Iconos

Iconos
Volcán Popocatépetl

lunes, 26 de febrero de 2024

El Presidente está fuera de la ley

Un presidente que se proclama por encima de la ley es un presidente fuera de la ley. No hay que darle vueltas, es así de claro

Pablo Hiriart

https://www.elfinanciero.com.mx/opinion/pablo-hiriart/2024/02/26/el-presidente-esta-fuera-de-la-ley/

febrero 26, 2024

El 1 de diciembre de 2018 Andrés Manuel López Obrador juró ante el Congreso cumplir y hacer cumplir la Constitución y las leyes que de ella emanan.

Fue un juramento en sesión solemne y el viernes se volteó contra él.

Se tendría que ir.

Aunque para una sociedad cuyas élites y sectores informados perdieron su capacidad de asombro, tal vez lo ocurrido sea sólo una anécdota.

Dijo en su discurso de toma de posesión: “Habrá un auténtico Estado de derecho, tal como lo resume la frase de nuestros liberales del siglo XIX, al margen de la ley nada y por encima de la ley nadie”.

Le faltó agregar: ‘por encima de la ley nadie, salvo yo’.

A unos meses de terminar su periodo constitucional, el viernes reciente, lo expresó con todas sus letras: “Por encima de esa ley está la autoridad política, la autoridad moral”.

El Presidente nos informó que ‘la autoridad política’”, es decir él, está por encima de la ley.

Y ‘la autoridad moral’, es decir la suya, también está por encima de la ley.

¿No que nadie por encima de la ley?

Fue una mentira más, podría alegarse con excesiva indulgencia. No es así. Ésta tiene un peso y significado diferentes.

Un presidente que se proclama ‘por encima de la ley’ es un presidente fuera de la ley. No hay mucho que darle vueltas.

El Congreso tendría que pedir la dimisión de Andrés Manuel López Obrador, con base en su autoproclamado poder supralegal, y porque actúa en consecuencia.

No lo va a hacer porque hay mayoría de legisladores morenistas en ambas cámaras. No son demócratas.

Aunque si hubiera sentido de responsabilidad en sus diputados y senadores, obedecerían a la obligación política de exhortar al Presidente a que se vaya, luego de romper expresamente con el régimen constitucional.

La oposición tampoco insistirá en la renuncia del mandatario que se proclamó fuera de la ley. Por encima de ella.

Vienen las elecciones y ya se va, dirán algunos.

¿Ya se va? ¿De veras?

¿López Obrador se va a ir el 1 de octubre?

En realidad, sucederá lo que diga su dedito.

No lo sabemos. Depende de quien gane.

Si triunfa la oposición, ni soñar con que va a dejar el poder.

Él está por encima de las leyes y no va a reconocer una derrota. Nunca lo ha hecho. Menos ahora que está en el poder y nos anunció a los ciudadanos que más allá de lo que obliguen las leyes está lo que dicte él.

Si pierde su candidata en junio, AMLO se quedará hasta repetir las elecciones tantas veces sea necesario, para que se haga su voluntad.

Es posible que, a pesar de oírlo de sus labios y constatarlo con sus acciones, no se haya calibrado lo que significa que un Presidente se haya proclamado la “autoridad moral” que está por encima de las leyes.

Se trata del anuncio del fin de la legalidad. Del Estado de derecho. De las garantías individuales. De la democracia.

En caso de que gane su candidata a la Presidencia en junio, él seguirá siendo la “autoridad moral” que, como lo dijo, estará por encima de las leyes.

No tenemos esa figura en nuestro orden legal.

La hay en algunos países islámicos, y se llama ayatola.

En los regímenes fundamentalistas, como Irán, el presidente y el Congreso están sujetos a la autoridad moral del ayatola.

Esa es la decisión que tomaremos en las urnas el próximo 2 de junio: queremos un país de libertades o no.

Igualdad ante la ley o no.

Una autoridad política por encima de las leyes, o no.

Consagraremos una ‘autoridad moral’, un ayatola, o preferimos Estado de derecho.

Los que dicen que se equivocaron hace seis años tienen ahora la oportunidad de corregir.

Será, tal vez, la última oportunidad.

Es una tarea titánica, porque vencer al régimen presidido por un hombre que se piensa, se proclama y actúa por encima de la ley, es más difícil que quitarse de encima a un autócrata.

No va a soltar el poder.

Para confirmarlo, ahí está la autoproclamación de ser la autoridad moral por encima de lo que mandan las leyes.

Esa ‘autoridad moral’ no le va a entregar el poder a sus enemigos. O al Adversario, para usar el término bíblico que se emplea para referirse al demonio.

