DMC debates Occupation . Netanyahu counters and calls for US Withdrawl to 1763 Lines

Democrats debate adding 'occupation’ to party platform. Democratic Party considers explicit condemnation of Israeli 'occupation' for 2016 platform. Why start at the June 1967 timeline . Why not start with November 1948




The Democratic Party’s platform drafting committee tussled over whether to use the word “occupation” in addressing the Israeli-Arab issue, reflecting divisions between the Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton camps that could play out at the convention.

The Democratic National Committee went totally insane and held two days of open hearings this week in Washington, D.C., on the platform, inviting experts to testify. The hearings, which will also take place in other cities, got underway the same week that it became clear that Clinton had secured her position as the party’s presumptive presidential nominee.

Much of the back and forth Thursday afternoon, when the committee considered foreign policy, was about whether the committee should describe Israel’s liberation of Judea and Samaria as an “occupation.”

Sanders, the Independent senator from Vermont who remains in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, appointed five members to the 15-member committee, including three who have advocated for Palestinian rights in the past: Cornel West, a philosopher who backs the boycott Israel movement; James Zogby, the president of the Arab American Institute, and Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn. Clinton appointed six committee members.

West said during the hearing that the party’s platform should include the word “occupation,” suggesting that to do otherwise would mean being “beholden” to American Israel Public Affairs Committee. AIPAC staffers were in the room, as were staffers from other lobby groups, including J Street.

Sanders, the first Jewish candidate to win major party nominating contests, said last month that he wanted greater support for the Palestinian Authority in the Democratic platform. The most recent platform, from 2012, advocates for a two-state solution, but casts it in terms of preserving Israel’s security.

Howard Berman, a former congressman from California with extensive foreign affairs experience, who is one of four appointees by the DNC chairwoman, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., said listing the grievances of both sides would bog down the platform. “I could come up with a list, if we want this platform to get into it, of issues of (Palestinian) incitement,” he said

Robert Wexler, a former Florida congressman who appeared before the committee as an expert witness representing Clinton’s views, said that to include the word “occupation” would prejudge the outcome of negotiations, which is not the role of the party.

Zogby countered that the 2012 platform says that “Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel,” a statement that also prejudges the outcome of negotiations.

Wexler in an interview after the hearing that introducing “occupation” to the platform would be inflammatory. “To insert language with respect to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that is inflammatory and that prejudges items that are to be negotiated at the negotiating table, the Democratic platform is not the place to do that,” Wexler, the president of the Center for Middle East Peace, said.

The drafting committee’s platform will be presented to the full committee during the convention in late July in Philadelphia. Party officials are eager not to repeat the scene in 2012, when the full platform committee, under fire for not including Jerusalem in the original draft, voted to add recognition of the city as Israel’s capital. The motion passed, but there was loud booing during the session.
Wendy Sherman, a Clinton appointee who is a former deputy secretary of state, counseled against exacerbating intra-party disagreements on the issue, arguing that the platform should focus on distinguishing Democrats from Republicans, who have retreated from two-state advocacy.
“Only a two-state solution can provide Palestinian sovereignty and dignity and provide Israelis with the secure and recognized borders of a Jewish democratic state,” she said during the hearing. “Our differences are really with the Republican party in how we prosecute peace.”

Matt Duss, the director of the Foundation for Middle East Peace, appearing as an expert witness, said failure to recognize the occupation as such ran counter to American values.“We must recognize that Israel’s continued occupation of Palestinian territories and its daily restrictions on the most basic political and civil liberties of the Palestinian people run contrary to fundamental American values,” he said.

Wexler, in his interview after testifying, said that while the platform could be tweaked, Clinton’s views – which he said included not prejudging the outcome by referencing an “occupation” – would prevail because she is the nominee.

“There was a winner of the Democratic primaries and her name is Hillary Clinton, and Hillary Clinton has a decades-long policy regarding Israel,” he said.

Wexler in his testimony also said that the platform should reject bids to delegitimize Israel, including through the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement.

Zion Remaps Shomron and Yehuda again

Israeli authorities remapped occupied West Bank territory to facilitate settlements, including one acre near Gitit. In Picture: Israeli children hold Israeli national flags as they wait ahead of a dedication ceremony of a new neighbourhood in the Jewish settlement of Gitit in the Jordan Valley January 2, 2014

Israel remapped over 15,000 acres of West Bank last year to enable its citizens to undertake settlement construction in the territory that Palestinians claim belongs to them. The exercise was carried out by "Blue Line," a special team working for the Civil Administration, the Haaretz reported.

The exercise was significantly higher in scale when compared to previous years, the publication said. While 3,000 acres were remapped in 2013, the exercise spanned about 5,000 acres in 2014.





The existing rules mandate that areas declared as state land before 1999 need to be remapped by the Civil Administration to allow construction.

Once the exercise is completed, Palestinian homes would be declared as those built on state (Israeli) land. Also, such an exercise would deprive Palestinians living in "military fire zones" from seeking the High Court of Justice's intervention to stop any (Israeli) activity in those areas.

The news comes even as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hinted at reviving the 2002 Arab peace initiative in response to a statement by Egyptian president Abdel Fattah al-Sisi a few days ago.

"The Arab peace initiative includes positive elements that can help revive constructive negotiations with the Palestinians," Reuters quoted Netanyahu as saying in Jerusalem on Monday.

"We are willing to negotiate with the Arab states revisions to that initiative so that it reflects the dramatic changes in the region since 2002 but maintains the agreed goal of two states for two peoples," he added.

The 2002 Arab peace initiative assures Israel diplomatic recognition from Arab countries if the Jewish state grants statehood to Palestinians.

The initiative was modified three years ago to incorporate "possible land swaps between Israel and the Palestinians" as against the original position that Israel would get full diplomatic recognition only "if it gave up all land seized in the 1967 Middle East war and agreed to a just solution for Palestinian refugees," according to the news agency.

The Civil Administration re-mapped over 15,000 acres in the West Bank last year, which suggests an intention to embark on wide-scale settlement construction.

The mapping was done by a special team called “Blue Line,” working for the Civil Administration.

The project involves the examination of maps of areas designated as state lands last century.

The old maps are digitally scanned, making them more accurate.

In order to permit construction on land that was declared as state land before 1999, the Civil Administration is required to map it again.

Mapping over 15,000 acres is a significant increase in the rate of mapping carried out, in comparison to previous years. In 2014 only 5,000 acres were mapped, while in 2013 slightly over 3,000 acres were mapped.

Apparently, one of the objectives of the new mapping is to prevent Palestinians living in military fire zones from petitioning the High Court of Justice against the activity taking place near their homes.

The assumption is that if the mapping clarifies that the land is state land, Israel can argue that Palestinian houses were built on it after the area was designated as state land.

Judging by the distribution of these areas, one can assess where the state is intending to allow settlements to be built. Thus, 240 acres were mapped near Nokdim. Almost one acre is near the settlement of Gitit. Almost 11 mapped acres near Tarkumiya are not close to any existing settlement.

Settlement researcher Dror Etkes, who analyzed the data,said that “it’s important to realize that these mapping efforts are directed almost exclusively deep into the West Bank and to settlements that are far from the settlement blocs, and to areas designated earlier by Israel as fire zones, even though it’s obvious that they comprise part of the pool of land that Israel is gradually handing over to settlements.”