English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest world news

Netanyahu’s fait accompli to Trump

Published

on

Netanyahu’s fait accompli to Trump

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]In a controversial move, the Israeli Knesset goes ahead with legalising 4,000 West Bank settlement homes retroactively

By Sujit Bhar

When hubris piggy-backs a high dose of self-confidence, the yield is an attitude that refuses to see reality as it is, and even refuses to address situations within social and legal parameters of the world. One can be forgiven for thinking the simile is vis-à-vis US President Donald J Trump. You are correct in your assumption, in some ways, and wrong as well.

For, this is about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

It was just the other day that the White House rebuked Israel for its decision to build more settlements in the West Bank. Yet on February 6, Israel’s Knesset passed a law that legalised—and retroactively too—no less than 4,000 settlement homes to be built on land that is privately held by Palestinians.

Which means that Netanyahu has not only thumbed his nose at the White House, but has also agreed to take on massive international outrage and an unending series of lawsuits in his stride.

On February 2, White House spokesman Sean Spicer had said in a statement: “While we don’t believe the existence of settlements is an impediment to peace, the construction of new settlements or the expansion of existing settlements beyond the current borders may not be helpful.”

“The Trump administration has not taken an official position on settlement activity and looks forward to continuing discussions, including with Prime Minister (Benjamin) Netanyahu when he visits with President Trump later this month,” Spicer had added.

While the statement surprised many, considering Trump’s pre-election position vis-a-vis Israel, the latter had made up its mind. Reacting to Spicer, Danny Danon, Israel’s ambassador to the UN, had put out a carefully worded reply. He told Israel Radio: “It’s too early to tell… I would not categorise this as a U-turn by the US administration but the issue is clearly on their agenda… the issue will be discussed when the prime minister (Netanyahu) meets the president in Washington. We will not always agree on everything.”

Back home, Israelis, it seems, refused to wait so long. One believes Netanyahu wants to hand Trump a fait accompli when they meet. That would be difficult for Trump to disengage from, given his original stand.

On February 6, there as a debate in the Knesset, before voting on the Bill took place. In his reply, Israeli cabinet minister Ofir Akunis reportedly said: “We are voting tonight on our right to the land. We are voting tonight on the connection between the Jewish people and its land. This whole land is ours. All of it.”

Total disregard for law

This is clear hubris, a total disregard for international law and even a disregard for the UN Security Council’s December 23 resolution that demanded the stoppage of further settlement activity on occupied Palestinian territory. It was a vote taken in US abstention, but it remains a legal document nevertheless.

This act was, obviously, not worked out through negotiations. When it becomes as law—it is expected to be challenged in the Israeli Supreme Court—it will give the administration legal teeth to confiscate land and hand out whatever compensation the administration deems fit. Such compensation can be money or alternative land, which is surely not there.

The problem in the West Bank is that it is on the border and around disputed land. International laws regarding this have little possibility of being implemented in this area.

The land agreement worked out with international arbitration after Israeli victory in the six-day war of 1967, has neither been fully accepted by Israel nor ratified by the Palestinians. Hence the entire West Bank and even the Gaza Strip remains disputed.

However, with the Palestinian Authority being recognised worldwide today, the “compensation” package is probably just a face-saver. If a Palestinian landowner refuses to part with his land, he will be forced to. That is the ground reality.

The Twist in the Tale

Here lies a twist. The way Netanyahu has been acting it seems as if he has always been against risking the wrath of the world in resuming building on the West Bank. There was, reportedly, huge argument and shouting during the voting process before it was passed 60-52 in the 120-member Knesset.

It has been reported that some spectators in visitors’ seats had shown a black cloth in protest. It is also true that Netanyahu has been concerned about possible international censure and had wanted to wait till his meeting with Trump later this month. This, however, was a ploy to try and sensitize the US regarding the issue and brandishing this support while facing the world. To him, this would have given it a legitimate tinge, however weird that may be.

His dilly-dallying with the law was clear when he had told reporters in London that he was okay with the law going through, but withdrawing into a shell thereafter, probably because of Spicer’s statement.

Also read: Common ground for Trump, Netanyahu, Modi

Hark back to the Security Council decision where ex-president Barack Obama (he was still in office at that time) pushed this resolution through the 15-member council, comprising interesting countries: New Zealand, Malaysia, Venezuela and Senegal. Even Egypt, which had initially been interested, quietly withdrew under pressure from Israel and Trump.

Before that Trump had issued an unofficial call for a veto to the bill. Israel had supported it.

It is also pertinent to recall that Netanyahu was livid, calling the vote “shameful”. He had summoned US Ambassador Daniel Shapiro for a stern talk. Back with his cabinet, he had told his colleagues in the ministry that the resolution was “reckless and destructive”.