Porque de eso va, más o menos, lo que nos está diciendo.

domingo, 25 de febrero de 2024

Two Years After the Start of the SMO, the West Is Totally Paralyzed

PEPE ESCOBAR • FEBRUARY 24, 2024

https://www.unz.com/pescobar/two-years-after-the-start-of-the-smo-the-west-is-totally-paralyzed/

Exactly two years ago this Saturday, on February 24, 2022, Vladimir Putin announced the launching – and described the objectives – of a Special Military Operation (SMO) in Ukraine. That was the inevitable follow-up to what happened three days before, on February 21 – exactly 8 years after Maidan 2014 in Kiev – when Putin officially recognized the self-proclaimed republics of Donetsk and Lugansk.

During this – pregnant with meaning – short space of only three days, everyone expected that the Russian Armed Forces would intervene, militarily, to end the massive bombing and shelling that had been going on for three weeks across the frontline – which even forced the Kremlin to evacuate populations at risk to Russia. Russian intel had conclusive proof that the NATO-backed Kiev forces were ready to execute an ethnic cleansing of Russophone Donbass.

February 24, 2022 was the day that changed 21st century geopolitics forever, in several complex ways. Above all, it marked the beginning of a vicious, all-out confrontation, “military-technical” as the Russians call it, between the Empire of Chaos, Lies and Plunder, its easily pliable NATOstan vassals, and Russia – with Ukraine as the battleground.

There is hardly any question Putin had calculated, before and during these three fateful days, that his decisions would unleash the unbounded fury of the collective West – complete with a tsunami of sanctions.

Ay, there’s the rub; it’s all about Sovereignty. And a true sovereign power simply cannot live under permanent threats. It’s even feasible that Putin had wanted (italics mine) Russia to get sanctioned to death. After all, Russia is so naturally wealthy that without a serious challenge from abroad, the temptation is enormous to live off its rents while importing what it could easily produce.

Exceptionalists always gloated that Russia is “a gas station with nuclear weapons”. That’s ridiculous. Oil and gas, in Russia, account for roughly 15% of GDP, 30% of the government budget, and 45% of exports. Oil and gas add power to the Russian economy – not a drag. Putin shaking Russia’s complacency generated a gas station producing everything it needs, complete with unrivalled nuclear and hypersonic weapons. Beat that.

Ukraine has “never been less than a nation”

Xavier Moreau is a French politico-strategic analyst based in Russia for 24 years now. Graduated from the prestigious Saint-Cyr military academy and with a Sorbonne diploma, he hosts two shows on RT France.

His latest book, Ukraine: Pourquoi La Russie a Gagné (“Ukraine: Why Russia has Won”), just out, is an essential manual for European audiences on the realities of the war, not those childish fantasies concocted across the NATOstan sphere by instant “experts” with less than zero combined arms military experience.

Moreau makes it very clear what every impartial, realist analyst was aware of from the beginning: the devastating Russian military superiority, which would condition the endgame. The problem, still, is how this endgame – “demilitarization” and “denazification” of Ukraine, as established by Moscow – will be achieved.

What is already clear is that “demilitarization”, of Ukraine and NATO, is a howling success that no new wunderwaffen – like F-16s – will be able to change.

Moreau perfectly understands how Ukraine, nearly 10 years after Maidan, is not a nation; “and has never been less than a nation”. It’s a territory where populations that everything separates are jumbled up. Moreover, it has been a – “grotesque” – failed state ever since its independence. Moreau spends several highly entertaining pages going through the corruption grotesquerie in Ukraine, under a regime that “gets its ideological references simultaneously via admirers of Stepan Bandera and Lady Gaga.”

None of the above, of course, is reported by oligarch-controlled European mainstream media.

Watch out for Deng Xiao Putin

The book offers an extremely helpful analysis of those deranged Polish elites who bear “a heavy responsibility in the strategic catastrophe that awaits Washington and Brussels in Ukraine”. The Poles actually believed that Russia would crumble from the inside, complete with a color revolution against Putin. That barely qualifies as Brzezinski on crack.

Moreau shows how 2022 was the year when NATOstan, especially the Anglo-Saxons – historically racist Russophobes – were self-convinced thar Russia would fold because it is a “poor power”. Obviously, none of these luminaries understood how Putin strengthened the Russian economy very much like Deng Xiaoping on the Chinese economy. This “self-intoxication”, as Moreau qualifies it, did wonders for the Kremlin.

By now it’s clear even for the deaf, dumb, and blind that the destruction of the European economy has been a massive tactic, historic victory for the Hegemon – as much as the blitzkrieg against the Russian economy has been an abysmal failure.

All of the above brings us to the meeting of G20 Foreign Ministers this week in Rio. That was not exactly a breakthrough. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov made it very clear that the collective West at the G20 tried by all means to “Ukrainize” the agenda – with less than zero success. They were outnumbered and counterpunched by BRICS and Global South members.

