which ended without its clear military victory. A semi-military organization of a few thousand men resisted, for a few weeks, the strongest army in the Middle East, which enjoyed full air superiority and size and technology advantages. The barrage of rockets aimed at Israel's civilian population lasted throughout the war, and the IDF did not provide an effective response to it. The fabric of life under fire was seriously disrupted, and many civilians either left their home temporarily or spent their time in shelters. After a long period of using only standoff fire power and limited ground activities, Israel initiated a large scale ground offensive, very close to the Security Council resolution imposing a cease fire. This offensive did not result in military gains and was not completed. These facts had far-reaching implications for us, as well as for our enemies, our neighbors, and our friends in the region and around the world. 12. In the period we examined in the Final Report – from July 18, 2006, to August 14, 2006- again troubling findings were revealed, some of which had already been mentioned in the Interim Report: We found serious failings and shortcomings in the decision-making processes and staff-work in the political and the military echelons and their interface. – We found serious failings and flaws in the quality of preparedness, decision-making and performance in the IDF high command, especially in the Army. – We found serious failings and flaws in the lack of strategic thinking and planning, in both the political and the military echelons. – We found severe failings and flaws in the defence of the civilian population and in coping with its being attacked by rockets. – These weaknesses resulted in part from inadequacies of preparedness and strategic and operative planning which go back long before the 2nd Lebanon war. 13. The decision made in the night of July 12th – to react (to the kidnapping) with immediate and substantive military action, and to set for it ambitious goals – limited Israel's range of options. In fact, after the initial www.reiner-bernstein.de 397 – Chronologie 2008

decision had been made, Israel had only two main options, each with its coherent internal logic, and its set of costs and disadvantages. The first was a short, painful, strong and unexpected blow on Hezbollah, primarily through standoff fire-power. The second option was to bring about a significant change of the reality in the South of Lebanon with a large ground operation, including a temporary occupation of the South of Lebanon and 'cleaning' it of Hezbollah military infrastructure. 14. The choice between these options was within the exclusive political discretion of the government; however, the way the original decision to go to war had been made; the fact Israel went to war before it decided which option to select, and without an exit strategy – all these constituted serious failures, which affected the whole war. Responsibility for these failures lay, as we had stressed in the Interim Report, on both the political and the military echelons. 15. After the initial decision to use military force, and to the very end of the war, this period of 'equivocation' continued, with both the political and the military echelon not deciding between the two options: amplifying the military achievement by a broad military ground offensive, or abstaining from such a move and seeking to end the war quickly. This 'equivocation' did hurt Israel. Despite awareness of this fact, long weeks passed without a serious discussion of these options, and without a decision – one way or the other – between them. 16. In addition to avoiding a decision about the trajectory of the military action, there was a very long delay in the deployment necessary for an extensive ground offensive, which was another factor limiting Israel's freedom of action and political flexibility: Till the first week of August, Israel did not prepare the military capacity to start a massive ground operation. 17. As a result, Israel did not stop after its early military achievements, and was 'dragged' into a ground operation only after the political and diplomatic timetable prevented its effective completion. The responsibility for this basic failure in conducting the war lies at the doorstep of both the political and the military echelons. 18. The overall image of the war was a result of a mixture of flawed conduct of the political and the military echelons and the interface between them, of flawed performance by the IDF, and especially the ground forces, and of deficient Israeli preparedness. Israel did not use its military force well and effectively, despite the fact that it was a limited war initiated by Israel itself. At the end of the day, Israel did not gain a political achievement because of military successes; rather, it relied on a political agreement, which included positive elements for Israel, which permitted it to stop a war which it had failed to win. 19. This outcome was primarily caused by the fact that, from the very beginning, the war has not been conducted on the basis of deep understanding of the theatre of operations, of the IDF's readiness and preparedness, and of basic principles of using military power to achieve a political and diplomatic goal. 20. All in all, the IDF failed, especially because of the conduct of the high command and the ground forces, to provide an effective military response to the challenge posed to it by the war in Lebanon, and thus failed to provide the political echelon with a military achievement that could have served as the basis for political and diplomatic action. Responsibility for this outcomes lies mainly with the IDF, but the misfit between the mode of action and the goals determined by the political echelon share responsibility. www.reiner-bernstein.de 398 – Chronologie 2008

