Antony Loewenstein

As another flotilla makes its way to Gaza, to highlight the ongoing and illegal Egyptian and Israeli imposed siege on the Strip, the following statement is released today:

Free Gaza Australia rejects the threats by Israel to “take any necessary action” to prevent two boats carrying pro-Palestinian activists, including Australian Michael Coleman, from reaching Gaza. The two boats Tahrir (Liberation) and Saoirse (Freedom) set sail from Turkey on Wednesday with the aim of breaking Israel’s illegal sea blockade of Gaza.

A spokesperson for the group, Vivienne Porzsolt said: ”The participants of this flotilla are unarmed peaceful activists and journalists who are acting entirely lawfully. We call on the Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd to denounce Israel for its expressed intention. We ask that he urges the Israeli government and military to desist from intervening, boarding or towing the boats to Israel and that he insist Israel does not use force or violence against any of those on board the vessels. In particular, we demand that the Australian Government exert its influence to ensure the safety of Australian citizen Michael Coleman.”

An email to Free Gaza Australia from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) on 3 November legitimised Israel’s military blockade of Gaza. While DFAT confirmed it would provide consular support to Coleman, currently on board the Tahrir, “if necessary”, rather than condemning the illegal blockade, DFAT instead advised against travel to Gaza.

“The travel advice for Israel, Gaza Strip and the West Bank strongly advises against travelling by sea to the coast of the Gaza Strip in breach of Israeli naval restrictions or participating in any attempt to break the naval blockade,” a spokesperson for DFAT said.

Ms Porzsolt said: ”We call on the Australian Government to condemn Israel’s ongoing illegal blockade of Gaza and the consequent collective punishment of the 1.5 million Palestinians who live there.”

Wonderful independent Australian magazine Overland is currently running its Subscriberthon. I was asked to offer some words of support:

Independent media has never been more important. Our world is currently experiencing a necessary crisis in confidence in corporate media, corporate governance and capitalism itself. Relying on corporate media to accurately report on this crisis is impossible. From WikiLeaks to the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya to the #Occupy movement and Palestine, unembedded voices must be heard.

Overland provides this space, a rare place in the Australian media space that both celebrates and encourages dissent. Sacred cows are smashed, and we cheer. Supporting this kind of independent thought is vital, as our media becomes increasingly obsessed with protecting the powerful at the expense of the majority*. True freedom in society means having the right to vigorously disagree and be heard. I encourage people to support Overland and its consistently fine work. I salute its tenacity and foresight. Overland is truly a publication for the questioning age we are entering.

How best to support Overland? Subscribe.

Antony Loewenstein is a Sydney-based independent freelance journalist, author, documentarian, photographer and blogger.

Don’t believe anybody who says that private security and mercenaries won’t increasingly be in the front-line of US-led wars (if not in the headlines). The New York Times reports:

President Hamid Karzai’s plan to disband private security companies that protect billions of dollars worth of aid projects and replace them with government forces is fraught with problems and unlikely to meet the president’s March deadline to complete the transition, according to a six-month assessment of the program.

The assessment, conducted by NATO and the Afghan Interior Ministry, outlines dozens of issues that have slowed the development of the new security force and raises questions about the government’s capacity to carry out and sustain the program and others as international aid and military support dwindle in coming years.

The report, a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times, comes as international development companies are becoming increasingly worried about the security of their workers, many of whom are Afghans.

Mr. Karzai has said that replacing the private companies with his country’s forces is an important step toward Afghan sovereignty. Gen. John R. Allen, the commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, has also made it a central issue, according to a Western official.

“It’s become a top priority because if it doesn’t work, everything grinds to a halt,” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity in keeping with diplomatic protocol. “If it isn’t sorted out, everyone will pull out because they don’t want some fly-by-night security protecting them.”

NATO, the State Department and the United States Agency for International Development are setting up a task force that could grow to more than 170 people to advise and help train the guard force, according to a senior American official and a senior NATO official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. The Pentagon will also be asking Congress to appropriate $35 million to $40 million in new and reallocated money to pay for the task force, a senior NATO official said.

The assessment makes it clear that much work needs to be done. Of 166 “essential” criteria to determine if the government was able to recruit, train and sustain the guard force, less than a third could be fully met, the assessment found. Sixty-three of the measurements could not be met at all.

Among the shortfalls: the program, which is overseen by the Interior Ministry, “has no money available to procure necessary supplies and equipment”; its training center is not teaching leadership skills and cannot generate enough guards to meet the forecasted demand; and the ministry has failed to provide the seed money — about $10 million — to prop up a state-owned business to run the program.

The program has already failed to supply personnel and equipment for some of its contracts, the report said. Its authors concluded that the police protection force “is not on track” to assume the responsibilities of the private security companies by March.