At his press conference, Lavrov could not be more stark on the prospects of the war of the collective West against Russia. These are the highlights:

  • Western countries categorically do not want serious dialogue on Ukraine.
  • There were no serious proposals from the United States to begin contacts with the Russian Federation on strategic stability; trust cannot be restored now while Russia is declared an enemy.
  • There were no contacts on the sidelines of the G20 with either Blinken or the British Foreign Secretary.
  • The Russian Federation will respond to new Western sanctions with practical actions that relate to the self-sufficient development of the Russian economy.
  • If Europe tries to restore ties with the Russian Federation, making it dependent on their whims, then such contacts are not needed.

In a nutshell – diplomatically: you are irrelevant, and we don’t care.

That was complementing Lavrov’s intervention during the summit, which defined once again a clear, auspicious path towards multipolarity. Here are the highlights:

  • The forming of a fair multipolar world order without a definite center and periphery has become much more intensive in the past few years. Asian, African and Latin American countries are becoming important parts of the global economy. Not infrequently, they are setting the tone and the dynamics.
  • Many Western economies, especially in Europe, are actually stagnating against this background. These statistics are from Western-supervised institutions – the IMF, the World Bank and the OECD.
  • These institutions are becoming relics from the past. Western domination is already affecting their ability to meet the requirements of the times. Meanwhile, it is perfectly obvious today that the current problems of humanity can only be resolved through a concerted effort and with due consideration for the interests of the Global South and, generally, all global economic realities.
  • Institutions like the IMF, the World Bank, the EBRD, and the EIB are prioritizing Kiev’s military and other needs. The West allocated over $250 billion to tide over its underling thus creating funding shortages in other parts of the world. Ukraine is taking up the bulk of the funds, relegating Africa and other regions of the Global South to rationing.
  • Countries that have discredited themselves by using unlawful acts ranging from unilateral sanctions and the seizure of sovereign assets and private property to blockades, embargoes, and discrimination against economic operators based on nationality to settle scores with their geopolitical opponents cannot be considered guarantors of financial stability.
  • Without a doubt, new institutions that focus on consensus and mutual benefit are needed to democratize the global economic governance system. Today, we are seeing positive dynamics for strengthening various alliances, including BRICS, the SCO, ASEAN, the African Union, LAS, CELAC, and the EAEU.
  • This year, Russia chairs BRICS, which saw several new members join it. We will do our best to reinforce the potential of this association and its ties with the G20.
  • Considering that 6 out of 15 UN Security Council members represent the Western bloc, we will support the expansion of this body solely through the accession of countries from Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

Call it the real state of things, geopolitically, two years after the start of the SMO.

Netanyahu’s Post-War Plans for Gaza Call for Military Occupation ‘Without Time Limit’

The Israeli Prime Minister also wants to deploy troops along the border with Egypt

by Kyle Anzalone February 23, 2024

https://news.antiwar.com/2024/02/23/netanyahus-post-war-plans-for-gaza-call-for-military-occupation-without-time-limit/

Israel has released its first draft of its plans for post-war Gaza. Throughout the four months of a brutal onslaught, Israeli forces have decimated the Strip and killed 30,000 Palestinians. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s post-war plans call for “operational freedom of action in the entire Gaza Strip without a time limit” and “demilitarization” of Palestinians.

The Israeli government first released the document to some media outlets on Thursday. According to the translation from NBC News, the document says, Israel will “maintain its operational freedom of action in the entire Gaza Strip, without a time limit,” and “The security perimeter being created in the Gaza Strip on the border with Israel will remain as long as there is a security need for it.”

Israel is also requesting control of the border between Egypt and Gaza. Netanyahu’s plan may face resistance in Washington and Cairo. Egypt has demanded that Israel not deploy its forces along the border. The US has asked Israel not to expand buffer zones in Gaza. However, Tel Aviv has ignored nearly all of Washington’s requests over the past four months with no impact on US aid shipments to Israel.

Netanyahu says he will not allow the rebuilding of the Strip to begin until the Palestinians have been “deradicalized.” Additionally, Tel Aviv plans to have complete control over the future political system in Gaza. Netanyahu says the Strip will be fully demilitarized.

President Joe Biden has requested that Netanyahu allow Arab states to finance the reconstruction of Gaza and allow the Palestinian Authority (PA) to govern Gaza in the process of creating a sovereign Palestine. Netanyahu’s proposal did not mention the PA.

The Israeli government has repeatedly stated that it will not allow the PA to control Gaza or the Palestinians to have a state. In the statement released by the Israeli government, Netanyahu says, “Israel utterly rejects international diktats over a final-status agreement with the Palestinians.”

Netanyahu additionally plans to shut down UNRWA, the main aid agency in Gaza, that hundreds of thousands of Palestinians rely on for survival. Tel Aviv recently accused the UN Relief and Works Agency of employing 12 people who took part in the Hamas attack in Israel. However, a US intelligence community assessment only endorsed the claim with “low confidence.”

