Middle East Press on the US Presidential Elections, Post-Pandemic World and Israeli Annexation: New Age Islam's Selection, 30 September 2020
By New Age Islam Edit
Bureau
30
September 2020
• Trump, the Teflon President
By Marwan Bishara
• Lebanon Awaits the US Presidential Elections,
But Will Collapse Faster While It Waits
By Hanin Ghaddar
• Do We Still Need Cities In A Virtual,
Post-Pandemic World?
By Fahd Abdulmohsan Al-Rasheed
• Annexation without Declaration: The Israeli
Case
By Najla M. Shahwan
------
Trump, the Teflon President
By Marwan Bishara
29 Sep 2020
US
President Donald Trump speaks to reporters during a news conference inside the
James S Brady Briefing Room at the White House on September 27, 2020 in
Washington, US [Reuters/Ken Cedeno]
-----
Watching
the United States election season from across the Atlantic, I am reminded of
the story of the 19th-century French writer Guy de Maupassant, who hated the
Eiffel Tower but had lunch at its restaurant because it was the one place in
Paris where he could not see it.
Indeed,
Americans are increasingly losing sight of America, of the big picture, as they
turn inward and against each other with such venom, blinded by racial hatred,
religious bigotry and the cult of personality.
Watching
the “quantum of solace” drop fast, as political incitement diminishes tolerance,
promotes violence and spreads panic, one wonders if the country will descend
into civil strife if incumbent President Donald Trump loses the upcoming
election.
In many
ways, the presidential vote is not only a referendum on his character and
leadership, but also a referendum on the character of the country and its
standing in the world.
The Moral Argument
Predictably,
liberals and Democrats blame Trump and his Republican enablers for all that is
ailing America today, though, as the president himself puts it, he would not be
in power in the first place if it were not for their failings and follies.
They see
him as a mean, vulgar, cheating, lying character, who either practises or
embraces racism, chauvinism and bigotry.
They see
him as an immoral, divisive and dangerous leader who has torn the country apart
to stay on top, serving the narrow interests of one group over another.
They argue
that he is an incompetent and lazy commander-in-chief, unfit to serve the
common good of the country, as he has demonstrated during the pandemic.
They
believe, as president, he is more interested in the trappings of the office
than the workings of the presidency; that he prefers talking about himself over
working for the country; that he is obsessed with his image but indifferent to
America’s standing.
Now, a
sceptic might question such damning criticism by the opposition party in the
heat of battle, even though much of it is collaborated by media reports,
including this week’s damning revelations about his taxes.
And that is
not all.
Democrats
are not alone in their criticism of Trump. Republicans have also harboured
similar and no less damning sentiments.
Leading
Republican senators Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio and Susan Collins as well
as former Republican governors like Nikki Haley and Rick Perry, and the likes
of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and former White House adviser Kellyanne
Conway, who cheer Trump today, have all severely criticised, if not condemned
him in the past.
They took
turns calling him a liar, narcissist, authoritarian, ignorant, demagogue,
bully, crook, crazy, delusional, a racist bigot and unfit for office.
In other
words, there is a consensus of sorts across the political spectrum over Trump’s
defects and derelictions.
All of this
begs the question: why, despite their low opinion of the president, do an
overwhelming majority of conservatives and Evangelicals, as well as, a majority
of white and male Americans continue to support Trump?
The ‘Pragmatic’ Argument
Alas, most
Republicans seem unmoved by their own “moral judgement”, arguing that Americans
propelled Trump to victory in 2016 despite his multiple personal scandals.
Indeed,
their response to the moral argument is straightforward, self-serving and
rather cynical. They believe, to paraphrase one of their favourite
philosophers, Adam Smith, that it is not from the benevolence of the baker that
you get bread for dinner.
In this
way, whatever Trump is losing among liberal Republicans who see him as anathema
to their traditional Republican values, he is making up by gaining the support
of certain independents. Those who think Trump has done well on the economy are
more likely to vote for him – as many as 82 percent of them, according to the
latest polls.
