Meddling in Africa

All signs indicate that Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman remains keen on implementing his ministry's strategic priorities as set out from his first day in office, including pouncing on Africa. Lieberman's interest in Africa revives former prime minister Golda Meir's outlook in the 1950s and 1960s. She visited most non-Arab states on the continent. Israel's current intensified moves mainly target the Horn of Africa, which includes Kenya, Sudan, Ethiopia, Eritrea and Somalia.

While the Israeli Foreign Ministry is in theory in charge of Israel's policies in Africa, there is no doubt that the party that is playing the greater role is Mossad. It maintains active agents in many African capitals, as recently revealed by Haaretz newspaper. Assigning Mossad this task is directly connected to this organisation's routine attempts to undermine the national security of Arab states in Africa and on the Red Sea.

Indeed, there is a direct relationship between recent efforts to nurture Israeli-Ethiopian ties and threats by the government of Addis Ababa to re-channel Nile waters to the disadvantage of Egypt and Sudan. According to Israeli sources, the relationship between Tel Aviv and Addis Ababa went to a new level when Tel Aviv showed dexterity in abandoning its former ally Eritrean President Isaias Afewerki for the sake of closer ties with the Ethiopian regime. Israel and Ethiopia have signed many arms deals and are involved in training programmes whereby Israeli military units train Ethiopian forces.

Some make a connection between Tel Aviv's cooperation with Addis Ababa and Ethiopia's victories over Eritrea in battles that took place two years ago. Meanwhile, no one expects Israel or Ethiopia to reveal what may have been planned against Egypt behind the scenes. Lieberman once threatened to destroy Egypt's High Dam. Meanwhile, Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz insists that Egypt is an "enemy state" despite the 1978 Egypt- Israel Peace Treaty.

It is widely known that Israel uses its relations with states and political movements that are hostile to Arab countries to undermine Arab national security, and distract influential Arab states with secondary issues. This way, the role of these Arab states in the Arab-Israeli conflict is curtailed. In a recent and unprecedented admission, Shlomo Nakdimon, adviser to former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, stated that Israel had manoeuvred since the 1950s to strengthen ties with the Kurds in northern Iraq in support of their separatist agenda to undermine the Iraqi regime and influence the priorities of Baghdad. For the same reasons, Israel drew closer to the Shah of Iran as well as the military leadership and secularists in Turkey because of their animosity towards the Arab world. Israel also built an alliance with the Maronites in Lebanon to target Palestinian resistance and Lebanese nationalist movements.

In his book Periphery Alliance, Nakdimon noted that the same reasoning was behind Israel's move to nurture ties with the separatist Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM), whereby they supplied the movement with arms and training. It is also no secret that Tel Aviv encouraged Jewish lobby groups in the US to draft agendas for expatriate Coptic groups, which are then presented to the US Congress and the US administration, specifically to include claims of discrimination and oppression of Copts.

Regarding Ethiopia, there was a time when Eritrean President Afewerki had strong ties with Israel, which had convinced him to undermine the security of Yemen by occupying Yemeni islands in the Red Sea using superior weapons supplied by Israel. But since that time Tel Aviv has felt it more beneficial to nurture relations with Ethiopia -- Afewerki's arch nemesis -- and did not hesitate in cutting the Eritrean president off. In particular, Tel Aviv wants to sidetrack Egypt since it continues to be the major challenge for Israel's regional strategy, as stated by Israel's deputy prime minister and minister of strategic threats in Netanyahu's government, General Moshe Yalon, who previously served as chief of staff of the armed forces.

Israel's interest in the Horn of Africa is not limited to meddling in Egypt's national security by interfering with Cairo's quota of Nile waters, but also serves higher Israeli goals. The Horn of Africa overlooks the straits of Bab Al-Mandab, through which passes 20 per cent of Israel's foreign trade. The growing power of Al-Qaeda and other groups associated with it in the region, especially in Somalia, has encouraged Israel to establish a presence in the area. As a close ally of Israel, Ethiopia's interference in Somali affairs has facilitated Israel's job. There are indications that Israel has used Ethiopia's occupation of large areas in Somalia to give Mossad a foothold.

Zvi Bar expressed a widely held fear in Tel Aviv when expressing concern about the rise of Islam in Africa since it would lead to an anti-Israel atmosphere on the continent. Some analysts believe this is why Israel is redoubling its efforts in the region. When Israel approaches regimes that are in power struggles with Muslim opponents, they encourage them to rely on Israel's experience in confronting Islamic movements. Hence, Israel has exerted much effort in drawing closer to Nigeria, and signed an agreement to supply it with military equipment.

There is also a long list of Israeli interests in Africa that it wants to protect, including controlling oil mining on the continent, whereby Israeli companies -- under European cover -- are in charge of oil exploration in several African countries. Israel has taken great interest in Africa's oil reserves after UN reports confirmed them at more than 80 billion barrels. Israel also mines natural resources in African states, including uranium. In his book With the Power of Science, Israeli nuclear scientist Ariel Bakhrakh revealed that Israel had stolen uranium from African states under the pretence that its scientists were carrying out geological tests.

Third, Africa is a vast market for Israeli products, especially military products. Also, Israel monopolises many industrial and economic sectors in a number of Africa states. For example, Israeli companies have a strong hold on food products in Ethiopia. Finally, producing and exporting diamonds is a major source of revenue for Israel, and these diamonds are mined in Africa.

Historically, Israel has used several tools to strengthen ties with African countries, at times by exporting technical know-how in agriculture and at others through military training, discreetly providing medical treatment for African rulers at Israeli hospitals, and hosting African students at Israeli universities. Israel has not hesitated to participate in military coups in some African states. As confirmed by Yossi Melman, an Israeli commentator on intelligence issues, it is certain that Mossad assisted in coups that took place in Uganda and Zanzibar.

What is remarkable is that Israel is moving freely on the African continent without any Arab reaction. Arab states are failing to utilise the many tools they possess to not only stop Israel's manoeuvres, but more importantly to halt Tel Aviv's efforts to undermine Arab national security

Society must be defended

For six years, the killing of Amr Abu Setta, one of the leaders of a Palestinian resistance group in southern Gaza, remained a mystery. While there were many tales about how he died, there was consensus that Israeli intelligence was in one way or another behind his murder. The Israeli army accused him of being responsible for the deaths of a large number of occupation soldiers. A few months ago, the mystery was solved.