Kyle Anzalone is the opinion editor of Antiwar.com, news editor of the Libertarian Institute, and co-host of Conflicts of Interest.

 

viernes, 23 de febrero de 2024

U.S. Examined Allegations of Cartel Ties to Allies of Mexico’s President

The inquiry examined accusations of potential links between drug traffickers and close confidants of the president while he governed the country.

By Alan Feuer and Natalie Kitroeff

Feb. 22, 2024

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/22/world/americas/mexico-president-drug-cartel.html

American law enforcement officials spent years looking into allegations that allies of Mexico’s president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, met with and took millions of dollars from drug cartels after he took office, according to U.S. records and three people familiar with the matter.

The inquiry, which has not been previously reported, uncovered information pointing to potential links between powerful cartel operatives and Mexican advisers and officials close to the president while he governed the country.

But the United States never opened a formal investigation into Mr. López Obrador, and the officials involved ultimately shelved the inquiry. They concluded that the U.S. government had little appetite to pursue allegations against the leader of one of America’s top allies, said the three people familiar with the case, who were not authorized to speak publicly.

Mr. López Obrador called the allegations “completely false,” responding to questions from The New York Times on Thursday. He said the news of the inquiry would not “in any way” affect Mexico’s relationship with the United States, but said he expected a response from the U.S. government.

“Does this diminish the trust the Mexican government has in the United States?” Mr. López Obrador said at a regular news conference, adding, “Time will tell.”

Drug cartels have long infiltrated the Mexican state, from the lowest levels to the upper reaches of government. They pay off the police, manipulate mayors, co-opt senior officials and dominate broad swaths of the country.

But while the recent efforts by the U.S. officials identified possible ties between the cartels and Mr. López Obrador’s associates, they did not find any direct connections between the president himself and criminal organizations.

“There is no investigation into President López Obrador,” a spokesperson for the Justice Department said. “The Justice Department has a responsibility to review any allegation.”

Much of the information collected by U.S. officials came from informants whose accounts can be difficult to corroborate and sometimes end up being incorrect. The investigators obtained the information while looking into the activities of drug cartels, and it was not clear how much of what the informants told them was independently confirmed.

For example, records show that the investigators were told by an informant that one of Mr. López Obrador’s closest confidants met with Ismael Zambada García, a top leader of the Sinaloa drug cartel, before his victory in the 2018 presidential election.

A different source told them that after the president was elected, a founder of the notoriously violent Zetas cartel paid $4 million to two of Mr. López Obrador’s allies in the hope of being released from prison.

Investigators obtained information from a third source suggesting that drug cartels were in possession of videos of the president’s sons picking up drug money, records show.

Mr. López Obrador denied all the allegations made by the informants.

The U.S. law enforcement officers also independently tracked payments from people they believed to be cartel operatives to intermediaries for Mr. López Obrador, two of the people familiar with the inquiry said.

At least one of those payments, they said, was made around the same time that Mr. López Obrador traveled to the state of Sinaloa in 2020 and met the mother of the drug lord Joaquín Guzmán Loera, who is better known as El Chapo and is now serving a life sentence in an American federal prison.

More than a decade ago, a separate investigation led by the Drug Enforcement Administration unearthed allegations that traffickers had donated millions to Mr. López Obrador’s unsuccessful presidential campaign in 2006. This inquiry, which was detailed by three media outlets last month, was closed without charges being brought.

For the United States, pursuing criminal charges against top foreign officials is a rare and complicated undertaking. Building a legal case against Mr. López Obrador would be particularly challenging. The last time the United States filed criminal charges against a top Mexican official, it ultimately dropped them after his arrest caused a diplomatic rift with Mexico.

The Biden administration has an enormous stake in managing its relationship with Mr. López Obrador, who is seen as indispensable to containing a surge in migration that has become one of the most contentious issues in American politics. It is a major concern for voters in the lead-up to the presidential election this fall.

Mexico is also a top American trading partner and the single most important collaborator in U.S. efforts to slow illicit drugs like fentanyl from crossing the southern border.

U.S. law enforcement agencies have jurisdiction to investigate and bring charges against officials of other countries if they can show a connection to narcotics moving across the border into the United States.

While it is uncommon for American agents to pursue top foreign officials, it is not unprecedented: The drug trial of Juan Orlando Hernández, the former president of Honduras, began this week in Federal District Court in Manhattan.

Federal prosecutors in New York also secured a corruption conviction last year against Genaro García Luna, Mexico’s former public security secretary, persuading a jury that he had taken millions of dollars in bribes from violent cartels he was meant to be pursuing.

