Bush Threat To Withold Israel $$ Over Apartheid Wall Called "Sham"

by Thalif Deen

Over the objections of the United States, the government of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon decided Tuesday to go on building the barrier, which includes trenches, fortified guard towers and electronic sensors-- aimed at thwarting Palestinian attacks.

Last week the United States threatened to deduct the cost of the wall from a proposed $9 billion U.S. loan guarantee to Israel.

But Professor As'ad AbuKhalil of California State University says the U.S. threat is a sham. "There is no credibility to U.S. threats. And it is not accurate to refer to mild U.S. statements about the barrier as threats."

"Threats is the language the U.S. government reserves for Arabs and Muslims, not for Israelis," AbuKhalil told IPS.

"The time has come to condemn the wall as an unlawful act of annexation in the same way that Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights has been condemned as unlawful," says John Dugard, UN Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories.

In a 15-page report that will go before the UN Commission on Human Rights next March, Dugard says that "what we are presently witnessing in the West Bank is a visible and clear act of territorial annexation under the guise of security."

The report catalogs a staggering array of human rights violations by Israelis, including torture, detentions, demolition of homes and agricultural properties and targeted assassinations of Palestinians.

"It was important to record that the past six months had seen continued violations of human rights and international humanitarian law in the area," Dugard said.

The World Bank has said that about 150,000 Palestinians will be "harmed" by the first phase of the barrier, which has already been completed. Other phases are likely to affect at least 150,000 more, according to New York-based Human Rights Watch (HRW).

Dugard's report is one of several UN studies on alleged human rights violations in the Israeli-occupied territories since the Palestinian uprising began in September 2000. More than 2,755 Palestinians and 830 Israelis have been killed since then.

About 28,000 Palestinians and 5,600 Israelis have been injured in the violence, which continues unabated.

Stephen Zunes, associate professor of politics and chair of the peace and justice program at the University of San Francisco, says the U.S. threat to hold back loans is a political charade.

In 1992, the United States was pressured by peace and human rights groups to deduct the costs of additional Israeli settlement activity from the $2 billion annual instalment of a $10 billion U.S. loan guarantee, Zunes told IPS.

In October 1993, he said, Washington officially told Israel that it would deduct $437 million in the next year's instalment due to settlement construction. But a State Department Middle East peace talks coordinator immediately let the Israeli government know that Washington would find a way to restore the full funding.

Within a month, Zunes said, President Bill Clinton authorized Israel to draw an additional $500 million in U.S. military supplies from NATO warehouses in Europe. A similar scenario unfolded the following year.

"What resulted then, was that the United States began effectively subsidizing the settlement, since the Israelis knew that for every dollar that they contributed to maintaining and expanding their presence in the West Bank, Washington would convert a loan guarantee into an outright grant," he added.

Asked if UN condemnation would have any impact on an intransigent Israel, Zunes said: "In the case of Israel, they can largely ignore much of this kind of criticism as long as they have the unconditional military, economic and diplomatic support of the world's one remaining superpower."

"At the same time," he said, "things would probably be even worse without such international pressure."

HRW's Joe Stork says his organization recognizes the Israeli government's duty to protect its civilians. But the government is also obliged to ensure its security measures do not violate international human rights and humanitarian law, he added.

"Israel has a long history of severe and arbitrary restrictions on movement. The barrier will institutionalize these restrictions and reinforce the long-term harm done by illegal settlements. That is why we need strong U.S. intervention -- now," Stork said.

"The U.S. threats to deduct money from loan guarantees should be understood both as a rhetorical threat and as a concrete action," Catherine Cook, a senior analyst at the Middle East Research and Information Project, told IPS.

The U.S. administration has been clear that it intends to deduct money for Israel's settlement activity in the occupied territories, though it has yet to declare how much will be deducted, she said.

"The question that remains is whether the United States will follow-up this issue in such a way that Israel will indeed suffer an economic penalty for its action, or whether this is simply rhetorical in nature, and the United States will have made a public statement, but in effect, Israel will be implicitly given the green light to go ahead with its activities," Cook said.

Unfortunately, based on past history and current statements of U.S. officials, there is little indication that Washington will pursue this issue with the vigour necessary to result in concrete changes in Israeli practice, she added.

Israel, said Cook, is a very public relations- and image-conscious country that promotes itself as a western, liberal democracy. "Because it has a vested interest in this image, international condemnation does have an effect because it runs counter to how Israel wants to be perceived."

"Ultimately, however, for international condemnation to have a real effect, rhetoric needs to be backed with concrete action."