Hence his current ingenuous attitude fails to find takers.

There is, however, some dissent which seems justified. Netanyahu’s attorney general has said that the bill was unconstitutional and that he would not defend it in the Supreme Court. He has a point. He would probably be the one defending it if the case goes to the International Criminal Court at The Hague, Netherlands. That court has already been apprised of a lot of pertinent details and is said to be examining the settlements issue.

The reactions

The Palestinian reaction was as expected. Nabil Abu Rdeneh, a spokesman for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, has said: “This is an escalation that would only lead to more instability and chaos. It is unacceptable. It is denounced and the international community should act immediately.”

The US State Department too has reacted cautiously. It has reportedly said: “The Trump administration will withhold comment on the legislation until the relevant court ruling.”

The move has not received support from the global Jewish advocacy group AJC. Its CEO David Harris has been quoted as saying: “Israel’s High Court can and should reverse this misguided legislation.” 

International legal position

The Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 prohibits countries from moving population into territories occupied in a war. That, incidentally, was also the year that the state of Israel came into existence.

The trouble has been with Israeli stubbornness and, of course, with massive US support. Israel says this decision of 1949 does not apply to territory occupied during the Six-Day War of 1967. Proving this argument to be specious, the UN Security Council, its General Assembly, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the International Court of Justice and the High Contracting Parties to the Convention have all said that the Fourth Geneva Convention does apply.

Technically that left Israel with the fig leaf of the US support.

Many UN resolutions have clearly said that these settlements, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights occupations are illegal. The last UN Security Council decision wasn’t the first. Similar rulings had been passed in 1979 and 1980, too.

Israel has deliberately kept its position vis-a-vis the law somewhat vague and has failed to justify its stand about pushing its population into territory that the international community believes is Palestinian.

There has also been talk to equate this issue with the China-Tibet issue, but that has not gained as much traction as this. This is probably because of India’s somewhat weak position vis-a-vis the matter. It is the strength of conviction that keeps the Palestine issue hot around the world. The legal battles, that should ensue and then get lost in the mist, would still be pertinent in the social contexts of these nations.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Latest world news

India closes two more visa centres in Bangladesh amid worsening security concerns

India has temporarily closed visa application centres in Rajshahi and Khulna, citing security concerns following protests near Indian establishments in Bangladesh.

Published

on

India closes two more visa centres in Bangladesh amid worsening security concerns

India has shut two additional Indian Visa Application Centres (IVACs) in Bangladesh — in Rajshahi and Khulna — citing the prevailing security situation in the country. The move comes a day after protests were held near the Indian High Commission in Dhaka by radical groups, raising concerns over safety around Indian establishments.

An official notification issued on the IVAC website said the centres in Rajshahi and Khulna were closed on December 18 due to security reasons. Applicants who had appointments scheduled for the day have been assured fresh slots at a later date.

The decision follows the temporary shutdown of the visa application centre in Dhaka earlier, even as New Delhi flagged a rise in open hostility towards India, particularly targeting the northeastern region, under the interim government led by Muhammad Yunus.

Bangladesh rejects India’s security assessment

Bangladesh’s Foreign Affairs Advisor Touhid Hossain dismissed India’s concerns and denied any deterioration in law and order. He distanced the interim administration from recent inflammatory remarks made by National Citizen Party (NCP) leader Hasnat Abdullah, who had publicly threatened to cut off India’s “seven sisters” and also issued comments against the Indian High Commissioner.

Hossain said the individual was not part of the government and termed his statements irrelevant. He also claimed that security arrangements were in place and that the shutdown of the Dhaka visa centre coincided with a local programme, which raised security-related questions.

Political backdrop and India’s response

The NCP, which emerged from student-led protests that led to the fall of the previous Awami League government, has extended support to the Yunus-led interim setup. Though the party has limited political presence, radical elements associated with it have organised anti-India demonstrations in Dhaka.

India, in an earlier statement, urged the interim government to ensure internal law and order and hold peaceful elections so that Bangladesh can return to an elected administration. However, the interim government appeared dismissive of this advice, with Hossain stating that India need not advise Dhaka on conducting elections.

Observers in Bangladesh have pointed out that delays in elections could benefit the unelected interim government, while radical groups may attempt to create disruptions by projecting India as a hostile actor. New Delhi has so far maintained a measured stance, despite remarks that directly question India’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, particularly in the northeastern region.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

PM Modi receives Ethiopia’s highest civilian honour, first world leader to get award

PM Modi has become the first global leader to be awarded Ethiopia’s highest civilian honour for strengthening bilateral ties and global leadership.