While efforts to scrutinize Mr. López Obrador’s allies are no longer active, the revelation that U.S. law enforcement officials were quietly examining corruption allegations against them could itself be damaging.

Last month’s media reports, including one by ProPublica, about a U.S. inquiry into 2006 campaign donations — for an election he did not win — ignited a firestorm in Mexico.

Mr. López Obrador publicly denounced the stories, implying they were aimed at influencing the country’s presidential election in June, in which his protégé, the former Mexico City mayor Claudia Sheinbaum, is leading the race to replace him. He suggested the reports could complicate talks on migration and fentanyl with the U.S. government, and said he considered not receiving President Biden’s homeland security adviser for a planned meeting in the Mexican capital.

“How are we going to be sitting at the table talking about the fight against drugs if they, or one of their institutions, is leaking information and harming me?” Mr. López Obrador said at a regular news conference days after the stories published.

After President Biden called Mr. López Obrador, calming tensions, the Mexican foreign minister said that the U.S. homeland security adviser told Mexico “that this is a closed issue for them.”

The Biden administration has handled Mr. López Obrador with great care, avoiding public criticism in favor of repeatedly dispatching top officials to Mexico City to meet with him and press for sustained migration enforcement in private.

The decision to let the recent inquiry go dormant, the people familiar with it said, was caused in large part by the breakdown of a separate, highly contentious corruption case. In the closing months of the Trump administration in 2020, U.S. officials brought charges against Gen. Salvador Cienfuegos Zepeda, who served as Mexico’s defense secretary from 2012 to 2018.

In a federal indictment, unsealed in New York after a multiyear investigation named “Operation Padrino,” prosecutors accused General Cienfuegos of using the powers of his office to help a violent criminal group called the H-2 cartel conduct its drug trafficking operations.

His arrest at the Los Angeles airport provoked a furor within the Mexican government, particularly among the leaders of the country’s armed forces, which have assumed greater responsibilities and power under Mr. López Obrador.

The president said the charges were “fabricated” and his administration released more than 700 pages of communications intercepted by U.S. agents that purported to show criminal activity but were cast as inconclusive.

The Drug Enforcement Administration, which already had a checkered history as protagonists in a drug war seen as bloody and futile, suffered a tremendous blow to its relationship with the Mexican government.

Just weeks after the arrest took place, the U.S. Justice Department, under heavy pressure from Mr. López Obrador, reversed itself and dismissed the indictment, sending General Cienfuegos back to Mexico.

The episode not only damaged longtime security arrangements between the two countries, but also left a deep impression on law enforcement officers north of the border, many of whom saw the failed case as a cautionary tale about undertaking similar efforts against other high-ranking Mexican officials.

Emiliano Rodríguez Mega contributed reporting.

Alan Feuer covers extremism and political violence for The Times, focusing on the criminal cases involving the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol and against former President Donald J. Trump.  More about Alan Feuer

Natalie Kitroeff is The Times’s bureau chief for Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean. More about Natalie Kitroeff

Genocide is a bad investment.

https://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/2024/02/22/genocide-is-a-bad-investment/

One of the largest pension funds in the world has divested entirely from Israel Bonds. 

In November, the Norwegian Pension Fund announced that it had withdrawn all of its nearly half a billion dollars worth of investments in Israel Bonds, citing “uncertainty in the market.” It pulled what remained of its investments at the start of the Israeli government’s genocidal war in Gaza.

Israel’s economy is in trouble. That tells us we need to double down on demands to divest from Israel Bonds.

Israel Bonds are money lent directly to Israel’s treasury. Since their establishment in 1951, the sale of Israel Bonds has funneled billions of dollars into almost every sector of the Israeli economy. 

Like any material support for the Israeli government, Israel Bonds cannot be disentangled from nearly a century of ethnic cleansing and slaughter. The sale of Israel Bonds has and continues to fund the maintenance of a brutal system of apartheid over millions of Palestinians throughout historic Palestine, and the genocide being carried out against 2.3 million Palestinians in Gaza.

That’s why the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement is targeting divestment from Israel Bonds as part of a larger strategy to build economic and political pressure as a meaningful contribution to the Palestinian struggle to dismantle Israel’s apartheid regime. 

In doing so, the BDS movement has created a new vocabulary of effective international solidarity, empowering people around the world to direct more focused pressure to end the complicity of governments, corporations, institutions, and individuals in financing Israeli apartheid.

Israel’s economy is in trouble.

In the last quarter of 2023, Israel’s GDP plummeted nearly 20 percent. Consumer spending was down by a third, imports and exports shrunk, and government spending skyrocketed 88 percent. Earlier this month, rating agency Moody’s downgraded Israel’s credit rating for the first time in the country’s history, saying its economic outlook was “negative.” 

Israel’s far-right government is again managing an economic crisis, largely of its own making, by changing the subject. 

