"Correct me if im wrong but I believe Israel is in permenant violation of resolution 242."

OK Joe, I will correct you. The UN resolution called for the return of territories captured in the Six Day War but only in return for an overall peace agreement recognising Israel's right to live within secure borders. Israel has fully complied with this resolution by returning land to Egypt and Jordan in recognition of their agreement to accept the existence of Israel. Israel has even returned land to those who don't have a peace treaty with them and of course have been rewarded with rocket attacks from those areas, which of course is hardly conducive to more land being returned in this way.

Incidentally, it is clear from the other points you have made that you have not taken account of the other side of the argument as set out in my earlier comments here and on the pages covering the Post Office issue.

Frances, I presume from your comment that Jews will deserve what they get from anti-semites if they don't come out against Israel.

Paul, the Palestinian refugees were not expelled but fled when Israel defeated the massed armies of the Arab states when they invaded Israel in 1948,

And for every alleged atrocity by the Israelis there are dozens by the other side where it is clear that civilians were DELIBERATELY targeted without any provocation.

"Why should either side consent to talks along these lines when both are committed to the pursuit of their political objectives by military means? Why should Hamas abandon its policy of overturning the Zionist state? Why should the Israelis give up on their reliance on overwhelming military force?"

Well, they won't until they face it themselves, which, I suspect, is the way the world is going. I'm never sure what Martin means by "overturning the Zionist state". It could mean as little as changing a couple of clauses in the basic law and the administrative law based on those clauses, through the creation of an enlarged bi-national state to total - and totally improbable - obliteration of the racist state of Israel and its people, which I suspect Martin, perhaps unconsciously, implies.

As Norman Finkelstein said in a discussion with Amy Goodman, Juan Gonzalez and Martin Indyk, Ambassador to Israel and Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs during the Clinton administration, on yesterday’s Democracy Now!

NORMAN FINKELSTEIN: “Well, the record is fairly clear. You can find it on the Israeli website, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs website. Mr. Indyk is correct that Hamas had adhered to the ceasefire from June 17th until November 4th. On November 4th, here Mr. Indyk, I think, goes awry. The record is clear: Israel broke the ceasefire by going into the Gaza and killing six or seven Palestinian militants. At that point—and now I’m quoting the official Israeli website—Hamas retaliated or, in retaliation for the Israeli attack, then launched the missiles.

“Now, as to the reason why, the record is fairly clear as well. According to Ha’aretz, Defense Minister Barak began plans for this invasion before the ceasefire even began. In fact, according to yesterday’s Ha’aretz, the plans for the invasion began in March. And the main reasons for the invasion, I think, are twofold. Number one, as Mr. Indyk I think correctly points out, to enhance what Israel calls its deterrence capacity, which in layman’s language basically means Israel’s capacity to terrorize the region into submission. After their defeat in July 2006 in Lebanon, they felt it important to transmit the message that Israel is still a fighting force, still capable of terrorizing those who dare defy its word.

“And the second main reason for the attack is because Hamas was signaling that it wanted a diplomatic settlement of the conflict along the June 1967 border. That is to say, Hamas was signaling they had joined the international consensus, they had joined most of the international community, overwhelmingly the international community, in seeking a diplomatic settlement. And at that point, Israel was faced with what Israelis call a Palestinian peace offensive. And in order to defeat the peace offensive, they sought to dismantle Hamas.”

The transcript and the full video, both of which are highly rewarding, can be found here:
www.democracynow.org/2009/1/8/former_amb_martin_indyk_vs_author