It became apparent that the person who placed the explosives under Abu Setta's car is Mohamed Ibrahim Ahmed Ismail, a Palestinian working for Israeli intelligence. Ismail detonated the explosives via remote control upon orders from Israeli intelligence, killing Abu Setta and one of his aides. Ismail used his connections with some people in Abu Setta's circle to place the explosives that ended the life of this highly respected leader in Gaza. Ismail confessed to his involvement and received a death sentence from the military court in Gaza. He was executed 15 April.

This was not the only crime to which Ismail confessed. Other than collaborating with occupation forces, he admitted causing the death of a number of wanted Palestinian resistance activists by placing stickers on their vehicles to enable unmanned Israeli planes to target them.

According to a statement of the Ministry of Interior in Gaza, Ismail confessed to plotting the assassination of Hossam Hamdan, the son of prominent Hamas leader Ahmed Hamdan. Israeli intelligence killed the younger Hamdan in another operation. The collaborator also revealed that he assisted the Israeli army by going to Rafah, deep in southern Gaza, to defuse explosives placed by the resistance targeting Israeli forces that had penetrated the area.

This was the first time that an execution was carried out since Hamas began governing Gaza single-handedly in the summer of 2007. Another man, Salama Mohamed Abu Freh, who is a resident of Gabalya, was also executed after confessing to collaborating with the Israeli occupation forces. Abu Freh admitted that upon orders from Israeli intelligence he specialised in monitoring the border between Gaza and Israel and reported anyone who approached it.

Since 2002, Abu Freh began participating in military invasions after receiving military training in the occupied territories in 1984. Abu Freh further revealed that during the last war on Gaza, he participated in the Israeli invasion of Gabal Kashef, the Ottoman region and the recent invasion of eastern Gabalya, where a large number of civilians were killed. In return, Abu Freh received sums of money.

A senior Palestinian security source told Al-Ahram Weekly that the confessions of these two agents revealed the type of missions that are assigned to Israeli agents in Gaza. "Without these agents, occupation forces would not be able to succeed," he asserted. "Accordingly, espionage must be stamped out. We have decided to invest a lot of energy to curtail the damage done by collaborators with Israel." The source revealed that Israel manipulates economic and social conditions, as well as its control of the borders, to convince as many young Palestinians as possible to conspire with it.

Khalil Al-Hayya, a prominent Hamas figure, defended the death sentences asserting that the incumbent government will continue executing Israeli agents as part of its legal mandate. "Society has a right to defend itself against this danger," Al-Hayya argued. "We cannot ignore the issue of agents any longer; they were given an opportunity to mend their ways and rejoin their people. We cannot tolerate this issue anymore." He suggested that the education system should play a pivotal role in shielding young Palestinians from the manipulations of Israeli intelligence.

But lawyer Mustafa Ibrahim criticised the executions as beyond the basic mandate of Palestinian law, explaining that the law states that no execution can be carried out without the approval of the Palestinian president, and this did not happen. Ibrahim believes that the executions could negatively influence national reconciliation because Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas will consider them a signal that Hamas is not serious about ending inter-factional divisions.

Nonetheless, like others who are critical of the execution orders, Ibrahim understands the gravity of the issue of Israeli agents and the need to neutralise them. In fact, harsh measures against collaborators are popular among Palestinians, to the extent that 94 per cent living in Gaza support them. According to the Palestinian Human Rights Centre, Palestinian courts issued 17 death sentences over the past year -- three in the West Bank and the rest in Gaza. Minister of Interior in Gaza Fathi Hammad stated that his cabinet decided to carry out death sentences against Israeli agents regardless of opposition from human rights organisations.

But despite these executions, the Israeli general intelligence agency, the Shin Bet, continues to develop new methods to recruit Palestinians to spy on its behalf. One day before the executions took place, the Gaza Ministry of Interior announced that it uncovered an espionage network that uses Internet websites. It revealed how Israeli intelligence uses the needs of the people under siege to recruit agents, and that the ministry has undertaken a massive awareness campaign to confront this.

Spokesman for the Gaza Ministry of Interior Ehab Al-Ghassan warned against "falling into the trap of collaboration through the misuse of social Internet websites such as Facebook, Twitter and others." Al-Ghassan stated that Israel uses these websites to gather information about citizens and blackmails them into becoming agents. "Unfortunately, some citizens write everything about themselves on these websites, which include all their circles of friends and family, giving the occupation a wealth of information for free," he said.

Al-Ghassan continued that according to the security apparatus it is apparent from monitoring the activities of the Shin Bet and the confessions of agents that Israeli intelligence uses social websites extensively to recruit agents. Among its methods is "easily accessing these websites and gathering information, added to what intelligence they already have, and then blackmailing their targets and attempting to recruit them." The spokesman added that, "the target feels the Israelis know everything about him and quickly complies out of fear that they will retaliate against him with the information they have.

Sometimes, the Israelis do not directly recruit agents but obtain information surreptitiously. Some Gazans have reported that Israeli intelligence have called their landlines and cell phones using overseas numbers, posing as researchers from international or Palestinian research centres overseas, polling them about sensitive security issues pertaining to domestic Palestinian security.

Gamal Sarha, 28, from Al-Nossayrat Refugee Camp in central Gaza told the Weekly that he was surprised to receive a call recently from someone claiming to be from an Arab research centre based in London. The caller quizzed him about resistance movements and how Palestinians view them, which made Sarha certain that the caller was connected to the Israeli intelligence. One question asked was: "What would you do if resistance fighters stood by your house, would you tell them to move away or protect them?"

Another young man said that a woman speaking Arabic called claiming to be from an agency in the West Bank, and wanted him to respond to a questionnaire over the phone. All the questions revolved around the resistance and how the people respond to it; he refused to answer the questions after suspecting that the caller was connected to the Israeli intelligence.

All signs indicate that despite the fierce campaign underway against Israeli collaborators, Israel's intelligence apparatus is determined to continue developing new methods and tools to acquire vital information about the Palestinian resistance. This means that the issue of Israeli agents will remain on the Palestinian political and social agenda for a long time to come.