21. We should note that, alongside the failures in the IDF performance, there were also important military achievements. Special mention should go to the great willingness of the soldiers, especially reserve soldiers, to serve and fight in the war, as well as the many instances of heroism, courage, self-sacrifice and devotion of many commanders and soldiers. 22. The air force should be congratulated on very impressive achievements in this war. However, there were those in the IDF high command, joined by some in the political echelon, who entertained a baseless hope that the capabilities of the air force could prove decisive in the war. In fact, the impressive achievements of the air force were necessarily limited, and were eroded by the weaknesses in the overall performance of the IDF. 23. The "Hannit" episode colored to a large extent the whole performance of the Navy, despite the fact that it made a critical contribution to the naval blockade, and provided the Northern Command with varied effective support of its fighting. 24. We should also note that the war had significant diplomatic achievements. SC resolution 1701, and the fact it was adopted unanimously, were an achievement for Israel. This conclusion stands even if it turns out that only a part of the stipulations of the resolution were implemented or will be implemented, and even if it could have been foreseen that some of them would not be implemented. This conclusion also does not depend on the intentions or goals of the powers that supported the resolution. 25. We note, however, that we have seen no serious staff work on Israeli positions in the negotiations. This situation improved in part when the team headed by the prime minister's head of staff was established. The team worked efficiently and with dedication, professionalism and coordination. This could not compensate, however, for the absence of preparatory staff work and discussions in the senior political echelon. 26. This fact may have much significance to the way Israel conducts negotiations, and to the actual content of the arrangements reached. In such negotiations, decisions are often made that may have far-reaching implications on Israel's interests, including the setting of precedents. 27. The staff work done in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs concerning the adoption of a favorable resolution in the Security Council was, in the main, quick, systematic and efficient. At the same time, for a variety of reasons, it did not reflect clear awareness of the essential need to maintain an effective relationship between military achievements and diplomatic activities. 28. We now turn to the political and military activity concerning the ground operation at the end of the war. This is one of the central foci of public debate. 29. True, in hindsight, the large ground operation did not achieve its goals of limiting the rocket fire and changing the picture of the war. It is not clear what the ground operation contributed to speeding up the diplomatic achievement or improving it. It is also unclear to what extent starting the ground offensive affected the reactions of the government of Lebanon and Hezbollah to the ceasefire. 30. Nonetheless, it is important to stress that the evaluation of these decisions should not be made with hindsight. It cannot depend on the achievements or the costs these decisions in fact had. The evaluation must be based only on the reasons for the operation, and its risks and prospects as they were known – or as they should have been known – when it was decided upon. Moreover, it is impossible to evaluate the ground operation at the end of the war without recalling the developments that preceded it www.reiner-bernstein.de 399 – Chronologie 2008

and the repeated delays in the adoption of the Security Council resolution; and as a part of the overall conduct of the war. 31. Against this background, we make the following findings on the main decisions: – The cabinet decision of August 9th – to approve in principle the IDF plan, but to authorize the PM and the MOD to decide if and when it should be activated, according to the diplomatic timetable – was almost inevitable, giving the Israeli government necessary military and political flexibility. – The decision to start in fact the ground operation was within the political and professional discretion of its makers, on the basis of the facts before them. The goals of the ground operation were legitimate, and were not exhausted by the wish to hasten or improve the diplomatic achievement. There was no failure in that decision in itself, despite its limited achievements and its painful costs. – Both the position of the Prime minister – who had preferred to avoid the ground operation – and the position of the Minister of Defense – who had thought it would have served Israel's interest to go for it – had been taken on the merits and on the basis of evidence. Both enjoyed serious support among the members of the general staff of the IDF and others. Even if both statesmen took into account political and public concerns – a fact we cannot ascertain – we believe that they both acted out of a strong and sincere perception of what they thought at the time was Israel's interest. 32. We want to stress: The duty to make these difficult decisions was the political leaders'. The sole test of these decisions is public and political. 33. At the same time, we also note that: – We have not found within either the political or the military echelons a serious consideration of the question whether it was reasonable to expect military achievements in 60 hours that could have contributed meaningfully to any of the goals of the operation; – We have not found that the political echelon was aware of the details of the fighting in real time, and we have not seen a discussion, in either the political or the military echelons, of the issue of stopping the military operation after the Security Council resolution was adopted; – We have not seen an explanation of the tension between the great effort to get additional time to conclude the first stage of the planned ground operation and the decisions not to go on fighting until the ceasefire itself. 34. A description of failures in the conduct of war may be regarded as harming Israel. There will be those who may use our findings to hurt Israel and its army. We nonetheless point out these failures and shortcomings because we are certain that only in this way Israel may come out of this ordeal strengthened. We are pleased that processes of repair have already started. We recommend a deep and systematic continuation of such processes. It is exclusively in the hands of Israeli leaders and public to determine whether, when facing challenges in the future, we will come to them more prepared and ready, and whether we shall cope with them in a more serious and responsible way than the way the decision-makers had acted – in the political and the military echelons – in the 2nd Lebanon war. 35. Our recommendations contain suggestions for systemic and deep changes in the modalities of thinking and acting of the political and military echelons and their interface, in both routine and emergency, including war. These are deep and critical processes. Their significance should not be obscured by current affairs, local successes or initial repairs. A persistent and prolonged effort, on many levels, will be needed in order to bring about the essential improvements in the ways of thinking and acting of the political-military systems. www.reiner-bernstein.de 400 – Chronologie 2008

