Peaceful Protest in Al-Walaja

Al-Walaja, population 2,000 is located just south of Jerusalem and west of Bethlehem. After the 1967 Six Day War, half the town was annexed to Israel and included the Jerusalem municipal area. The citizens though did not receive Israeli citizenship or residency, thus they are considered illegal within their own homes.

The Wall has come to Al-Walaja and when completed it will completely isolate the residents from everyone, including Jerusalem, Bethlehem and their land. Israel has confiscated half of the land planning to utilize it to build Har Gilo and Gilo settlements. Their fruit orchards have been cut down, their homes demolished and the areas to south and west have been closed off. When the wall is complete it will separate 3,200 Dunams (1 dunam = 1000 square metres) of which 3,000 are olive groves, the only recreational forest, a monastery and winery from the town.

The citizens of Al-Walaja, international activists and other human rights organizations have been demonstrating peacefully against this outrage. In one day alone, they stopped the bulldozers from proceeding leading to several arrests. In the end, the IDF successfully managed to drag the protesters out of the way and allowing the construction to proceed.

When is it legal to arrest citizens protecting their land from the construction of an illegal wall on an illegally occupied land? Where are the citizens of Al-Walaja, whose homes have been demolished to go? This barrier wall, allegedly constructed to ensure Israel's security, will cut off these people from the entire world. Who really needs security, the all powerful Israeli armed to the teeth or the citizens of Al-Walaja whose only crime is to peacefully protest the contraction of an illegal wall?

INDULGING ISRAEL?

The demand by AIPAC "to take immediate steps to defuse the tension with the Jewish State" regarding the Obama Administration's recent statements in light of Israel's announcement of construction of 1600 settlement homes is over the top.  Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton, stated the announcement was insulting as it was made during the Vice-Presidential visit to Israel. AIPAC also advised the Administration it "should make a conscious effort to move away from public demands and unilateral deadlines directed at Israel". Further, they "urge the Administration to work closely and privately with our partner Israel, in a manner befitting strategic allies, to address any issues between the two governments".

I find AIPAC's statements insulting to the American public and the International community. Since military aid in the amount of almost 3 billion dollars per year (7 million per day) is given to Israel from the taxpayer’s purse, the Administration should definitely heed public demands. AIPAC’s request to disregard to the public voice is undemocratic. Should the Obama, like the Bush Administration be governed by a well healed lobby group?

It certainly takes chutzpah to plan construction of another 1600 illegal homes in an illegally occupied land. The timing of Israel’s announcement is a minor infraction and deserves the US response it received. This only demonstrates the Israeli government’s complete distain for their rich Uncle Sam, along with their contempt and disregard for International Law, the United Nations, and the global community.

The enormity of Israel’s malfeasance, aside from the criminality of the existence of settlement homes themselves, is the contravention of Israel’s own moratorium on additional construction of settlement homes for ten months. This leads one to believe that Israel had no intention of honouring their guarantee and deliberately misrepresented their intentions. How can one trust Israel’s stated proclamation for a peace solution?

The AIPAC lobby is the overindulging parents of this petulant child. Rather than admonishing the United States for this well deserved rebuke, they should be reminding Israel of the risk of souring the relationship with their benefactor.