Shortly after Moody’s issued its new rating, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich lambasted the financial ratings agency for their so-called “lack of confidence in the righteousness of [Israel’s] path in the face of its enemies.” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, meanwhile, has claimed that the rating will return to normal “once we win the war.”

It’s true that Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza has put tremendous strain on Israel’s economy. But that only tells part of the story.

What does this mean?

The Norwegian Pension Fund’s decision to entirely divest from Israel Bonds undoubtedly had an impact on Israel’s credit rating, regardless of whether it did so for any other reason than it was a poor investment. 

Five months of war have shaken Israel’s economy, and investors are uneasy. This represents a critical opening for the movement for Palestinian liberation to push even harder for divestment from Israel Bonds. 

U.S. state and local treasuries alone have invested $1.6 billion in Israel Bonds; Florida leads them with over $100 million in investments to date. That’s not including the countless universities, unions, corporations, and individuals across the U.S. who have also invested in Israel bonds. 

Ending U.S. complicity in the Israeli government’s crimes must include getting these institutions to divest from Israel Bonds. And as we approach five months since the start of the genocide in Gaza, cutting off the flow of all U.S. dollars to Israel’s war chest has never felt more urgent.

Horror beyond comprehension.

In north Gaza, famine has set in. Parked aid trucks stretch on for miles in Egypt, unable to enter the besieged enclave. Palestinians resort to grinding animal fodder and bird feed to make bread, but soon, they’ll run out of that, too. In Gaza City, the Israeli military shoots at crowds of starving people gathering to receive what little aid is still available, sending them fleeing for their lives. 

This is not a tragic byproduct of war. It is part and parcel of the Israeli government’s strategy of total annihilation, a policy designed to kill as many Palestinians as possible and to ethnically cleanse their traumatized loved ones who survive them. 

In Khan Younis, we’ve watched the Israeli military’s nightmarish siege on Nasser Hospital play out in real time. 

A video recorded inside the hospital shows a Palestinian man dressed in PPE, his hands bound with zip ties and eyes wide with terror. The man has been taken hostage by Israeli forces and sent into the hospital to evacuate the thousands of people sheltering inside. 

His mother, who has also taken refuge inside the hospital, begs her son not to leave. As soon as he does, Israeli forces shoot him dead. He is one of over a dozen Palestinians who were shot and killed outside Nasser Hospital in a matter of days — an indisputable war crime.

Two hundred patients remain inside without electricity and with dwindling food and medical supplies. At least eight people have died due to lack of oxygen.

“We can see from the hospital a lot of bodies, dead bodies of Palestinian refugees who tried to go outside the hospital or trying to get shelter in the refugee camps outside the hospital got shot in the street and left in the street.”

– Khaled Al Serr, a doctor at Nasser Hospital

In Rafah, Gaza’s southernmost city, the Israeli military is preparing to launch a ground invasion. The 1.5 million Palestinians who now live in Rafah, pushed as far southward as they can go by the Israeli military’s relentless bombardment, are now staring down the barrel of mass slaughter and yet another wave of mass forced displacement, with nowhere left to flee. Across the border in Egypt, construction is underway for what appears to be a camp intended to house displaced Palestinians.

Palestinians fear, rightfully, that they will never be allowed to return to their homes in Gaza. Seventy-six years ago, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were driven from their homes by Zionist militias to make way for the founding of the state of Israel, referred to by Arabs as the Nakba, or catastrophe. 

The majority of the people who live in Gaza are refugees: Palestinians who were forced to flee their homes during the Nakba, and their descendants. Today, as a second Nakba looms, securing an immediate ceasefire, lifting the siege, and ending all U.S. support for the Israeli government is more important than ever. 

jueves, 22 de febrero de 2024

Rugs, cosmetics, motorbikes: Israeli soldiers are looting Gaza homes en masse

Soldiers describe how stealing Palestinian property has become totally routine in the Gaza war, with minimal pushback from commanders.

By Oren Ziv

February 20, 2024

https://www.972mag.com/israeli-soldiers-looting-gaza/

Israeli soldiers fighting in Gaza have not been shy about posting videos on social media gleefully documenting their wanton destruction of buildings and humiliation of Palestinian detainees. Some of these clips were even exhibited in South Africa’s presentation at the International Court of Justice last month as evidence of genocide. But there is another war crime being readily documented by Israeli soldiers that has garnered less attention and condemnation despite its prevalence: looting. 

In November, the Palestinian singer Hamada Nasrallah was shocked to discover a TikTok of a soldier playing the guitar that his father had bought him 15 years earlier. Other videos uploaded to social media in recent months show Israeli soldiers boasting about finding wristwatches; unboxing someone’s collection of soccer shirts; and stealing rugs, groceries, and jewelry. 