36. For these reasons we would like to caution against dangers which might upset plans and delay required change processes, and thus produce dangerous results: – Fear of criticism in case of failure may lead to defensive reactions, working by the book, and abstention from making resolute decisions and preferring non-action. Such behavior is undesirable and also dangerous. – In a dynamic complex reality, one should not prepare better for the last war. It is also essential not to limit oneself to superficial action, designed to create an appearance that flaws had been corrected. – It is also essential not to focus exclusively on coping with dangers, but to combine readiness for threat scenarios with an active seeking of opportunities. – When speaking on learning, one should take into account that enemies, too, are learning their lessons. 37. The 2nd Lebanon War has brought again to the foreground for thought and discussion issues that some parts of Israeli society had preferred to suppress: Israel cannot survive in this region, and cannot live in it in peace or at least non-war, unless people in Israel itself and in its surroundings believe that Israel has the political and military leadership, military capabilities, and social robustness that will allow her to deter those of its neighbors who wish to harm her, and to prevent them – if necessary through the use of military force – from achieving their goal. 38. These truths do not depend on one's partisan or political views. Israel must – politically and morally – seek peace with its neighbors and make necessary compromises. At the same time, seeking peace or managing the conflict must come from a position of social, political and military strength, and through the ability and willingness to fight for the state, its values and the security of its population even in the absence of peace. 39. These truths have profound and far-reaching implications for many dimensions of life in Israel and the ways its challenges are managed. Beyond examining the way the Lebanon War was planned and conducted; beyond the examination of flaws in decision-making and performance that had been revealed in it – important as they may be; these are the central questions that the Lebanon war has raised. These are issues that lie at the very essence of our existence here as a Jewish and democratic state. These are the questions we need to concentrate on. 40. We hope that our findings and conclusions in the Interim and the Final Reports will bring about not only a redress of failings and flaws, but help Israeli society, its leaders and thinkers, to advance the long-term goals of Israel, and develop the appropriate ways to address the challenges and respond to them. 41. We are grateful for the trust put in us when this difficult task was given to us. If we succeed in facilitating rectification of the failings we have identified – this will be our best reward. Thank you.

184 IDF SPOKESPERSONS ANNOUNCEMENT – IDF Response to the Report of the Winograd Committee, January 30, 2008: The IDF views the report of the Winograd Committee as an important document, and is obliged to evaluate its contents and act accordingly to correct any shortcomings. As a body that is constantly under public scrutiny, the IDF considers this report to be important tool for detecting and correcting its problems and shortcomings. The IDF is fully aware of the failures and lessons that were revealed in the different fields during the Second Lebanese War, and to the perception www.reiner-bernstein.de 401 – Chronologie 2008

that was created among the Israeli public, therefore it is in a midst of a comprehensive and continuing process of correction. The IDF did not wait for the report and immediately after the war, on the orders of the Chief of Staff, at the time, Lt. Gen. (res.) Dan Halutz, initiated a thorough process of inquiries which resulted in an extensive list of lessons and conclusions. It is emphasized, that this list was translated to an encompassing work plan which constitutes a major change. The process began during the year of 2007, which was declared in the IDF as "the year of strengthening and preparedness", during which priority was given to operational frameworks and infrastructure. Accordingly and as a result of the size of the challenges and gaps that were identified, it is important to stress that there is no single and immediate solution to these issues, but rather in a multi-year program, which will provide a comprehensive system-wide solution, according to the priorities defined within the program. Following the war, the IDF operative conception was updated and the priority was placed on the joint training and combat operation of the different branches, as well as the strengthening of the IDF land maneuver capability, alongside the clarifying of fighting values and the foundations of the moral spirit of the IDF. The IDF operative plans and orders were examined and rewritten according to the IDF's needs in a clear and professional manner. These plans are constantly reviewed, and their goals are updated on a multi- annual basis. During the past year, the IDF has implemented a training program which was unprecedented in its scale for many years. One of the lessons from the war dealt with the need to exercise the senior command, thus during 2007 the General Staff, the Air Force, the Navy and the four Commands (Central, Northern, Southern and the Home Front) participated in exercises. In addition, divisional training exercises as well as brigade level (permanent army and reserve), combat support level, Air Force and Navy level (permanent army and reserve) exercises took place; all of which included mobile elements and live fire, while implementing the lessons and conclusions which were reached during the war inquiries. A special emphasis was placed on the reserve forces that have been defined as the "core strength" of the IDF. The IDF is operating according to a multi-year plan, to restock ammunition and weaponry in order to replace the weapons that were used by the IDF during the war. Additionally, a five year plan named "River Rapids" was inaugurated, with a total budget of nearly 2 billion shekels, for the completing and improving of the equipment in the IDF's emergency warehouses. As for the training of commanders, there has been a revolution in the instruction doctrine, as well as a decision that no officer should be appointed to a position for which he does not have the appropriate professional trainings while emphasizing the continuing nature of this training and instruction. Since the war programs for training commanders were developed (some of them from the foundations), improved and implanted this year, including a Division Commanders Course, a Brigade Commanders Course and unification of the Air, Land, Navy and Intelligence Command and Staff Colleges into one. www.reiner-bernstein.de 402 – Chronologie 2008

In the field of the Home Front, the Command had undergone a long and thorough process of lesson studying, an extensive exercise took place and the Home Front Command's activity of the learning process was presented to the political echelon as well as to the State Comptroller Committee. The implementation of the lessons learned from the war was integrated in the work plan for 2008 as well as in the multi-year work plan "TEFEN" that was finalized and authorized last September. During the last year, many organizational changes were finalized with the objective of strengthening the General Staff capability to activate the force while focusing the land forces on building the land forces; two directorates were rebuilt: the Deputy Chief of Staff will serve as the head of the army's headquarters, with responsibility for activating and building the force. Medical, Logistics and Centers Branch will transform into a "Logistic Command" in which a logistics section was built. The chief corp. commanders – logistics, armaments, manpower and communications will return to the directorates of the General Staff. The Operating Division that was built in the Intelligence Branch will lead into an improvement in the procedures and operational synergies. In addition, in the Teleprocessing Branch, a Teleprocessing Brigade was established. Alongside the criticism and feeling of disappointment after the war, one must remember that IDF troops have shown great courage in the battlefield, and that in every contact between IDF soldiers and terrorists, the IDF forces prevailed. During the inquiries into the war, many stories of valor and bravery were discovered which led into awarding of different medals and decorations to the soldiers and officers involved. The IDF continues and will continue to act in order to gain and maintain the trust of the Israeli public, to retain quality commanders in career service and to strengthen the value of serving the country in the regular, career and reserve forces. The IDF Spokesperson wishes to emphasize that in order to withstand its tasks and future challenges, the IDF will need the trust, support and assistance of the Israeli people, as well as constructive criticism that the IDF is obligated to study and implement.