Whistling in the wind

The anger was clear on Ahmed El-Geshi's face as he listened to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas explaining on Palestinian TV why his government had postponed voting on the Goldstone Report.

"I can't listen to these lies anymore," El-Geshi said, turning off his television. "We've been waiting for him to say something new, but it's the same old broken record. He refuses to take responsibility for the crime of delaying the Goldstone Report. He will not act to finalise a comprehensive national reconciliation deal."

Disappointment that Abbas's speech betrayed a lack of will to achieve reconciliation was widespread. Political analyst Nehad El-Sheikh Khalil cited several portions of the speech which he said demonstrated that Abbas was "not serious" about ending inter-Palestinian divisions. These included the statement that his only goal in entering dialogue was to hold legislative and presidential elections and an allusion to his hope that elections would result in toppling Hamas from power in Gaza.

"When Abbas attacks Hamas and talks about the 'emirate of darkness' in Gaza, it is clear any reconciliation agreement will not end internal strife," argues Khalil. "Abbas believes elections will remove Hamas from power and therefore he is keen on holding elections." He told Al-Ahram Weekly it was "regretful" Abbas had attempted to explain Palestinian anger following the Goldstone incident as a conspiracy by Hamas.

"This shows that the man does not realise the magnitude of his mistake."

Khaled Meshaal, head of Hamas's Political Bureau, blamed the Palestinian leadership for the failure to reach a comprehensive national reconciliation accord. In an address to the Golan Forum in Damascus on Sunday, Meshaal said the leadership of the Palestinian Authority (PA) was incapable of signing a national reconciliation agreement because of its vulnerability to Israeli and US blackmail. He added that the PA remains unable to release a single political detainee without clearance from General Keith Dayton, US security coordinator to the PA and the effective head of the security apparatus in Ramallah.

Dawoud Shehab, spokesman for the Islamic Jihad Movement (IJM), argues the Abbas's address has further eroded any ability to make decisions on a national level. He described Abbas's reasoning as "baseless", and called on the president to apologise to the Palestinian people for his actions.

Taher Al-Nunu, spokesman for Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh's Hamas-run government in Gaza, told the Weekly that Abbas's speech was a blow to Egyptian efforts to reconcile Palestinian factions. "His words do not demonstrate that he is ready for reconciliation or its requisites," said Al-Nunu.

Abbas's address came after Hamas and Cairo agreed to the postponement of a reconciliation deal. An informed Palestinian source told the Weekly the Egyptians agreed to delay the agreement until after Eid Al-Adha in December. Egypt explained to Hamas it would not be possible to reach agreement by 26 October given the anger among Palestinians over the Goldstone episode. At the same time, Cairo rejected Hamas's suggestion to delay for only a few days so as not to appear as if Hamas is in control of the national dialogue.

According to the source Egypt wants Hamas to sign the agreement without objecting to any clauses, and agree to hold elections on 28 June 2010. Hamas has said it will consider the suggestions.

Ghazi Hamad, a leading Hamas official and the point man in contacts between the group and the Egyptian government, said that Hamas is committed to signing a reconciliation deal regardless of the Goldstone crisis. Hamad warned, however, about over-optimism in ending divisions with a stroke of a pen. He described the Egyptian-brokered document as a skeleton agreement, allowing each party to interpret it in a way that best serves its interests.

"The deal contains broad outlines, leaving it open to further negotiation to agree on how to move forward," Hamad told the Weekly. Putting pen to paper does not necessarily mean turning over a new leaf, he noted, citing several problematic issues, including the creation of a security force in charge of law and order in Gaza. "After the signing ceremony is over, several rounds of talks will be needed. There's also the issue of whether the security overhaul will include the West Bank, as per Hamas's request, or only the Gaza Strip, as demanded by Fatah."

The proposal to create a multi-factional committee to administer Gaza until elections are held is, says Hamad, devoid of detail, stipulating neither the mandate of the committee nor its relationship with Haniyeh's government in Gaza or with President Abbas. He believes the article pertaining to elections could alone derail the agreement since it remains contingent on the good will of the parties. It stipulates holding legislative, presidential and Palestinian National Council (PNC) elections "although it is almost impossible for the parties to agree on the mechanism of electing the PNC because of the large numbers of Palestinian refugees around the world."

Hamad doubts any reconciliation agreement will be worth the paper it is printed on because each party will only try to implement aspects that serve their own interests.

Abbas will attempt to push for legislative and presidential elections in the hope that although the people are critical of him and his aides, the siege of Gaza will convince voters not to re-elect Hamas. Meanwhile, Hamas will seek to delay the elections, and, together with other factions, demand a revision of the PA's political agenda, especially regarding negotiations with Israel in light of continued settlement building. It will also make other demands which it knows Abbas will reject.

The general sense among Palestinians is that any end to divisions is contingent on regional developments which might change the balance of internal Palestinian politics.

Meanwhile, on Tuesday, the Israeli daily Haaretz reported that Washington had informed Egypt that it rejects any reconciliation agreement sponsored by Cairo between Fatah and Hamas. George Mitchell, US Envoy to the Middle East, was said to have told Egyptian Chief of General Intelligence Omar Suleiman and Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul-Gheit that a reconciliation deal between Fatah and Hamas would undermine efforts to reach a political settlement of the conflict with Israel. Haaretz added that Mitchell stressed any future Palestinian government must comply with Quartet conditions, which includes rejecting resistance to occupation and recognition of agreements already signed between the PA and Israel.

Al-Jazeera reports that the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) will hold a special session in Geneva, as requested by the PA, in which the Goldstone Report is expected to be addressed. The session is expected to begin today. The PA request was co-sponsored by 18 member states of the UNHRC: Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Gabon, Indonesia, Jordan, Mauritius, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Senegal

Back to square one

Head of Israel's Mossad Meir Dagan leant on a small staff in the company of his top aides as they waited in the room that opens into the Defence Ministry office of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu for permission to enter. This scene used to repeat itself every Thursday at noon, but recently the meetings between Netanyahu and Dagan have intensified, with them now meeting as often as three times a week, the Israeli media reports. One reason for their hectic schedule is that Dagan is in charge of coordinating Israeli policy on the Iranian nuclear issue, and is required to present evaluations of Israeli responses to the Iranian nuclear programme. Yet the increase in the number of meetings also reflects how seriously Israel is taking Iran's nuclear endeavours, a fact that was expressed in Netanyahu's recent speech at Bar-Ilan University, where he said that the Iranian nuclear threat was currently the top threat facing Israel.