In a Facebook group for Israeli women comprising nearly 100,000 users, someone wondered what to do with the “gifts from Gaza” that her partner, a soldier, had brought back for her. Sharing a photo of cosmetic products, she wrote: “Everything is sealed except for one product. Would you use these? And does someone know the products or are they only in Gaza?”

Indeed, since the start of Israel’s ground invasion in late October, soldiers have been taking whatever they can get their hands on from the homes of Palestinians who have been forced to flee. More than an open secret, the phenomenon has been widely — and uncritically — reported in the Israeli media, while rabbis from the Religious Zionist movement have been answering soldiers’ questions about what is permissible to loot according to Jewish law. 

Soldiers who returned from fighting in Gaza confirmed to +972 Magazine and Local Call that the phenomenon is ubiquitous, and that for the most part their commanders are allowing it to happen. “People took things — mugs, books, each one the souvenir that does it for him,” said one soldier, who admitted that he himself took a “souvenir” from one of the medical centers that the army occupied.

Another soldier, who served in northern and central Gaza, testified that soldiers “took rugs, blankets, [and] kitchen utensils,” and explained that there was no briefing on the matter from the army either before entering or while in the field. “There was zero talk about it from the commanders,” he said. “Everyone knows that people are taking things. It’s considered funny — people say: ‘Send me to The Hague.’ It doesn’t happen in secret. The commanders saw, everyone knows, and no one seems to care.”

The soldier offered his explanation for why the phenomenon is so widespread: “There is something about this reality in which the house is already [in ruins] that allows you to take a plate or rug. In one of the operations, in a destroyed house, there was a cupboard with antique kitchen utensils, special plates, special mugs. I saw them being looted, unfortunately.”

“[The commanders] didn’t really talk to us about it,” another soldier testified. “They didn’t say you couldn’t take things. And most people felt the need to take a souvenir.” 

The soldier noted that the looting was no secret; indeed, some of their seniors were doing it too. “The company sergeant major distributed Qur’an study books that he found and gave to whomever wanted them,” he said. “Another soldier took a set of coffee mugs, a serving tray, and a pot. Another unit, whom we met after they returned from a tour, brought a motorcycle, like the Nukhba [Hamas special forces] motorcycles. One of the soldiers declared that it was his. They [the soldiers] talked about renovating it.”

Another soldier who served in Gaza told +972 and Local Call that soldiers took “prayer beads, spoons, glasses, coffee pots, jewelry, rings. Whatever is easy and accessible is taken. Not everything, but people felt like the lords of the land.” He noted also that “maps from children’s textbooks were taken to show how they are taught there.”

In contrast to the others who testified, this soldier said that it was clear to him that looting was forbidden. “In my experience, of course, it’s a big no no,” he explained. “They emphasized this issue, but no one supervises the reservists. The most common thing [to steal] is ‘local souvenirs’ [i.e. quintessentially Palestinian or Arab items]. Once, they kicked out a soldier who stole money.”

The soldier added that he and his team tried, with varying degrees of success, to persuade other soldiers to leave behind the items they had stolen in Gaza. “They [soldiers] would come back with things; we told them it was better to leave them [inside the Strip, near the fence], it’s better to throw them away than to take them.”

‘From the ruins of Khan Younis, in the classic Gazan style’

In a communique this week to commanders in charge of units fighting in Gaza, IDF Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi urged soldiers “not to take anything that is not ours.” But this letter comes after several months in which looting has become completely routine. 

So normalized is the phenomenon that in a recent segment on Israel’s public broadcaster, Kan, soldiers presented reporter Uri Levy with a mirror they had brought back from Gaza. “From the ruins of Khan Younis, in the classic Gazan style,” Levy jokes, without asking the soldiers where they found the mirror or why they stole it. In a column on Ynet, Nahum Barnea quotes a soldier who said he saw the looting of “phones, vacuum cleaners, motorcycles, and bicycles.”

 

Channel 13 also reported on the phenomenon earlier this month. Rather than condemning it, however, the presenters simply noted that the videos are being shared around the world to “shame” Israeli soldiers. (The segment also included an interview with the soldier who filmed himself with the wristwatches he found inside a Palestinian home, who claims that he did not steal them: “They see me holding watches, not looting, nothing … My intention was to show that the Hamas leadership lives there at a high level.”)

Another sign of how widespread the phenomenon has become is the fact that rabbis from the Religious Zionist movement have been receiving questions from soldiers on the issue. In a Q&A uploaded to YouTube, Rabbi Yitzchak Sheilat of the Ma’ale Adumim Yeshiva in the occupied West Bank noted that looting is forbidden. 

“This is a very serious issue, in two respects: in terms of halacha [Jewish law] and military law,” he said. “Halacha permits looting only food or perishable things from the enemy … taking objects is strictly prohibited. According to halacha, all the spoils must go to the king, that is, the army commander … It would be a shame for someone to be caught and have to pay a heavy price.”