185 Daniel Barenboim: Israeli and Palestinian, in „International Herald Tribune“ 29.01.2008; „Middle East Times” 01.02.2008; „The Guardian” 30.01.2008: BERLIN: I have often made the statement that the destinies of the Israeli and Palestinian people are inextricably linked and that there is no military solution to the conflict. My recent acceptance of Palestinian nationality has given me the opportunity to demonstrate this more tangibly. When my family moved to Israel from Argentina in the 1950s, one of my parents' intentions was to spare me the experience of growing up as part of a minority – a Jewish minority. They wanted to me to grow up as part of a majority – a Jewish majority. The tragedy of this is that my generation, despite having been educated in a society whose positive aspects and human values have greatly enriched my thinking, ignored the existence of a minority within Israel – a non- Jewish minority – which had been the majority in the whole of Palestine until the creation of the state of Israel in 1948. Part of the non-Jewish population remained in Israel, and other parts left out of fear or were forcefully displaced. In the Israeli-Palestinian conflict there was and still is an inability to admit the interdependence of their two voices. The creation of the state of Israel was the result of a Jewish-European idea, which, if it is to extend its www.reiner-bernstein.de 403 – Chronologie 2008

leitmotif into the future, must accept the Palestinian identity as an equally valid leitmotif. The demographic development is impossible to ignore; Palestinians within Israel are a minority but a rapidly growing one, and their voice needs to be heard now more than ever. They now make up approximately 22 percent of the population of Israel. This is a larger percentage than was ever represented by a Jewish minority in any country in any period of history. The total number of Palestinians living within Israel and in the occupied territories (that is, greater Israel for the Israelis or greater Palestine for the Palestinians) is already larger than the Jewish population. At present, Israel is confronted at once with three problems: the nature of the modern democratic Jewish state – its very identity; the problem of Palestinian identity within Israel; and the problem of the creation of a Palestinian state outside of Israel. With Jordan and Egypt it was possible to attain what can best be described as an ice-cold peace without questioning Israel's existence as a Jewish state. The problem of the Palestinians within Israel, however, is a much more challenging one to solve, both theoretically and practically. For Israel, it means, among other things, coming to terms with the fact that the land was not barren or empty, "a land without a people," an idea that was propagated at the time of its creation. For the Palestinians, it means accepting the fact that Israel is a Jewish state and is here to stay. Israelis, however, must accept the integration of the Palestinian minority even if it means changing certain aspects of the nature of Israel; they must also accept the justification for and necessity of the creation of a Palestinian state next to the state of Israel. Not only is there no alternative, or magic wand, that will make the Palestinians disappear, but their integration is an indispensable condition – on moral, social and political grounds – for the very survival of Israel. The longer the occupation continues and Palestinian dissatisfaction remains unaddressed, the more difficult it is to find even elementary common ground. We have seen so often in the modern history of the Middle East that missed opportunities for reconciliation have had extremely negative results for both sides. For my part, when the Palestinian passport was offered to me, I accepted it in the spirit of acknowledging the Palestinian destiny that I, as an Israeli, share. A true citizen of Israel must reach out to the Palestinian people with openness, and at the very least an attempt to understand what the creation of the state of Israel has meant to them. The 15th of May, 1948, is the day of independence for the Jews, but the same day is Al Nakba, the catastrophe, for the Palestinians. A true citizen of Israel must ask himself what the Jews, known as an intelligent people of learning and culture, have done to share their cultural heritage with the Palestinians. A true citizen of Israel must also ask himself why the Palestinians have been condemned to live in slums and accept lower standards of education and medical care, rather than being provided by the occupying force with decent, dignified and liveable conditions, a right common to all human beings. In any occupied territory, the occupiers are responsible for the quality of life of the occupied, and in the case of the Palestinians, the different Israeli governments over the last 40 years have failed miserably. The Palestinians naturally must continue to resist the occupation and all attempts to deny them basic individual needs and statehood. However, for their own sake this resistance must not express itself through violence. www.reiner-bernstein.de 404 – Chronologie 2008

Crossing the boundary from adamant resistance (including non-violent demonstrations and protests) to violence only results in more innocent victims and does not serve the long-term interests of the Palestinian people. At the same time, the citizens of Israel have just as much cause to be alert to the needs and rights of the Palestinian people (both within and outside Israel) as they do to their own. After all, in the sense that we share one land and one destiny, we should all have dual citizenship. Daniel Barenboim, a pianist and conductor, is music director of the Staatskapelle Berlin and principal guest conductor at La Scala Opera in Milan. He is co- founder with Edward Said of the West-Eastern Divan Orchestra, which brings together Arab and Israeli musicians.