Despite the apparent satisfaction among Israeli intellectuals and media professionals over the protests that have followed the presidential elections in Iran, Israeli decision-makers have warned of their possible consequences, and Israeli strategists agree that the election of Mir-Hussein Mousavi as Iran's president would have formed an even more serious threat for Israel than Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's rule. Mousavi's rise, they argue, would lead to toppling the mounting international pressure currently placed on Iran to stop its nuclear programme. Israel's second largest paper Maariv has reported top Defence Ministry officials as saying that it would be difficult for Israel to justify attacking Iranian nuclear facilities if Mousavi became Iran's president, even though Israel's decision-makers concur that Mousavi wouldn't differ from Ahmadinejad with regard to continued interest in the Iranian nuclear programme.

To a great extent, what's worrying Israel about the Iranian nuclear programme is the fear that the Israeli public has of it. Many Israelis tie their continued residency in Israel to developments in the Iranian nuclear programme, and the angry response of Netanyahu's government to a public opinion survey published by Israeli papers late last month is understandable -- about a quarter of Israelis say they will leave the country if Iran succeeds in developing nuclear arms. This survey tore down the myths upon which Zionism is based and which stress the spiritual, historical, and religious ties between the Jews and this land. Now many in Israel are raising difficult questions over these myths, and a quarter of them say they'll abandon the country if a neighbouring state develops nuclear arms.

As Israeli public opinion polls suggest, the number of those wanting to flee Israel would increase if Iran actually did develop nuclear arms. And these poll outcomes also confirm the fears expressed by former Israeli defence minister General Ephraim Sneh, who said two years ago that Israel would fall apart on its own accord if Iran developed nuclear arms because most of the Jews would simply leave Israel. These polls also explain why Israel considers any neighbouring Arab or Islamic state developing nuclear arms to form an existential threat.

Of course there are also other reasons why Israelis are terrified of the possibility of Iran or any other Islamic or Arab country in the region developing nuclear arms. Decision- makers in Tel Aviv are trying to keep silent over these reasons so as not to increase motivation for joining the nuclear arms race. Yet according to comments Israeli security experts made before the Knesset's foreign affairs and security committee, there is a list of reasons for the concern Israel is trying to hide over the possibility of Iran or any Arab country in the region developing nuclear capacities, even if they are considered moderate countries. These reasons include the following:

Firstly, should an Arab or Islamic state in geographic proximity to Israel develop nuclear capacities, that would greatly decrease Israel's ability to strike at the Palestinian resistance. Israel would then have to take into consideration the possibility of a confrontation in which the use of nuclear arms are a threat. These fears were expressed in a report submitted by Israeli military intelligence to the government a year ago. Netanyahu, for example, held that Israel wouldn't have been so bold in its last war on the Gaza Strip and conducted such wide-scale operations of killing and destruction if the Arabs had possessed nuclear arms. As such, decision- makers in Israel hold that the development of Arab or Iranian nuclear arms would allow the Palestinian resistance a greater margin of flexibility and an effective strategic reach. This would in turn increase the threat to Israeli security while Tel Aviv would remain incapable of firmly responding.

Secondly, Israeli strategist Shalom Gutman holds that Iran and the Arabs developing nuclear arms would undermine Israel's role in the region which, he argues, benefits the West. Israel has always claimed that the West and especially the United States are not doing it any favour by supporting it with arms, for it plays the role of the region's "police force" that disciplines "outlaws". This role was recognised by former Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, who several years ago told the American CNN network that "you Americans are not doing us a favour by offering us aid, for Israel plays the role of a permanent American jet carrier in the Middle Eastern region." It is certain that if Iran or the Arabs developed nuclear arms, Israel would lose this role, for the arms of the "police" would become outdated and wouldn't frighten anyone anymore, at which point Israel would need the West rather than the other way around. Former defence minister Shaul Mofaz warns that the Arabs' success in developing nuclear arms would allow them to develop relations with the West on different bases than those currently governing Western-Arab relations.

Thirdly, Arab development of nuclear arms would make Israel's traditional arsenal lose its value in future military confrontations. It would also harm many of the Israeli security institutions whose accomplishments have become legendary, in particular Mossad, which is currently charged with undermining Arab attempts to develop nuclear arms. This mission is based on Menachem Begin's principle established following the 1981 bombing of the Iraqi nuclear reactor by which Israel is obliged to prevent "enemy states" from developing nuclear arms by any means, including attacking facilities that are suspected of being part of future plans to develop nuclear arms.

Additionally, Israel would be economically strained by the need to allocate a large budget for building shelters and facilities to deal with the outcomes of a war in which nuclear arms are used. Despite the exorbitant cost of building such shelters, the Israeli government would be forced to do so in order to reassure residents and convince them to stay. It knows how terrified the public is of Arabs and Muslims developing nuclear arms and that their doing so might result in a mass exodus from Israel.

And finally, much of Israel's elite hold that the development of nuclear arms would put an end for good to the most important pillar of the Zionist project, that being Jewish immigration to Palestine. If a large percentage of Jews living in Palestine want to leave, it is almost certain that Jewish immigration to Palestine will end.

All of this reveals how fragile the Zionist entity is despite its military and technical superiority and its victory over the Arab armies. None of these achievements prevent Israel from sensing that it could return to square one at any moment. Changing the nature of the conflict is largely dependent on the ability of the Arabs to develop nuclear arms. Even those who believe in reaching a political settlement with Israel must also realise that without a significant change in the strategic power balance, Israel won't ever be convinced to change its current positions on a settlement to the conflict

Birth of a new alliance

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk was surprised when his Greek counterpart George Papandreou cut short their meeting at government headquarters in Warsaw last December, asking if he could have a private room to make "important calls" with his cabinet in Athens. When Tusk asked about the emergency, Papandreou's aides told him that Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has asked for Greece's assistance in putting out the wildfires ablaze on Mount Carmel surrounding Haifa, and that the Greek premier was keen on sending help.