Published

on

PM modi Ethiopias highest civillian award

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Tuesday was conferred with ‘The Great Honour Nishan of Ethiopia’, the highest national award of the African nation, becoming the first head of government or state globally to receive the honour.

The award was presented during a special ceremony held at the Addis International Convention Centre, where Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed Ali honoured Modi for his role in strengthening bilateral relations between India and Ethiopia and for his leadership on global issues.

Recognition of India-Ethiopia partnership

According to an official statement, the honour recognises Prime Minister Modi’s contribution to deepening the long-standing partnership between the two countries and his engagement with issues concerning the Global South. The conferment is being seen as a milestone in India-Ethiopia relations and reflects the growing diplomatic and development cooperation between the two nations.

Prime Minister Modi acknowledged the award and dedicated it to the people of India. In a post on X, he said he was honoured to receive Ethiopia’s highest recognition and attributed it to the collective strength and aspirations of 140 crore Indians.

‘Accepted with humility and gratitude’

Speaking at the ceremony, Prime Minister Modi said it was a privilege to accept the honour from one of the world’s most ancient civilisations. He expressed humility and gratitude while thanking Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed and the people of Ethiopia for the recognition.

He also praised the Ethiopian Prime Minister’s leadership and initiatives aimed at promoting national unity, sustainability and inclusive development. Highlighting the role of knowledge and education in nation-building, Modi noted that Indian teachers have been contributing to Ethiopia’s progress for more than a century.

The Prime Minister dedicated the award to both Indians and Ethiopians who have nurtured bilateral ties over generations and conveyed appreciation on behalf of India’s population for the honour bestowed upon him.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

Trump administration expands US travel ban to 20 more countries, Palestinians also affected

The Trump administration has widened its travel ban, adding 20 more countries and fully restricting entry for Palestinians, citing security and vetting concerns.

Published

on

The Trump administration has widened its travel restrictions, adding 20 more countries to the existing list and imposing a complete ban on travel for people holding documents issued by the Palestinian Authority. The decision significantly expands the scope of the travel limits announced earlier this year and will come into force from January 1.

According to the proclamation issued on Tuesday, the latest move doubles the number of nations impacted by US travel and immigration restrictions. Five additional countries now face a full ban, while 15 others have been placed under partial restrictions. The administration said the measures apply to both visitors and those seeking to immigrate to the United States.

Countries facing full travel ban

The newly added countries under the full ban include Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger, South Sudan and Syria. In addition, people travelling on Palestinian Authority-issued passports or documents have been fully barred from entering or emigrating to the US. South Sudan had already been subject to significant restrictions before this announcement.

Earlier, the administration had imposed a complete ban on travellers from Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen.

15 countries under partial restrictions

The list of countries now facing partial travel restrictions includes Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Benin, Ivory Coast, Dominica, Gabon, Gambia, Malawi, Mauritania, Nigeria, Senegal, Tanzania, Tonga, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

These join the earlier partially restricted countries such as Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela. The administration also said restrictions on Laos and Sierra Leone have been upgraded, while some limits on Turkmenistan have been eased after an improvement in vetting standards.

Who is exempt from the restrictions

The proclamation clarifies that certain categories of travellers are exempt. These include people who already hold valid US visas, lawful permanent residents, diplomats, athletes, and individuals whose entry is considered to be in the national interest of the United States.

Reasons cited by the administration

The US administration said many of the affected countries suffer from widespread corruption, unreliable civil documents and weak criminal record systems, making proper vetting difficult. It also pointed to high visa overstay rates, refusal by some governments to accept deported nationals, and broader concerns related to immigration enforcement, foreign policy and national security.

The expansion follows the arrest of an Afghan national accused in the shooting of two National Guard troops near the White House during the Thanksgiving weekend. The accused has pleaded not guilty to murder and assault charges.

Criticism and concerns over Afghan visas

The decision has drawn criticism from rights groups and immigration advocates, who argue that national security is being used to justify broad restrictions on entire populations. Concerns have also been raised over the removal of an exception for Afghans eligible for the Special Immigrant Visa, a category meant for those who assisted US forces during the war in Afghanistan.

Advocacy groups said these individuals undergo extensive vetting and that restricting their entry could undermine commitments made by the United States.

New restrictions on Palestinians

The full ban on people holding Palestinian Authority passports marks a further tightening of restrictions imposed earlier, which had already made it extremely difficult for Palestinians to travel to the US for work, education, business or tourism. The administration justified the move by citing the presence of US-designated terrorist groups in the West Bank and Gaza, as well as challenges in vetting due to ongoing conflict.

Governments of some newly affected countries said they were reviewing the decision and seeking clarity from US officials on the implications of the restrictions.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com