186 Rede von Bundesaußenminister [Frank-Walter] Steinmeier anlässlich einer Diskussionsveranstaltung mit palästinensischen und deutschen Wirtschaftsvertretern im Haus der Deutschen Wirtschaft, Berlin, 23.01.2008: Sehr geehrter Herr Premierminister [Salam Fayyad], Sehr geehrter Herr Börner [Präsident des Bundesverbandes des deutschen Außenwirtschaftshandels], Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren, ich freue mich, heute zusammen mit dem palästinensischen Premierminister Salam Fayyad bei Ihnen zu sein. Mein besonderer Dank gilt den Veranstaltern, der Nordafrika-und-Mittelost-Initiative der deutschen Wirtschaft, dem Deutschen Industrie-und-Handelskammer Tag, und natürlich ganz besonders auch dem Bundesverband des deutschen Groß- und Außenhandels, dessen Präsident Herr Börner dankenswerterweise die Initiative für die heutige Veranstaltung ergriffen hat und unser heutiger Gastgeber ist. Wir können es fast täglich beobachten: Die Konferenz von Annapolis hat die schwierige Lage im Nahen Osten nicht von einem Tag zum anderen zum Besseren gewendet. Aber sie hat – und das ist für dieses wichtige Jahr 2008 von großer Bedeutung – Israelis und Palästinensern eine neue Chance auf eine dauerhafte Friedenslösung gegeben. Noch vor einem Jahr hätte dies niemand für möglich gehalten. Wir haben heute im Nahen Osten – mehr als je zuvor seit dem Ausbruch der 2. Intifada vor fast 8 Jahren – wieder Grund zur Hoffnung. Die Bedingungen für die Verständigung auf eine Zweistaatenlösung sind so gut wie seit Langem nicht: Lassen Sie mich dies kurz erläutern: – Die israelische und die palästinensische Regierung sind beide entschlossen, zu einem Verhandlungsabschluss zu kommen. Natürlich gibt es auf beiden Seiten weiter innenpolitische Schwierigkeiten. Aber sowohl Premierminister Olmert als auch Präsident Abbas haben wiederholt betont, dass sie diese für überwindbar halten. – Palästinenser und Israelis scheinen in ihrer Mehrheit bereit für einen Friedensschluss, auch wenn sie dafür schmerzhafte Kompromisse in Kauf nehmen müssen. – Die Konferenz in Annapolis zeigte zudem: Erstmals seit langer Zeit ist die große Mehrzahl der arabischen Staaten gewillt, ernsthafte Verhandlungen zwischen Israel und Palästina aktiv zu unterstützen. Die breite Teilnahme arabischer Staaten in Annapolis hat dies eindrucksvoll unterstrichen. – Und schließlich hat der Prozess durch die uneingeschränkte Unterstützung von US-Präsident Bush, die er zuletzt vor zwei Wochen bei seiner Reise in die Region zum Ausdruck gebracht hat, an Fahrt gewonnen. www.reiner-bernstein.de 405 – Chronologie 2008

Wie die gegenwärtige Krise in Gaza zeigt, gibt es manche Hindernisse. Andere werden kommen. Wir müssen aber die gegenwärtige Chance zum politischen und wirtschaftlichen Nutzen der gesamten Region ergreifen. Dieses Momentum wollen wir am Leben erhalten, indem wir die Bemühungen beider Konfliktparteien mit aller Kraft unterstützen. Die Regierungen werden die politischen Verhandlungen nur mit Rückhalt in ihrer Bevölkerung zum Erfolg bringen. Doch nur wer Vertrauen in seine eigene Zukunft hat, wird dieses auch in seine Regierung setzen. Die Menschen in der Region müssen daher eine konkrete Verbesserung ihrer Lebenssituation spüren. Israelis wollen ohne Bombenattentate und Kassamraketen leben. Die Palästinenser wünschen sich neben Sicherheit ganz besonders eine wirtschaftliche Perspektive. Sie wollen spüren, dass die Verhandlungen und das Ergebnis ihnen unmittelbar Verbesserungen im täglichen Leben bringen. Auf palästinensischer Seite bedeutet dies: Eine schnelle Wiederbelebung der palästinensischen Wirtschaft. Diese ist gewiss durch die Vielzahl der israelischen Sicherheitskontrollen und Bewegungshindernisse in der Westbank behindert. Es gilt aber gleichwohl, die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung in den palästinensischen Gebieten neu zu beleben und die ökonomischen Voraussetzungen für eine Belebung zu schaffen. Dr. Fayyad hat den ersten, wichtigen Schritt in diese Richtung gemacht, als er in enger Zusammenarbeit mit dem IWF und der Weltbank einen Reformplan erarbeitet hat, der die Grundlage für eine Wiederbelebung der palästinensischen Wirtschaft legt. Er wird Ihnen sicher dazu mehr sagen können. Die Herausforderungen für die Palästinenser sind groß: Die palästinensische Wirtschaft, bestehend überwiegend aus kleineren mittelständischen Unternehmen, muss auf dem globalen Markt bestehen. Diese Unternehmen werden die Hauptlast für die wirtschaftliche Basis eines künftigen palästinensischen Staates tragen. Diese Aufgabe müssen die Palästinenser selbst leisten – und dass sie dies wollen, davon können Sie sich heute selbst überzeugen. Dr. Fayyad wird begleitet von Herrn Munib Al Masri, eine der Führungsfiguren der palästinensischen Unternehmerschaft, und Dr. Bassam Khoury, dem Präsidenten der Palestinian Federation of Industries und erfolgreicher Unternehmer. Beide haben es geschafft, trotz der widrigen Umstände palästinensische Unternehmen wirtschaftlich erfolgreich zu führen. Ich bin der Auffassung, dass wir diesen in der ganzen arabischen Welt gerühmten palästinensischen Unternehmergeist unterstützen müssen. Und wo immer wir können, wollen wir diese Bemühungen mit Kräften unterstützen. Die Bundesregierung tut dies bereits seit geraumer Zeit. Es sei nur der European Palestinian Credit Guarantuee Fund, die Unterstützung für die Erschließung eines Industrieparks in Jenin oder wirtschaftliche Beratung erwähnt. Es heißt aber auch, palästinensischen Unternehmen zu helfen, Kontakte zu europäischen/deutschen Unternehmen zu knüpfen! Die Bundesregierung und ich persönlich legen großen Wert auf diese Kontakte. Es ist bereits das dritte Mal innerhalb der vergangenen 12 Monate, dass palästinensische Unternehmer nach Deutschland kommen, und ich bin optimistisch, dass dies zu Geschäftsabschlüssen, zu mehr Arbeitsplätzen und höheren Steuereinnahmen für die Palästinenser führen wird. www.reiner-bernstein.de 406 – Chronologie 2008