This is perhaps one of the few times when the leader of a country stopped a meeting with another world leader merely to oversee coordination of assistance to a third country. But the incident demonstrates the immense transformation in the relationship between Israel and Greece, as well as other Balkan states, despite the fact that Greece was the last European country to establish diplomatic ties with Israel, in 1992.

Ironically, Greece is the European state that saved Israel from the repercussions of Freedom Flotilla II setting sail towards the shores of Gaza, and blocking a nightmare scenario that Tel Aviv feared -- namely a confrontation between the Israeli navy and activists aboard the vessels. It is a scenario that Netanyahu's government tried to avoid at all cost. The irony is that until very recently, Greece was one of the strongest advocates of Arab causes among European states and supportive of the Palestinian people. In fact, support of Palestinian resistance against occupation was a uniting issue even among sparring political players in Greek politics.

The Greek Socialist Party, Pasok, especially under the leadership of Giorgios Papandreou and Andreas Papendreou -- the incumbent prime minister's grandfather and father, respectively -- who were also prime ministers, was the strongest supporter of the Palestinian cause. The late Palestinian president was a personal friend of Andreas Papandreou.

Since the beginning of June 2010, Israeli- Greek ties were significantly transformed and culminated in a declaration by Papandreou and Netanyahu, during the latter's visit to Athens a few months ago, that the two governments have agreed to cooperate in the fields of intelligence and security. They decided that a joint committee would coordinate strategic cooperation, and to expand cooperation in political and economic fields. This partnership was quickly translated into critical strategic services for Israel, such as allowing the Israeli Air Force to conduct extensive war games over Greek territories. So far, Israel has held two such military exercises, in 2010 and 2011.

The agreement came at a difficult time for Israel, since it loosely followed a decision by Turkey to ban the Israeli Air Force from using Turkish airspace for military exercises in response to the events of Freedom Flotilla I at the end of May 2010. Israel's small geographic size required it to seek Turkey's assistance to hold important air exercises; especially that Israel's leadership at the time was plotting to attack Iranian nuclear facilities as a top option in dealing with the Iranian nuclear programme. In recognition of the importance of ties between the two sides, Israel appointed a veteran diplomat, Arye Mekel, as ambassador in Athens -- he is known in Tel Aviv as one of the best experts on international and diplomatic relations.

Turkey, once one of Israel's closest allies, is the archenemy of Greece, which is why leaders in Tel Aviv and Athens took the opportunity to forge new bonds amongst themselves. The Israelis were looking for alternatives to make up for losses in military cooperation between Ankara and Tel Aviv, especially air exercises, intelligence cooperation, arms deals, etc. Athens found opportunity in these developments to use its relations with Israel to approach the critical economic crisis overwhelming Greece.

Israel realised the potential of strong ties with Greece and their strategic rewards for the Zionist entity, so it manipulated the hostile history between Turkey and Greece by emphasising the importance of developing relations between Tel Aviv and Athens to confront Turkish "ambitions". Israeli researcher Abirama Golan states that Israeli leaders frequently pointed out to Greek officials what Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu wrote in his book Strategic Depth as proof of Erdogan's ambition of reincarnating the Ottoman Empire in modern times and with new tools. Also, that Davutoglu's book is proof of the neo-Ottoman attempt to recover the country's former influence.

The Israelis do not hesitate to use historic hostilities rooted in the era when Greece and other Balkan states came under Ottoman rule for hundreds of years. Israeli Ambassador to Bulgaria Noah Gal-Gendler admits that Israel focuses on the historic and cultural background as an incentive to encourage all Balkan states to cooperate with the Zionist entity. It also relies on Islamophobia in Europe to build bonds on new foundations with these countries.

Meanwhile, Papandreou realised that EU assistance would not be enough to save Greece from economic catastrophe, and that it needs to increase foreign investment into the country. His government exerted great efforts to convince foreign firms to invest in Greece, as Israel's leadership scrambled to find a way to prevent Freedom Flotilla II from sailing to Gaza. If Israel were to use military force again to halt the convoy it would further harm Israel's already damaged image on the world stage and also hurt ties with countries whose nationals would be aboard the vessels in solidarity with the Palestinians.

Israel used the Greek economic crisis to serve its own interests. Netanyahu's government consulted with major Jewish organisations in the US to manipulate Greece's dire economic conditions for Tel Aviv's benefit. Netanyahu's office and the leaders of major Jewish organisations in the US agreed that a delegation of organisation representatives would head to Athens to meet with Papandreou, and promise him that these organisations would work on convincing US companies and Jewish businessmen to invest in Greece. In return, Greece would prevent Freedom Flotilla II from sailing from Greek ports. It was a done deal; the Greek government said that its decision to ban the ships from sailing out of its ports was based on Greece's national security.

Washington's official position and that of the UN secretary general that are firmly against Freedom Flotilla II sailing to Gaza also played a role in Greece's decision. Meanwhile, Netanyahu informed Papandreou that Israel could help Greece in overcoming the economic crisis by encouraging hundreds of thousands of Israeli tourists to visit Greece instead of Turkey -- a previously favourite destination for Israeli tourists. Netanyahu told Papandreou that there are 400,000 Israelis looking for holiday destinations and suggested promoting joint tourism packages to Tel Aviv and Athens.

One of the reasons why Greece is developing relations with Israel is its need for Washington's support in its conflict with Turkey regarding the future of Cyprus, and its supposition that cooperating with Israel would improve its standing with the US. While the focus has been the dizzying improvement in Greek-Israeli relations, in reality most Balkan states are now very interested in nurturing ties with Israel and are competing amongst themselves to offer the Zionist entity strategic services.

Bulgarian Prime Minister Boyko Borisov visited Israel a few months ago and proposed to Netanyahu that Israel's air force should exercise in Bulgarian airspace. Rather unusually, Borisov also initiated a meeting with the chief of the Mossad at the time, Meir Dagan, and offered security and intelligence cooperation with Israel. The Bulgarian prime minister also invited Dagan to visit Sofia and allowed Bulgarian newspapers to publish photos of his meeting with the Mossad official -- unheard of coverage for any Mossad chief's visit to a foreign country. Naturally, Borisov wanted something in return. He asked Israel to help develop Bulgaria's advanced technology industry and receive a percentage of Israeli tourists who had previously travelled to Turkey.