One of the soldiers asked the rabbi if it is permissible to take things from a house before it is demolished. “It is forbidden to take things,” Sheilat answered. “If you take something, it must be handed over to the chief of staff.” “And if a commander approves taking things for the company?” a soldier asked. “No, that’s exactly the problem, that there are commanders who don’t know military law, or don’t want to know, and suddenly they allow guys [to do] things they shouldn’t allow,” Sheilat replied.

However, Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu, the chief rabbi of the northern city of Safed, offered a different perspective on the issue in a Q&A of his own. He explained that because the “Arabs in Gaza do not observe international conventions, we are not obliged to abide by any of the rules of war. Nonetheless, we are very careful, because we want to preserve the image of God within us.”

And you shall eat the riches of all the nations’

Alongside the looting of Palestinians’ belongings, Israeli soldiers are also routinely eating the food they find in Gaza’s abandoned homes. “After two or three weeks, soldiers use whatever they find, clean it, and disinfect it,” a soldier told +972 and Local Call — though, according to him, soldiers are not supposed to use food found in Palestinian homes in case it is contaminated. Others said that no precise instructions were given regarding how to behave while staying in houses, many of which are set on fire or blown up by the army once they are no longer of use.

In a recent Haaretz article, Israeli soldiers described their “experiences” of cooking in Palestinian homes using the ingredients they found there. “Gazan cuisine, from what we’ve seen, is full of spices,” one soldier said in the article. “In every house you’ll find a lot of ras el hanout style mixes. There are also plenty of lentils, so at first we made a lot of stews …. Every house we stayed in had olives that [Palestinians] make, which we tasted … Olive oil is also present in every home, in gallons, and it helps a lot to upgrade any food. They also have a great spicy sauce. 

“Sometimes you encounter special things — suddenly there’s garlic and then you go all out on pasta with tomatoes and garlic,” the soldier continued. “I also came across this carob sauce that we added to the porridge and it was excellent.”

Last month, a letter published by the military rabbinate detailed instructions on how to keep kosher when using food and utensils found in homes in Gaza. The letter, signed by Rabbi Avishai Peretz ends with the biblical directive: “And you shall eat the riches of all the nations.”

Rabbi Sheilat also addressed the issue of whether it is permissible to eat food found in Palestinian homes in his Q&A. “With regard to non-kosher foods, there is a difference between what happens when you find food in enemy homes, where the law is that if you find food that you don’t have, and you want that food, even if it’s not essential, say sweets … it’s permitted to eat them without worrying whether it’s kosher or not.” 

In a statement to +972 and Local Call, the IDF Spokesperson said: “The IDF views with severity any case in which soldiers act contrary to the spirit of the IDF, including cases of unlawful taking of property. IDF commanders in various units conduct an ongoing dialogue on the subject throughout the fighting. Every report received on the subject is examined and dealt with individually. In relevant cases, an investigation is opened by the military police, and in some cases suspects are detained for interrogation purposes. The IDF operates in accordance with international law and will continue to do so.”

Israeli Knesset Overwhelmingly Backs Netanyahu’s Rejection of a Palestinian State

Ninety-nine out of 120 lawmakers backed the resolution against the 'unilateral' recognition of Palestinian statehood

by Dave DeCamp February 21, 2024

https://news.antiwar.com/2024/02/21/israeli-knesset-overwhelmingly-backs-netanyahus-rejection-of-a-palestinian-state/

The Israeli Knesset has overwhelmingly backed a resolution put forward by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that rejects a “unilateral” creation of a Palestinian state.

Ninety-nine lawmakers out of 120 in the Knesset voted in favor of the resolution. According to Ynet, Israel’s Labor Party boycotted the vote, and 11 Arab lawmakers voted against it. The majority of the leading opposition parties, National Unity and Yesh Atid, voted in favor.

Netanyahu celebrated the strong support for his legislation. “I commend the Knesset members, including those from the opposition, who today voted overwhelmingly in favor of my proposal that Israel opposes being unilaterally dictated to establish a Palestinian state,” he said.

“I don’t recall many votes, in fact, hardly any, where the Knesset voted with a majority of 99, nearly 100 members out of 120, on any proposal,” Netanyahu added.

The resolution came in response to reports that say the US is working with some of its Arab partners on an outline for a future peace deal that would include a “firm timeline” toward a Palestinian state.

The Knesset vote happened after the Israeli cabinet unanimously approved a similar declaration that rejected “international diktats” on a Palestinian state.

Netanyahu has been boasting of his efforts over the years to prevent a Palestinian state. “Everyone knows that I am the one who for decades blocked the establishment of a Palestinian state that would endanger our existence,” he said on Monday.