Nun ist der palästinensische Markt unter den arabischen ohne Zweifel nicht der größte. Die Wirkung, die von ihm ausgeht, strahlt aber in den gesamten arabischen Raum. Wirtschaftliches Engagement in Palästina wird in der ganzen Region wahrgenommen. Eine Stabilisierung der palästinensischen Wirtschaft hätte zudem zugleich politisch stabilisierende Wirkung auf die Gesamtregion. Und – wie das Beispiel der Herrn Masri und Khoury zeigt, kann man dabei durchaus auch Geld verdienen! Meine Damen und Herren, bei dieser Gelegenheit lassen Sie mich auch einige Worte zu der von Premierminister Fayyad und mir heute vorgestellten Initiative "Zukunft für Palästina" sagen. Sie zielt auf schnell umsetzbare kleinere Projekte, die den Menschen kurzfristig sichtbare Erfolge parallel zu den laufenden Verhandlungen zeigen. Sie sollen spüren, dass sich für sie etwas ändert. "Zukunft für Palästina" setzt genau an diesem Punkt an: Die Initiative umfasst schnell umsetzbare, kleine Projekte in einer Größenordnung von etwa 100.000 Euro, bei denen die Implementierung bereits in den nächsten Wochen und Monaten beginnen kann. Die Initiative wird ein komplementäres Instrument zu anderen internationalen Bemühungen sein. Sie versteht sich auch als Ergänzung zur klassischen Zusammenarbeit, zumal sie nach dem Anschub im Wesentlichen Instrument des zivilgesellschaftlichen Engagements aus Deutschland wird. Die Initiative will bewusst relativ bescheidene Projekte ins Leben rufen, damit die Umsetzung überschaubar, transparent und kurzfristig gewährleistet werden kann. Sie werden unmittelbar mit den palästinensischen Partnern entwickelt und mit Hilfe des Deutschen Vertretungsbüros in Ramallah und der Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, der GTZ ab Februar 2008 umgesetzt. Erste Projekte auf Vorschlag von Premierminister Fayyad wurden bereits identifiziert und ausgearbeitet. Es handelt sich dabei um Projekte, die Kindern in Kindergärten und Schulen bessere Lernbedingungen schaffen werden. Nach dem Anschub durch das Auswärtige Amt mit 6 Projekten sollen Sponsoren aus der deutschen Wirtschaft, Verbänden und Gesellschaft weitere Patenschaften in derselben Größenordnung übernehmen. Daimler, Software AG, Sie, lieber Herr Börner von der BAG, die Henkel- und Körber-Stiftung haben bereits zugesagt. Mit anderen Unternehmen und Stiftungen stehen wir im Gespräch. Und vielleicht findet sich auch unter Ihnen der eine oder andere, der daran Interesse finden könnte. Meine Mitarbeiter stehen Ihnen gerne für weitere Informationen zur Verfügung. Damit komme ich zu unserem heutigen Ehrengast, Premierminister Dr. Salam Fayyad. Dr. Fayyad ist eine der Schlüsselfiguren in diesem Prozess. Er ist trotz der großen Aufgaben in seiner Heimat heute in Berlin unser Gast. Er setzt auf konkretes Handeln und will tagtäglich einen neuen Baustein für eine bessere Zukunft setzen, in der Palästinenser und Israelis im beiderseitigen Respekt gemeinsam in einem wirtschaftlich prosperierenden Nahen Osten leben können. Und für die Wirtschaft ist Dr. Fayyad ein Mann vom Fach: Nach seinem Abschluss in Wirtschaftswissenschaften an der Texas University war er zunächst als Berater des Exekutivdirektors des Internationalen Währungsfonds IWF tätig und übernahm anschließend den Posten des IWF-Regionaldirektors in Gaza. Nach einer kurzen Tätigkeit als Regionaldirektor der Arab Bank Palästina wurde er im Jahr 2002 unter dem damaligen Palästinenserpräsident Arafat erstmals Finanzminister der Palästinensischen Autonomiebehörde. Seit Juni 2007 ist er in www.reiner-bernstein.de 407 – Chronologie 2008

Personalunion Premier- und Finanzminister der geschäftsführenden palästinensischen Regierung. Dr. Fayyad, Sie haben das Wort!