Closer ties between Israel and Greece and Bulgaria are also noticed in Romania, which had preceded Greece in allowing Israel to use its airspace for military exercises. But cooperation ended after an Israeli helicopter exploded over Romania one year ago, killing several Israeli pilots. Meanwhile, Slovenia, Croatia and Macedonia have also signalled their interest in improving relations with Israel.

It seems likely that Balkan states will support the Israeli-US position in rejecting the request by the Arab League to allow the Palestinian state membership in the UN in September

Out in the cold

Awatef Al-Assar filled bags of sand to hold down the sides of the tent in a failed attempt to stabilise it. Her children still remember how hard she tried to hold on to the pole of the tent that was sheltering her and her family last winter as the winds blew hard to uproot it. Meanwhile, trying to help, her husband was shaking with cold and fear from the thunder outside. Rainwater swamped the tent as their efforts failed and the tent collapsed on the heads of the children. The entire family was forced to seek refuge at a nearby house.

Like thousands of others, Al-Assar's home was destroyed during Israel's war on the Gaza Strip. Even now she fears a repeat of the same punishing experience of last winter. Her neighbour, Hajja Fatma Hamdan, who is at the same refuge camp with her family, remembers how she was surprised by the amount of rain filling up the tent while her family slept. They awoke startled, and all they could do was abandon all their possessions and seek shelter elsewhere.

The residents of the refuge camp, which lies close to Beit Lahia, said that uprooted and torn tents resulted in many health problems for the homeless, especially children. The young suffer from vomiting, diarrhoea and stomach cramps. Nehaya, who was widowed when her husband was killed during the war, said that for a long time she was continuously taking her children to a clinic in Beit Lahia for severe cases of colds.

As winter approaches, the occupants of this camp -- like those in other camps -- complain that there are not enough warm blankets. Suleiman Al-Masri, whose home in Beit Hanoun in northeastern Gaza was destroyed, said his family of 15 only received seven blankets from a charity organisation. Nine months after the end of the war, many homeless families still return to their destroyed homes in search of more blankets and warm covers under tons of rubble. Most of these attempts end in failure, either because everything inside is scorched or is buried too deep in the debris.

These families have no refuge except the camps set up by the Hamas government, UNRWA or charities working in Gaza. Camps for those who lost their homes have become widespread in Gaza. In fact, camps were constructed in every area destroyed during the war.

While those whose homes were completely demolished during the war suffer the winter cold, those whose homes were not completely obliterated during the assault also suffer. Windowpanes need to be replaced in many homes to block the bitter cold of winter, but because of the siege the supply of glass is limited and only available via smuggling. This has raised the price of glass unreasonably. The windows of Ghassan Abu Samha's family home, located in Al-Maghazi Refugee Camp in the centre of Gaza, were destroyed by the Israeli onslaught. The eight members of his family will be exposed to the winter chill as the cold season approaches and no repairs have been possible.

Abu Samha told Al-Ahram Weekly that he could not afford to repair the windows with the available glass, which is of poor quality anyway. "It costs 2,500 shekels [$700] to repair, which is a huge sum for me," he continued. "I have no other choice but to cover the windows with plastic which doesn't cost more than 100 shekels." Abu Samha's 10- year-old son Ahmed remembered how he could hardly sleep last winter because of the plastic on his bedroom window. Nonetheless, using plastic to cover broken windowpanes has become the common remedy for many families in Gaza.

Meanwhile, hundreds who live on the border between Israel and the Gaza Strip, and whose homes are intact, have decided to leave out of fear of being bombed by Israel. They feel especially vulnerable because their homes are located opposite Israeli army bases on the demarcation line.

Zaidan Sarar, who lives in Om Al-Gamal on the border, is one of those who chose to leave their home and move to a rented apartment out of fear of the Israeli army. Sarar moved to an apartment block in Deir Al-Balah and abandoned his home, telling the Weekly he preferred spending all his income on rent rather than risk his safety. "When I recalled the corpses of children who were killed in the last war, I decided to do anything so my children don't suffer the same fate," he said. "This is why I sought to rent an apartment and leave my home which I spent all my life's savings to build."

Other families are grappling with overcrowding after opening their doors to homeless families. Gamal Al-Masri, 29, waits until night before returning to his home in Al-Nosayrat Refugee Camp in the centre of Gaza. Al-Masri's home currently accommodates his parents and younger siblings who sought him out after their home in Al-Maghazi Camp, east of Al-Nosayrat, was obliterated in the last war in Gaza. Al-Masri, who is married with five children, told the Weekly that he tries to spend as much time outside the house as possible because his three-bedroom home now houses 17 people. As winter approaches, his ability to stay out with co-workers or neighbours is diminishing, but he is still unable to live in the overcrowded house. Al-Masri's biggest problem is a shortage in warm covers to shield everyone from the harsh winter cold.

Al-Masri is not the only one who was obliged to take in his family after the Israeli army destroyed their homes during the war. In fact, he could be considered luckier than most who have had to house many more family members because of the war. Adel Sala, 43, had no choice but to take in two of his brothers' families after the Israeli army destroyed their homes in two separate air attacks. With 25 people now living in his four-bedroom house in Al-Qarara village, each room houses one family while the three men sleep in the fourth room. Sala admits that the living conditions are very difficult, complicated and awkward. For example, going to the bathroom requires prior scheduling, while he and his brothers go to the mosque for ablutions to avoid any embarrassment.

The scenes of hardship this winter are endless, not least of the children whose homes were demolished and had to move far away from their areas of residence. Now they must commute for long distances to reach their schools and also lack sufficient winter clothing to protect them against the bitter winter cold

Hopelessness takes hold

Hopelessness takes hold

While insults across the Palestinian rift continue to be traded, ordinary Palestinians see the national cause suffer at a time otherwise ripe for international solidarity, writes Saleh Al-Naami

---

Jamal Hussein, 39, couldn't find the words to console his wife when her hopes of leaving the Gaza Strip were dashed. They were supposed to travel to a hospital in Jordan for a procedure that would put an end to 15 years of suffering due to her inability to conceive. Hussein is a teacher in a Gaza City school and was hoping to take advantage of the summer holiday to have the procedure done in mid-July. Until 7 July, he had hoped that an agreement putting an end to the Palestinian domestic rift would be signed, and that this would lead to the Rafah Crossing being reopened as Egyptian officials had promised. "Following the close of the sixth dialogue round, it became clear that it was impossible for the two sides to reach an agreement, and that as a result my wife and I would have to wait another year hoping that conditions improve and that we'll be granted an opportunity to have this procedure done," he told Al-Ahram Weekly.