Peace-loving Britain, America and Israel may soon engage in yet another “liberation” in the Middle East:

Britain’s armed forces are stepping up their contingency planning for potential military action against Iran amid mounting concern about Tehran’s nuclear enrichment programme, the Guardian has learned.

The Ministry of Defence believes the US may decide to fast-forward plans for targeted missile strikes at some key Iranian facilities. British officials say that if Washington presses ahead it will seek, and receive, UK military help for any mission, despite some deep reservations within the coalition government.

In anticipation of a potential attack, British military planners are examining where best to deploy Royal Navy ships and submarines equipped with Tomahawk cruise missiles over the coming months as part of what would be an air and sea campaign.

They also believe the US would ask permission to launch attacks from Diego Garcia, the British Indian ocean territory, which the Americans have used previously for conflicts in the Middle East.

The Guardian has spoken to a number of Whitehall and defence officials over recent weeks who said Iran was once again becoming the focus of diplomatic concern after the revolution in Libya.

They made clear that Barack Obama, has no wish to embark on a new and provocative military venture before next November’s presidential election.

But they warned the calculations could change because of mounting anxiety over intelligence gathered by western agencies, and the more belligerent posture that Iran appears to have been taking.

Julian Assange on The New York Times: Part 1 from NYT eXaminer on Vimeo.

More here.

Last night, just before Noam Chomsky delivered the 2011 Sydney Peace Prize, he spoke at #OccupySydney. I filmed his short appearance:

Some of my photos from the Chomsky visit here and here.

So:

The State Government has announced the company Serco is its preferred tenderer for services at a new young adults corrective centre.

The Corrective Services Minister Terry Redman says the company was chosen to provide services at the facility in Murdoch after an extensive evaluation of its standards.

Mr Redman says Serco’s performance will be closely monitored by both the Government and the Inspector of Custodial Services.

My source in Western Australia tells me:

Prior to the last election the [Liberal] Barnett mob gave a undertaking this facility would not be privatised but after they were elected  they reversed that decision and decided to privatise the facility. Serco had a couple of years to lobby and prepare for the tender. Serco were the only tenderer, they were actively involved in developing the specifications for the facility and its various programs and it is reputed that a senior executive with responsibility for the facility within DoCS has links with Serco.

Contract management WA style!

The Community and Public Sector Union knows what this latest contract means; less jobs, lower wages and less accountability:

The CPSU/CSA has condemned the Barnett Government’s announcement today that multi-national company Serco will operate a new Young Adults Facility in Western Australia.

CPSU/CSA Secretary, Toni Walkington, says that the decision to outsource the new Young Adults facility will be disastrous for the state and put public safety at risk.

“Colin Barnett’s Government says they care about Law & Order but they are outsourcing key parts of the justice system to private companies, said Ms Walkington.

“Private companies exist to make profits for their shareholders – they do not exist to keep the community safe. Over recent months serious doubts have been cast over multi-nationals and their management of prisons, detention centres and public services.

A recent comprehensive evaluation of public versus private management of a new facility shows there is no benefit to the state from outsourcing this facility.

If the State Government walks away from its responsibilities it will not be able to protect the community.”

Ms Walkington said that a government that talks tough on Law & Order should not be outsourcing jobs in the justice system and putting public safety at risk.

A new graphic novel, Zahra’s Paradise, is released that shows the long and ongoing struggle of Iranians for a better, safer and non-fundamentalist future. The New York Review of Books:

The people that Zahra and Hassan come across in their quest tell them stories: of missing relatives, confiscated property, executions, and the like. Hassan, for example, visits at his home a young man who shared a cell with Mehdi and others at Kahrizak Prison—the Tehran detention center where both male and female prisoners were allegedly assaulted and tortured during the 2009 protests. He describes these horrors: “I was raped! Raped in the name of their God, in the name of their Iran! Raped in the name of their prophet…It is their Islamic republic—not me—that is covered in filth!” Khalil’s drawings reconstruct this event as the young man is remembering them: his interrogators forcing him to face a cell wall; his trousers being pulled down; the document he was forced to sign afterwards, presumably saying he was well treated.

The novel’s drawings often reveal this kind of terrible irony. They represent a distinctly Iranian style of humor, a means of puncturing pretence and power. Iran’s leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, is depicted as the Caliph of an all-male harem, choosing a new favorite among the politicians and clerics who are vying for his attention. The Revolutionary Court is pictured as a Kafkaesque maze of stairs, running upside down and sideways and seemingly going nowhere. Iran’s judiciary is evoked by a huge, gaping set of a mullah’s jaws. Moving stairs and runways, carrying an endless line of the accused enter the jaws from one side; they emerge from the maws of the mullah, after side trips to the torture chamber and the confession room, carrying signs of their prison sentences: “10 years,” “2 years,” “17 years.”