Gaza: Towards a European Solution
Martin Yarnit
There is no military solution in Gaza. Every generation of Palestinians produces a new wave of militants dedicated to the destruction of Israel. Without a political solution, the Israeli Defence Force will be battling the grandchildren of the people killed in Gaza this week.
The blockade of Gaza, to prevent arms imports, the bombing to destroy the military and political base of Hamas: these make a perverted sense to Western governments who see Hamas as their enemy. For the sake of these, the same governments have to grit their teeth while civilian casualties mount. A cease fire may stem the flow of blood, for the time being at least, but it won’t prevent a reoccurrence of hostilities in the future. For the sake of the security of the Israelis and the Palestinians and the prosperity of both peoples, the West has no alternative but to push for the end of the occupation of the West Bank and Golan Heights, and the removal of illegal Jewish settlements.
Why should either side consent to talks along these lines when both are committed to the pursuit of their political objectives by military means? Why should Hamas abandon its policy of overturning the Zionist state? Why should the Israelis give up on their reliance on overwhelming military force?
The lesson from other war zones is that economic development is the only balm in the long term. France and Germany, traditional foes for generations, used the European Iron and Steel Community to bury the hatchet. The creeping creation of an all Ireland trading zone within the EU is beginning to dissolve the differences between Catholic and Protestant. The prospect of EU membership has worked wonders on intransigence in Turkey and the Balkans, strengthening the hand of democrats and supporters of human rights. The same approach should be directed now towards Israel, the Palestinians and their neighbours.
Turkey, a trusted interlocutor between Israel and the Arabs, could act as the lynchpin of this new diplomatic initiative, with a firmer offer from the EU of membership as a reward. The US, which has tried and failed to install democracy in the Middle East by force, should instead support the Europeans by providing financial guarantees for a programme of peaceful economic development in the region.
Given the EU’s hesitancy towards Turkish membership in the past, why would it now want to contemplate a major expansion of its reach in one of the world’s most troubled and poverty-stricken regions? A long term plan, perhaps stretching over 15-20 years, would have to be agreed leading to full membership which would lay down the terms for confidence building through new institutions for economic cooperation and the creation of a Middle Eastern Commonwealth. The plan would also envisage the creation of a network of major cities across the region including new cities in what is currently the West Bank, Gaza, Jordan, Syria and Egypt plus Jerusalem that would be governed by mixed administrations in which the Palestinians would be given an equal voice. In this way, hope would be given to the Palestinian refugees that they would find a permanent home within the new Common Market.
The benefits for the EU are political and economic. The conflict in Gaza, like the conflict in Iraq, poses a big threat to the security and social cohesion of Western Europe, as the July 2004 bombings in London showed. In the short term, the costs of supporting the creation of a Middle East Commonwealth, even with the help of the US and the Saudis, would be big but the long term benefits are great. Europe would gain access to a vast developing market equivalent in size to the US. In addition, Europe might also gain an intermediate zone that would act as a pole of attraction for the waves of impoverished and war weary people who are fleeing Africa’s disaster zones for Spain, Italy and Malta.
This idea is dogged by enormous problems, but an ambitious and imaginative proposal is needed to break the log jam in Palestine-Israel. And it will need to be ambitious to have any chance of success. The Israelis are in danger of settling into a crisis economy-permanent war outlook. They are benefitting from the international growth of their homeland security industrial sector, exporting the expertise gained in their battles with the Palestinians to create a prosperity that so far defies the global credit crunch. The Israelis, or at least the section of the population that has reluctantly been forced into the war camp by Hamas, have to believe that sometime soon they will be safer and no less prosperous than they are now.
As for the Palestinians, whose internal politics are driven by desperation and hopelessness, only the prospect of a large scale transformation of their political and economic fortunes will create the conditions for a new leadership willing to do business with Europe and their erstwhile enemy, Israel.
A Middle East Commonwealth, linked to the EU and eventually becoming part of the EU, leapfrogs across the tired debate about one state and two state solutions to provide a regional formula for peaceful development, releasing Israelis and Palestinians from the cycle of desperation in which they are currently trapped.

(873)

Stan, there is a very slight difference in the scale of damage caused by a rocket made in someone's kitchen and a full scale air strike, but I think you were deliberately simplyfying for the sake of arguement. If Israel also can see the state that these civilians are living in, and the close proximity to 'military' targets, surely it is illegal to carry out with those strikes anyway.
Would you have the whole population of Gaza in these tunnels for a start? Because, isn't one the prime objective's of Israels campaign to destroy these tunnel and, i assume, anyone within them?

There is no justification for the scale of this military action, and there never will be.

Just to confirm ther above message was posted by me.

I would like firstly to say well done to Compass for speaking out on this issue. Yet I would say the decision to speak out may become difficult in the future if Compass feels like it needs a dialogue on international affairs and the arab-israeli question.

Importantly the statement condemns the violence and calls for an end to the blockade. Let us not forget that Hamas was democratically elected and in that sense, a leader in the arab world.

For me the statement did not go far enough. Correct me if im wrong but I believe Israel is in permenant violation of resolution 242. Furthermore this is not the first time Israel has used massive violence which has led to civilian deaths on a large scale, 2006 to name but one. According to Robert Fisk it was Israel that broke the ceasefire not Hamas. It now seems that the Red Cross is accusing Israel of war crimes, im sure the Israeli PR spin machine will find a response today but this accusation should not be taken lightly.

The disproportionality of this conflict was inevitable when Israel decided to deploy its army. There have been around 20 israeli deaths in 10 years around Gaza and around 600 dead Palestinians in a week. Both are unacceptable but lets not pretend that the israeli army and home-made gaza rockets are equaivalent, they are not.

To condemn the bombing of a U.N school seems a little lightweight, the issue is bombing of a densely populated that will inevitably lead to civilian deaths and this should be condemned in itself.