Hassan Al-Zari, 28, lives in Deir Al-Balah City in the central Gaza Strip. He holds a bachelor's degree in civil engineering, and following immense efforts won a grant to a Canadian university to pursue his graduate studies. Last month he tried to leave the Gaza Strip to travel via Cairo airport but he was unable to cross the border into Egypt. Officials in the Gaza Strip's Interior Ministry say that priority is given to individuals suffering from serious, chronic diseases, and to those with residency abroad. Travel is permitted for cases such as Hassan's only during a very limited period in which Egypt allows the border to be reopened. "I can hardly believe this," Al-Zari told the Weekly. "Obtaining a grant to study in a Canadian university was my life's dream, and now that it's been granted, the crossing has become my barrier."

Inshirah Ribah, 41, is a Palestinian who was born and raised in Libya and who married a Palestinian teacher from the Gaza Strip who was working in Libya. She now lives in Al-Maghazi Refugee Camp in the central Gaza Strip and hasn't seen her family in five years. In late July her youngest sister is going to marry a Palestinian living in Egypt, and although she wants to attend the wedding it seems impossible that she will be able to due to the crossing's closure. Like so many others, Inshirah blames her situation on the continued Palestinian domestic rift that grants external parties justification for besieging the Gaza Strip and isolating it from the rest of the world.

Lack of hope that the domestic rift may end and unity be restored has become a dominant feature of commentary in Gaza. Palestinians no longer hold any hope that the next dialogue rounds will produce a breakthrough leading to a final agreement. Mohamed Al-Shamali, 46, owns an electrical appliance store in the Al-Ramal neighbourhood of Gaza City, but since he can't stand sitting in his shop as long as there are no customers at the door, he closes it and goes to exchange sarcastic quips with the owners of neighbouring shops instead. One of these joked as he exhaled cigarette smoke, "All that remains is for the states of Gaza and the West Bank to recognise each other, exchange ambassadors, and begin signing commercial, trade and other bilateral agreements."

Indeed, the gap between the two sides' positions has widened and the war of insults between them remains ongoing. Spokesperson for the security agencies in the West Bank Adnan Al-Damiri says that Hamas has spent millions of dollars to establish a security apparatus in the West Bank. He says that West Bank security agencies seized $8.5 million illegally entering the Palestinian territories over the last five months, in addition to large caches of arms and explosives in Nablus, Hebron and Qalqilya.

Hamas figure Ayman Taha says that such statements are an "attempt to justify striking at the movement and doing away with it, and are evidence of the West Bank security agencies trying to make the national dialogue fail." In a statement to the Weekly, Taha said that the funds Al-Damiri had spoken of belonged to charitable organisations that "support the families of martyrs and prisoners, the orphans and the weak. These kinds of measures make these families' situations further deteriorate."

Taha says these measures have come at a time when the Salam Fayyad government is pursuing the resistance, arresting resistance fighters and seizing weapons. He holds Al-Damiri's comments as an example of "fabricating lies aimed at justifying the failure of the dialogue and granting excuses for continued targeting of Hamas in the West Bank," although he also believes that efforts to do away with Hamas will fail. Taha says that talk by the Fayyad government and its security agencies of Hamas planning a coup in the West Bank sounds like a "cracked record", and he questions: "If the Palestinian Authority [PA] is pursuing Hamas activists because they are planning a coup, then why are Islamic Jihad activists also being pursued?" He believes Hamas is being targeted due to its role in the resistance.

Deputy speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) Hassan Khureisheh has revealed that President Mahmoud Abbas has suggested that Hamas mandate five ministers to participate in a prospective national accord government, on condition that they represent their personal points of view and not the political views of Hamas. In a statement to the Weekly, Khureisheh clarified that Abbas made this offer during his recent meeting with PLC Speaker Aziz Duweik in Ramallah, and that he asked Hamas to name five ministers capable of adopting positions different to those of Hamas. They would have to accept the conditions stipulated by the Quartet, most prominently commitment to the agreements signed by the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), recognition of Israel, and renouncement of resistance on the basis of it being terrorism. Abbas justified his request by saying that only a government of this colour would be capable of lifting the siege on Gaza and overseeing its reconstruction.

Khureisheh says that during the meeting Abbas refused to enter the argument between Fatah and Hamas over Duweik being the speaker of the PLC following statements of PLC Hamas bloc leader Azzam Al-Ahmed, who said that the bloc no longer considers Duweik speaker. Khureisheh also says that Abbas denies that the security agencies have arrested anyone on the basis of their political and organisational affiliations, but rather only due to their possession of arms and "political money".

Abbas stresses that he has issued orders for no one to be mistreated during their detention or interrogation. According to Khureisheh, he and Duweik have confirmed to Abbas that these orders had been issued, but that the security agencies simply don't follow them. "We have told Abbas that most of those released from PA prisons in the West Bank have shown signs of being severely tortured." Khureisheh is pessimistic about the dialogue succeeding, saying that the dispute between Fatah and Hamas is not limited to the political programme but has grown to threaten personal interests in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Action and reaction has become the leading feature of relations between the Fatah and Hamas authorities.

It is ironic that the prospects for Palestinian dialogue have plummeted at the time Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has restated impossible conditions for agreeing to the establishment of a Palestinian state. He has again stipulated that the Palestinians recognise Israel as the state of the Jewish people, that they agree to solve the issue of refugees outside the borders of Israel, that Jerusalem remain the unified capital of Israel, and that any Palestinian state is demilitarised. In other words, at a time that many Palestinians were placing their hopes on Netanyahu's rightwing government being isolated due to its extremist positions, the Palestinian rift allows Netanyahu to hold tight to his stances with a minimum of pressure from the international community. Thus the Palestinians who were betting on a settlement have lost a negotiations battle while Palestinians who believe in resistance as a strategic option are consumed with efforts towards the lifting of the Gaza siege.