187 Bericht in der Menüleiste „Bestandsaufnahmen und Perspektiven“ dieser Homepage.

188 Aluf Benn: Jerusalem seeks Bush’s okay for IDF free hand in West Bank, in „Haaretz“-Online 03.01.2008: Israel is seeking to reach an understanding with the U.S. administration that would safeguard Israel's security interests in a future final-status agreement with the Palestinians and during current negotiations, government sources have said. The sources also said Israel is seeking President George W. Bush's support for its security demands so that such understandings can serve as a basis for the work of the American special security envoy General James Jones, who has been tasked with formulating the security arrangements for an Israeli-Palestinian agreement. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is to discuss these security issues with Bush during the president's visit here next week. At the heart of Israel's demands is that it remains free to act against terror in the West Bank for as long as negotiations last, and that demilitarization arrangements place limitations on the future Palestinian state. Discussions with administration officials on this issue began even before the Annapolis summit, during the visit of the Israeli delegation to Washington. Wednesday Olmert called a meeting ahead of the Bush visit with Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni. Barak presented the security demands in detail and Livni discussed the importance of demilitarizing the areas that Israel would evacuate in the future. Israel wants to maintain effective military superiority in the territories during the talks, and ensure that it has the freedom to act against terror organizations in Gaza. "It is inconceivable that we would be prevented from continuing the extraordinary achievement against terror in the West Bank," a source said. "In the previous year no Israeli was killed within the Green Line from an attack that came from the West Bank. In the West Bank, four people were killed. In the South, it is true that quiet has not yet returned to Sderot, but we are carrying out an effective and focused offensive there. Hundreds of terrorists were killed last year." Israel would like the U.S. to agree to a number of limitations on the future Palestinian state's sovereignty. Israel wants Palestine to be completely demilitarized, and for Israel to be able to fly over Palestinian air space. Border crossings would be monitored by Israel in such a way that the symbols of Palestinian sovereignty would not be compromised, but Israel would know who was coming and going. Israel is to propose the deployment of an international force in the West Bank and along the Philadelphi Route in Rafah, and would ask that a permanent Israel Defense Forces presence remain for an extended period in the Jordan Valley. Jordan Valley 'tripwire force' According to Israel's plan, a small Israeli force would be stationed in the Jordan Valley as a "tripwire force" that would act as a deterrent. Israel would also demand Palestinian agreement that in the case of an www.reiner-bernstein.de 408 – Chronologie 2008

emergency Israel could deploy in essential areas of the West Bank to thwart a threat of invasion from the East. Such a deployment would only take place under extreme circumstances, but including it in the agreement would ensure that the Palestinians would not object if the time came when it was needed. Under ordinary circumstances the West Bank would be completely demilitarized, with only internal Palestinian security forces on duty. The Barak government reached agreement with the Clinton administration on a number of security issues with regard to a future accord with the Palestinians. However, monitoring border crossings and a long-term IDF presence in the Jordan Valley was not among them. The Palestinians vehemently opposed the security steps Israel wanted, such as the emergency IDF deployment in the West Bank, which they saw as damaging to their independence and sovereignty. Israel now seeks to reopen the discussion in the hope that Bush will support its demands. According to government and security sources, "in most of the issues involving the agreement with the Palestinians, Israel is the one being asked to give tangible things. The only area in which we have real demands from the Palestinians is that of security arrangements. Therefore it is important that the talks have the proper outline so that Israel can insist on its security demands and the Palestinians will not dilute them."

189 Bush: Settlement expansion ‚impediment’ to peace, in „Haaretz“-Online 03.01.2008: U.S. President George W. Bush on Thursday called Israeli settlement expansion an "impediment" to the success of revived peace efforts and urged the Jerusalem to follow through on its pledge to dismantle unauthorized settler outposts. Speaking less than a week before his first presidential visit to Israel and the West Bank, Bush voiced optimism at the prospects for securing an Israeli- Palestinian peace deal by the end of 2008, a goal set at last November's Annapolis conference that has been viewed with some skepticism. Bush said he would use his trip to keep up pressure on both sides, including making clear to Israelis his concern about continued Jewish settlement activity. "I will talk about Israeli settlement expansion, about how that is, that can be, you know, an impediment to success," in an interview at the White House with Reuters. "The unauthorized outposts for example need to be dismantled, like the Israelis said they would do." Bush also acknowledged that part of the reason for his January 8-16 Middle East trip is "absolutely" about efforts to contain Iran's influence in the region. Bush said that on his trip, which starts in Israel and will include stops in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Kuwait, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, he expects questions about a U.S. National Intelligence Estimate last month that said Iran had stopped its nuclear weapons program in 2003. "I will clarify to them that the NIE means that Iran is still a danger," he said. Bush's trip follows a U.S.-hosted conference last month in Annapolis, Maryland, where Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas pledged to try to forge a peace deal by the end of 2008. Asked whether he would hold three-way talks with Abbas and Olmert during his visit, Bush said, "I don't know. It's not on the calendar now. But there will definitely be substantial talks with the Israelis and the Palestinians." www.reiner-bernstein.de 409 – Chronologie 2008