I would like to echo solidar's statement because I think its spot on:

"What is needed is the involvement of civil society in a real dialogue process. Poverty and despair are the seed for violence. Peace building is more than signing an agreement through international pressure, it must start with mutual respect and understanding, with reconciliation and mutual learning. It is a long road, more than a roadmap, demanding the commitment of all stakeholders towards a peaceful solution based on the respect of international law, human rights and human"

Activist - many Jewish commentators are asking Israel to step back from this violence. There was a wonderful article in the Guardian by Avi Shaim this week who has served in the Israeli army and is asking Israel to stop.

The Jewish communities round the world would be supporting Israel by giving a more peaceful perspective and would win the respect of the rest of the world.

At a time like this it may be difficult to find the right words. May I recommend that people Google the Jewish Socialists' Group site for an alternative perspective ? I suggest this not because I am one of them. As a refugee from Anglicanism, I can't be. Nor because I agree with every word they say. Rather because of my respect for their civilised humanity.They have chosen a hard road because it is the just road.

Then activist mate I'm a racist, Burning a flag is something which might annoy people, dropping a 500lb bomb I think is more annoying it kills.

but yes I've become a racist over the past few years so racist it annoys me that Israel gets it's bombs and bullets from mainly the UK and America yet it's illegal for Gaza to buy anything even food or medical supplies because Israel says so, burn your flag yes I'd burn it mate.

"racism is not the sole domain of the BNP"

And presumably, in order to demonstrate that point, God invented Zionists, armed them, and gave them Palestine as a playground.

I’m asking compass as principled individuals to stand up to hatred when they see it.

I’m passionate about the Middle East and I understand the emotions felt on all sides of the debate, but this time things are spilling over into violent threats and acts against the Jewish community.
We are seeing across Europe an outpouring of anti-Semitism, synagogue’s being burnt both in the UK and on the content, Israeli’s shot in a mall in Denmark, Jewish communal buildings across Britain coated in graffiti. At protests we are seeing Israeli flags being burnt, you can be as anti-israeli as you like but burning a flag is a call for the destruction of the state and all who live there. The police have logged chants at UK protests screaming death to the jews. Facebook is alive with groups calling for mass retribution against the jews in the this country, prominent Jewish people are being targeted.
There is never an excuse for racism, if you are at a protest where racist chants are happening and you say nothing, if people march along side you carrying anti-Semitic signs and you say nothing, if groups call for the killing of Jews everywhere and you march along side without comment – you are guilty by association.
The liberal left is suffering with this outrageous undercurrent and it is about time it is kicked out. March proudly and loudly against Israel, but don’t march with those to whom a jew is a monkey or a pig.
This responsibility should not be ignored, racism is not the sole domain of the BNP, stand up and challenge it. For when these protests do spill over and synagogue’s are set alight, jews attacked and graffiti is sprayed the people who do it are not your allies due to a shared cause. The left do not let in racists just because they care about the same issues that the left care about.

So once again, Israel has opened the gates of hell to the Palestinians. Forty civilian refugees dead in a United Nations school, three more in another. Compass should be bold enough to explicitly support the people of Gaza and condemn the murderous Zionist regime. Let’s not forget about 800,000 Palestinians were forced into exile in 1948-9 and during the June 1967 war a further 325,000 Palestinians became refugees. Under UN Resolution 194, the Palestinians have the right to return to their homes, but Israel has always refused to implement the Resolution. Today over 6 million Palestinians live as refugees, hundreds of thousands of whom still live in overcrowded refugee camps in the West Bank and Gaza, and in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan. Have we forgotten the 17,500 dead – almost all civilians, most of them children and women – in Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon; the 1,700 Palestinian civilian dead in the Sabra-Chatila massacre; the 1996 Qana massacre of 106 Lebanese civilian refugees, more than half of them children, at a UN base; the massacre of the Marwahin refugees who were ordered from their homes by the Israelis in 2006 then slaughtered by an Israeli helicopter crew; the 1,000 dead of that same 2006 bombardment and Lebanese invasion, almost all of them civilians?

Can't fully remember the quote, from Desmond Tutu, but it sadly admitted that supporters of the world's relegions find themselves all to often caught up in warfare in its name.
I feel slightly less impotent being part of Compass and having seen the statement. We've got to start somewhere but its going to be a difficult bridge to build, drawing on all the experience of similar and not similar conflicts in the past.

"Why can't Hamas at least put their civilians into those tunnels they are so good at digging and attack the Israelis away from civilian areas if they care so much about these disproportionate casualties?"

Even more like fish in a barrel, heh? Armchair genocide on the cheap? Why not take it to its logical conclusion make the panoramic bombing of the innocent Israel's major tourist focal point, a regular Zionazi variant of the Changing of the Guard? What a fertile imagination you have, Stan. Someone, somewhere, must be very proud of you.