Empty words

Empty words

Fatah and Hamas appear able to agree just one thing, that elections be postponed. Saleh Al-Naami examines the causes, and ramifications, of a dispute that serves to exacerbate the suffering of ordinary Palestinians

---

Beneath the blazing sun Ahmed Al-Sheify continues to search the lists of names tacked to the wall of a school next to a police headquarters in the west of Gaza. They contain the names of everyone entitled to a $100 payment from the Ministry of Social Affairs of the Palestinian government. Suddenly Al-Sheify's face lights up. His name is on one of the lists.

The payment, supplemented by aid from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), which supplies basic food necessities, allows Al-Sheify's family of six to survive. The thing that most frustrates him is that he will be forced to live on such handouts until an agreement is reached that can end internal Palestinian divisions.

Al-Sheify is not alone in despairing at the petty back-and-forth squabbling between Fatah and Hamas. Each group blames the other for the failure of the latest round of talks in Cairo. Amid conflicting statements issued by the two factions one thing is clear. It is security arrangements that are at the heart of their most recent disagreements.

Majed Faraj, a member of the Fatah delegation, said Fatah had demanded Hamas recognise the existence of the security forces in Gaza before Hamas came to power. He also said Fatah had demanded the step-by-step return of those security forces to their posts -- they amount to 10,000 men -- as well as a review of the security forces introduced after Hamas took control. According to Faraj, Hamas is seeking to limit return to 3,000, starting with just 300. He also claimed Hamas was asking to send its own forces to the West Bank under some sort of a quota system, an idea Fatah has refused in its entirety.

Salah Al-Bardawil, a member of Hamas delegation to Cairo, accuses Fatah leaders of adopting an uncompromising position that will shatter any earlier consensus. He was taken by surprise when Fatah demanded "an end to Hamas's rule in Gaza", arguing that such a stance undermines the basis of dialogue between the two factions.

Speaking to Al-Ahram Weekly Al-Bardawil said that Fatah had objected to Egyptian proposals calling for the formation of a joint committee to oversee the administration of the Gaza Strip, as well as a joint security force. He also said Fatah had refused to discuss the issue of political prisoners.

Ashraf Gomaa, a senior Fatah legislator, refutes such charges, and has accused Hamas of trying to reach a political deal that guarantees its continued control over Gaza. Gomaa called on Hamas to adopt a strategy more open to Fatah the better to deal with the international community.

"It is clear that people are looking after their own interests, especially when it comes to political detainees. The Fatah movement is against political arrests. We do not arrest anyone. We are seeking the release of prisoners in the West Bank, and this is being done gradually," said Gomaa.

Fatah and Hamas at least agreed to postpone elections that were scheduled to be held on 25 January. The Weekly has learned that an understanding to this effect was reached in the second round of talks held last Sunday in Cairo. Informed sources say both Fatah and Hamas consider postponement in their interest.

While Fatah leaders are publicly in favour of elections now, in private they are worried that they will be defeated at the ballot box. They fear the Palestinian Authority's failure to persuade Palestinians, especially those in the West Bank, to reach a settlement with Israel, and continued Israeli settlement building and land confiscation in the West Bank, combined with draconian restrictions on movement, will weigh heavily against their electoral chances. Fatah is also worried that voters will exact a heavy price for its security forces' violations of human rights under Salam Fayyad's government.

Nor does Hamas see elections as being in its own interest as long as Gaza remains under siege. It fears that many who voted for the movement in the last elections will desert.

Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri has said that the movement is predicating elections on a number of conditions. It is demanding the restructuring of the Electoral Commission and the Judicial Committee which oversee elections. It also wants guarantees that the siege of Gaza will end, that Egypt be the one to work towards Palestinian reconciliation, and that elections to the Palestinian Authority be conducted in tandem with legislative and presidential polls. Hamas is also demanding an end to political detentions, the release of all members of parliament currently under arrest, and international guarantees that MPs will not be arrested after they are elected.

"Political indicators confirm the inability of the two Palestinian factions to bridge the divide between them, which means that elections will not be held on schedule," says Hassan Khreisheh, independent second deputy speaker of the Legislative Council. "If the elections are not held on time the Legislative Council will continue to exist along current lines, i.e. those who are from the West Bank will remain in the West Bank, and those from Gaza in Gaza."

Should that happen, argues Khreisheh, President Mahmoud Abbas will lose constitutional legitimacy, opening a political vacuum that will remain until presidential elections are held.

The Weekly has learned that Egypt requested the Hamas delegation in the Cairo to allow Fatah members and Gaza residents to travel to Bethlehem in order to participate in Fatah's General Conference. A Hamas source confirmed that Hamas would respond "positively" to Egypt's request, taking into account security conditions. The source stressed that Hamas would not seek to hamper Fatah's Sixth Conference. However, he added, "some of those associated with the Fatah Conference raise security concerns and it will be difficult for us to allow them to travel".

"For this reason, those who want to travel must submit a request to the government in Gaza, in order that their files can be checked. Another problem is that there are still some people who have expressed their request to travel verbally, and have yet to submit a written request."

In the meantime, Palestinians are paying close attention to Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's stance, not least his refusal to take a single step towards resolving the conflict through peaceful means. This, in turn, affects the credibility of the positions put forward by President Abbas and Fayyad's government. Netanyahu has openly challenged the US administration by rejecting American demands to freeze settlement-building in occupied East Jerusalem. At the weekly Israeli cabinet meeting on Sunday Netanyahu said Jews could live in Jerusalem wherever they pleased.

Netanyahu's challenge followed reports in Haaretz newspaper that Israeli decision-makers had started to take Obama's admonitions lightly, characterising the US president as naïve. According to the newspaper, the attitude was most deeply embedded among senior staff in Netanyahu's office. According to the report the most popular joke circulating among the Israeli prime minister's senior advisors is as follows:

"What does an American do when he discovers his house is a wreck, or that his washing machine is not working?

Easy, he calls on Obama to give a speech. Problem solved."