190 Vgl. die Eintragung am 12.12.2007 in dieser Zeitleiste.

191 Gert Weisskirchen: OSZE als Friedensforum, in „Jüdische Zeitung“ Januar 2008: Zum ersten Mal fand in Israel eine Konferenz der «Organisation für Sicherheit und Zusammenarbeit in Europa» (OSZE) statt. Ihre Vorgängerin war bis 1990 die «Konferenz für Sicherheit und Zusammenarbeit in Europa» (KSZE). Sie wurde 1975 in Helsinki gegründet und hat mit dazu beigetragen, zwischen den damals verfeindeten Staatsblöcken Prozesse der Verständigung einzuleiten und den aggressiven Charakter der Grenzen in Europa abzubauen. Der OSZE sind 56 Staaten beigetreten. Weitere haben sich als Partnerländer assoziiert, darunter alle nichteuropäischen Mittelmeerländer. Eine ihrer Aufgaben könnte es sein, ihre guten Dienste anzubieten, damit die Spannungen zwischen Israel und den arabischen Ländern reduziert werden. Um dies auszuloten, wurde am 18. und 19. Dezember 2007 die OSZE-Konferenz der Teilnehmerstaaten und ihrer Mittelmeerpartner in Tel Aviv eingerichtet. Thema der Konferenz war «die Bekämpfung von Intoleranz und Diskriminierung und die Vermittlung von gegenseitigem Respekt und Verständnis». Zudem fand am Vortag der offiziellen Konferenz ein Treffen von Vertretern der «Nichtregierungsorganisationen» (NGO) statt. Die Konferenz hat es leider nicht geschafft, alle Mittelmeerpartnerländer der OSZE an einen Tisch zu bringen. Bei der offiziellen Konferenz waren Ägypten und Jordanien vertreten, auf der NGO-Konferenz zudem Marokko. Die Regierung Israels ist den Partnerstaaten der OSZE weit entgegen gekommen. Sie hat es konsequenterweise vermieden, Jerusalem als Standort zu benennen. Das war eine weise Entscheidung schon deshalb, um die arabischen Regierungen hinsichtlich der Jerusalem-Frage nicht unter Druck zu setzen. Als Einladende zu diesem Treffen hat sich die israelische Regierung deutlich zurückgenommen. Sie zeigte der OSZE ihre Bereitschaft, aktiv eine fruchtbare Diskussion unter Beteiligung der arabischen Staaten in Gang zu bringen. Mit großem Bedauern haben die Teilnehmer feststellen müssen, dass die Mehrzahl der arabischen Regierungen diese Chance nicht wahrnahm. Gründe dafür kennen wir noch nicht. Könnte es die Angst sein, sich einer offenen, vorurteilslosen Debatte zu stellen? Das aber gerade ist der Sinn des Helsinki-Prozesses: Kontroversen auf den argumentativen Grund zu gehen, Debatten zu starten, die darauf zielen, das eigene Selbstverständnis kritisch zu beleuchten. Die OSZE muss sich fragen, was sie tun kann, um die Mittelmeerpartnerländer zukünftig stärker zu involvieren. In der Region sollten auf jeden Fall mehr Seminare und Konferenzen stattfinden, um die Fachleute vor Ort einzubeziehen. In meiner Funktion als Persönlicher Beauftragter des OSZE-Vorsitzenden zur Bekämpfung des Antisemitismus werde ich dies selbst umsetzen. Im September 2008 plane ich ein Seminar in Rabat. Trotz alledem: Tel Aviv war ein Erfolg, haben doch der Ort der Veranstaltung und die informativen Beiträge der israelischen Referenten den Teilnehmern ermöglicht, Einblicke in die innere Entwicklung der israelischen Gesellschaft zu gewinnen. Der Eindruck wurde verstärkt, dass die israelische Regierung alles daran setzt, gemeinsam mit der arabischen Minderheit soziale Integrationsprozesse zu intensivieren. Zudem wurde von Vertreterinnen der „Nichtregierungsorganisationen“ über die Situation von Frauen in Israel berichtet. Israel ist sich der großen Aufgabe bewusst, die Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Beruf für Frauen zu erleichtern. Mit der www.reiner-bernstein.de 410 – Chronologie 2008

Konferenz hat der Staat Israel überzeugend dokumentiert, dass er bereit ist, den Dialog mit den Partnern in der Region selbst zu eröffnen. Allerdings: Ohne die Fähigkeit, sich inhaltlich mit dem Argument des Anderen auseinanderzusetzen, geht jeder Dialogversuch ins Leere. Die Konferenz war ein wichtiges Zeichen. Sie verdeutlichte die Stärke der israelischen Demokratie. Niemand sollte sich entmutigen zu lassen, weil die arabischen Regierungen sich noch ängstlich zeigten.