In other
words, as long as Trump implements the conservative agenda by cutting taxes,
lifting regulations, appointing conservative judges etc, Republicans will stand
behind him, regardless of his lies, transgressions and divisiveness.
As long as
the president uses his popularity among the hardcore right-wing voters to boost
Republicans’ own chances for re-election, they will return the favour, come
what may.
All of this
has made Trump into Teflon president par excellence. No scandal, no matter how
great or grave, can damage his popularity. Indeed, any of his political,
financial or sexual scandals could have utterly diminished another candidate,
but not Trump.
It is
political cynicism at its worst.
All of this
makes one wonder if this week’s damning revelations about his tax avoidance or
potentially tax evasion will hurt him “bigly”, as he might say… or be treated
like any other scandal.
But that is
not all.
Many
Republicans seem to support Trump for his traits, not despite them.
Some may
support him because he knows how to pay very little or no taxes to stiff the
“welfare state”. Others may back him because he is aggressive and tenacious,
willing to do all to win.
Once they
realised they could not beat him, Republican leaders joined him
unconditionally, some grudgingly, others happily.
Either way,
they have supported his nationalist policies and xenophobic, populist and
chauvinist rhetoric which are tearing the country apart, viewing him as the
white male antidote to establishment liberals like Barack Obama, Hillary
Clinton, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.
And they
support him despite his rhetoric undermining the electoral process and
rejecting the peaceful transfer of power, especially when he insists he is
destined to win unless the Democrats cheat, which threatens to pave the way for
a prolonged political battle that may spill over onto the streets.
To be sure,
a constitutional crisis or an electoral implosion at a federal level will
trickle down to all levels of US society and polity, where confidence in the
ballot box is indispensable to the stability and wellbeing of states, cities,
counties and boroughs that regularly elect over half a million officials.
And that is
not all, either.
A Machiavellian Leadership
In fewer
than four years, Trump has been able to take full control of the Republican
party, bullying its traditional leaders and demolishing its liberal wing.
Despite
being a political novice with no articulated vision, Trump has managed to
dictate the party agenda, message and policies to his favour through stick –
blackmail and coercion – and the occasional carrot in the form of budget
allocations and government appointments.
Nowhere has
his grip on the party been more obvious than in its last convention, which for
the first time lacked any written platform, and instead was fully dedicated to
honour Trump and his family.
It is
indeed mind-boggling how this intellectually challenged, politically
inexperienced real estate developer has been able to mount a hostile takeover
of a major political party, brand it like he brands his towers, and begin to
transform the world’s leading democracy.
An untold
number of those who could speak out are afraid of doing so because they would
be ruthlessly labelled and tweeted into infamy by the “brother leader”.
If
re-elected, Trump will come back next year with greater vigour and vengeance,
and there may be little to stop him from ruling like an autocrat, ala Vladimir
Putin.
This may
seem like an exaggeration, but it is useful to make this comparison to point to
where the problem with the Republican Party really lies today.
Many
Americans, especially Republicans, believe that the end justifies the means,
ie, that using any and all means possible, even undemocratic and illiberal, is
justified to maintain power.
So eager to
defeat the Democrats, Republicans are slowly but surely turning undemocratic.
They are willing to support the president if he cuts their taxes, echoes their
religious beliefs and satisfies their sense of importance.
The rest is
history.
But in a
liberal democracy, the means are just as important as the end. In fact, to a
large extent, the means are the end. Justice, liberty, equality and the rule of
law are neither abstract nor expendable; indeed, they are indispensable for the
long-term prosperity, security and survival of any democracy.
Populist
authoritarian means may be attractive for some in the short term, but make no
mistake – they are detrimental to any democracy.
And that is
what ails America.
On The Brink
A majority
of Americans may be increasingly aware of the danger facing their country, which
could explain why Trump is trailing Biden in the polls.
But here on
the other side of the Atlantic and across the Mediterranean, Europeans and
Middle Easterners have a long and painful history with populist-nationalist
leaders exploiting the political process to take over and impose their will on
their nations.