Chris, have you considered that the disproportonality in casualties may have something to do with how the two sides look after their civilians? The Israelis put them into deep shelters whereas Gazan civilians are left in their homes while rockets and shells are fired from these areas.

Why can't Hamas at least put their civilians into those tunnels they are so good at digging and attack the Israelis away from civilian areas if they care so much about these disproportionate casualties?

Frances, you complain about the disproportionality of the Israeli response. What would you like the Israelis to do then?

Stan - there's no point me answering your question when I believe violence breeds more violence and we need to de escalate all conflict. I don't think any level of terror and massacre on trapped people will lead to a long term victory for Israel so I certainly don't think Israel should be doing this. How about giving the Palestinians a state. Now that might work.

So let's turn the question round and you tell me if there is a level of violence and horror that could be delivered on the population of Gaza that even if it delivered all your war aims you would consider was unacceptable.

Stan,

you mock the disproportionality but,

Israel = 22 dead in 8 years from rockets fired out of Gaza (correct me if I'm wrong)

Gaza = 700+ dead in approx. 2 weeks from an Israel groud invasion.

Is it not true that legally every country should act with proportionality in war?

There needs to be an international force manning the border allowing the free flowing of goods in and out of Gaza, this must be key to the ceasefire if it is indeed to last. Hamas has to lay down its arms for the sake of their people and involve themselves in the diplomacy in a reasonable and effective way. There also needs to be a full independant investigation on this whole offensive, especially for the attach on that UN school which I am sure shocked us all.

I'm sure every caring person (including Israelis) supports the Compass call for a full cease-fire in Gaza,as long as it is not just a prelude to further rocket and terrorist attacks from Gaza. In the past cease-fires have been used by Hamas simply to regroup and rearm with a view to recommencing their terrorist activity as soon as possible - whilst claiming victory because the Israelis have stopped their attacks.

As for the bombing of UN schools, the true facts have still to emerge with both sides putting forward different versions of what happened. What is clear is that Hamas has fired shells from a UN school before (there being actual video footage of this) and that they had more to gain from doing this (to attract UN and world sympathy when Israel returns fire) than the Israelis who have everything to lose by such actions. I also find it to be more than a coincidence that the incident happened just before the UN started debating the issue.

Frances, you complain about the disproportionality of the Israeli response. What would you like the Israelis to do then? Respond with a home-made rocket for every one fired by Hamas? This would have to be targeted at civilians, of course, to ensure a symmetrical approach and maybe Israel could send in some suicide bombers as well to maintain that symmetry. In this way the whole game can be spun out for years, keeping everyone in a state of terror and who knows, the palestinian extremists might even win such a war of attrition. No wonder they go on about disproportionality so much.

By the way, for those who may not be aware of it, this issue has already been thoroughly debated on the site covering the Post Office issue. Don't ask me how this happened!

Michael, its really difficult to write an appropriate and sensitive statement on these issues, don't look for subtexts where there aren't any.

Great job, Compass. A ceasefire followed by a "lasting, viable and sustainable two state solution" is the only way.

"This is getting very close to a war crime repeated day after day"

A classic of understatement, frances. The occupation is a continuing war crime, the invasion - and its planning - is a war crime, and every single act of aggression is a war crime. And I wonder what we would say and do if, for instance, the Syrian government were to attack schools being run as places of refuge for civilians by the United Nations and followed it up by attacking the UN's clearly marked trucks being used to transport humanitarian aid? The Americans bombed Belgrade for a lot less. But I suppose Clinton and Blair just naturally assumed the Serbs had it coming because they're... like... y'know... well... Serbian... well... anyway, not nice to Albanian Kosovars who deserve to have their own state carved out of historically Serbian territory and delivered to them at the point of a bomb.

The latest Middle East Report is well worth reading for the backstory, the analysis and the update on a pretty amazing criminal enterprise:

www.merip.org/mero/mero010709.html

Well done Compass. Fine statement.

Unfortunately things are getting worse by the hour in Gaza. This is a population trapped in a ghetto in a way that is almost unique. They can't flee and the agencies can't get help to them.

So we don't have time to talk about the long term. This is getting very close to a war crime repeated day after day and the Israelis are claiming that they can do this because in asymmetric warfare the proportionality of the Geneva convention doesn't apply.

If true that means that a recognised power in asymetric warfare can inflict any degree of collateral damage without penalty and that can't be right and we certainly don't have time to rewrite the Geneva convention.

This terrorising of a captive population is not acceptable whether it is technically illegal or not. When a war crime is being committed what is the duty of the onlooking super powers. Negotiating durable long term peace - wringing of hands and pleading or exercising their power to stop it?

"We particularly condemn the bombing of UN schools which was both unnecessary and avoidable." - I hope this isn't meant to imply that other elements of the Israeli offensive were necessary and unavoidable, which is simply not the case.