The protagonists of Zahra’s Paradise are in many ways representative types. Zahra is like the thousands of mothers who in Iran today persist in the search for missing sons and daughters and who courageously demonstrate before detention centers and in public parks, and issue open letters to the authorities seeking the freedom of their incarcerated children. Even today, a number of these mothers gather every Saturday in a Tehran park for this purpose, often risking arrest. This gathering is included in the book, and the police are shown dispersing the women. The brother, Hassan, provides an entrée into the world of Iran’s irreverent youth culture: into bedrooms plastered with posters, endless hours on the internet, intense camaraderie and the furtive but easy interaction between men and women in internet cafes. A taxi driver, taking Zahra and Hassan on their ronds, abandons his cab in the middle of Tehran’s perennially snarled traffic to fetch himself and his passengers a glass of his favorite watermelon juice. As the drawing appropriately shows, his absence hardly matters, since the traffic is not moving at all.

After more than 10 years of Western-led war in Afghanistan, The Guardian’s Jonathan Steele says that it is a conflict that we’ll (thankfully) never win. Take note America, Britain and Australia:

Two days after 9/11, I wrote a column in The Guardiansaying that if the U.S. reaction was to put boots on the ground in Afghanistan and try to occupy that country and to bring about regime change, they would suffer exactly the same fate as the Soviet Union. And I’m afraid to say that I’ve been proved right on that, because they’re following exactly the same techniques as the Russians. It’s what I call the garrison strategy. You hold the main cities, you try and keep the roads going open between them, and you make little forays into the countryside and try and push out a bit. But it doesn’t work, because you create new resistance by being there. The resistance comes because you’re there; you’re not there because of the resistance. The occupying force itself creates the resistance.

And so, the crucial thing now is to recognize that the war is unwinnable. It is a stalemate. There is no military victory. And this is the lesson that I’m afraid President Obama hasn’t yet learned from what the Soviets did, because Mikhail Gorbachev came into power in the Kremlin in 1985, after five years of war, when 9,000 Soviets soldiers had already died. He inherited somebody else’s war from his predecessor. And he realized immediately that the war was unwinnable. He consulted his military. They also said the war is unwinnable. They didn’t say, “We want a surge.” They didn’t say, “We want new troops, new equipment, you know, more scope, more money.” They recognized that the thing is a disaster. Obama hasn’t yet recognized that. And in fact it’s worse than that, because people like General Petraeus are still convinced that there can be a military victory. He has the ear of the President. He’s the head of the CIA, sees him virtually every day. And so, it’s really important, I think, that the American public—and we know from the polls that more than half are against this war—really make their voice heard.

Leading boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) advocate Omar Barghouti introduces this important piece by the head of Haaretz:

Nothing new. BUT it comes from the publisher of one of Israel’s most influential newspaper. Other prominent Israelis from within the establishment (and the Israeli media is most certainly part of the establishment, by any objective standard) have used the term apartheid before in describing this or that dimension of Israeli colonial oppression and system of racial discrimination. Still, for the publisher of Haaretz to use the term, and now, is news–good news!

Worth mentioning that a previous publisher of Haaretz called for boycotting the Knesset after it passed the “Loyalty Oath.”

As all “liberal” Zionists, however, the author attempts to absolve Israel of its “original sin,” the planned and systematic uprooting and ethnic cleansing of most of the indigenous Palestinians in 1948, focusing instead only on the corrupting effect of “the occupation” and the colonial settlement enterprise in the 1967 territory. So the Nakba becomes the “War of Independence,” with a capital I. And Israel is portrayed as an innocent democracy up until 1967! 

Typically, the author obfuscates the true definition of apartheid, making it an exclusively South African system of discrimination. But he still is obliged to use the term to describe Israel’s system towards the Palestinians, at least in the 1967 OPT. Again typically, the author ignores the dozens of Israeli laws, including “constitutional’ (Basic) laws, that discriminate between Jewish and “non-Jewish” citizens of the state in almost all vital aspects of life. 

The fact that Israel’s system of what even the US Department of State calls “institutional, legal, and societal discrimination” against the indigenous Palestinian citizens of the state fits the UN definition of apartheid as per the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid is ignored by this otherwise knowledgeable author.

The fact that the recent Cape Town session of the Russel Tribunal on Palestine (which involved several world renowned authorities on apartheid) found Israel guilty of the crime of apartheid against the entire Palestinian people, (in 48, 67 and exile) is conveniently omitted by this opinion maker.

Still, it is welcome news that Mr. Schocken is finally acknowledging part of what we’ve known for decades. Better late than never; and better admit part of the guilt than none.

Omar