It looks
all too familiar and utterly disturbing to watch Trump borrow a page or more
from infamous populist hyper-nationalist European leaders who brought their
nations, and indeed the continent, to their knees.
If the
election produces a more insular, authoritarian and aggressive American
leadership, the implications for the world’s leading liberal democracy will be
catastrophic and perhaps irreversible.
It will
also trigger a dramatic domino effect in Europe, the Middle East and elsewhere,
where populist leaders, far-right demagogues, and dictators look to Trump for
inspiration and momentum.
Alternatively,
a Biden win may have different implications, but I will leave this for another
time.
----
Marwan Bishara is Al Jazeera's senior political
analyst. He was previously a professor of International Relations at the
American University of Paris. An author who writes extensively on global
politics, he is widely regarded as a leading authority on the Middle East and
international affairs.
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2020/9/29/the-teflon/
----
Lebanon Awaits the US Presidential Elections,
But Will Collapse Faster While It Waits
By Hanin Ghaddar
29
September 2020
Hezbollah
and its sponsors in Tehran realized that they do not have to make concessions
in Lebanon – or anywhere else for that matter – before the US presidential
elections on November 3. They would rather use the Lebanese crisis as a
negotiating chip when the new administration in the US – whether a new Biden
administration or another Trump one – starts new talks with Iran.
Until then,
neither the initiative of French president Emmanuel Macron, nor any other
regional or international initiative, could force Hezbollah to concede.
After Prime
Minister-designate Mustafa Adib recused himself, Macron gave a rare and
specific press conference, focused on the Lebanese crisis. Although he did not
declare any punitive measures against the Lebanese political elite, he did name
and shame those who hindered his initiative, namely, Hezbollah and the other
Shia political party Amal.
On Sunday,
Macron accused Lebanon’s leaders of betraying their promises over their failure
to form a government, and he gave the country’s political class four to six weeks
to implement his roadmap. Macron said the political elite in Lebanon had
decided “to betray” their obligations and had committed “collective treason” by
failing to form a government. But more specifically, Macron pointed at
Hezbollah, warning that the group should “not think it is more powerful than it
is.... It must show that it respects all the Lebanese. And in recent days, it
has clearly shown the opposite.”
During the
six weeks that Macron gave to the Lebanese parties to sort out the problems,
the US presidential elections will have taken place, and Macron and those in
Lebanon will know which administration they’ll be dealing with for the next
four to eight years.
Accordingly,
Macron understood that Iran will not give him any win in Lebanon and that they
prefer to negotiate directly with the US after the presidential elections.
Macron’s initiative has failed, and until November 3, Lebanon will enter a
phase of rapid deterioration – economic, social and security deterioration – as
all parties will try to increase their odds of a favorable outcome ahead of the
next round of talks. Macron will focus on the humanitarian aspects, the Trump
administration on more sanctions on Hezbollah and probably more of its allies,
and Iran on its survival and the survival of its proxies.
If Trumps
wins a second term, his Iran policy will probably be the same. Although he said
he is willing to negotiate a deal with Iran, it will probably include
addressing Iran’s malign activities in the region.
However,
the question remains what route Biden will take if he wins. Will he pursue a
strategy that will save the Iranian regime and its proxies in the region, or is
this is some kind of wishful thinking by Hezbollah and its sponsors?
Biden was
part of the Obama administration that signed the JCPOA with Iran, but that
doesn’t mean that Biden necessarily has the same outlook or that he endorses
the same Iran policy as Obama. It is too early to tell, especially given that
Biden’s foreign policy team has not been formed. But the one aspect that might
differentiate Biden’s Iran policy from Obama’s is the fact that Biden is not in
a hurry.
When Obama
decided to move on with the negotiations, he was already in his second term,
and Iran was by no means in a rush to reach a deal. Iran’s economy was much
better, and the regime was stronger and less challenged. So Iran was able to
practice its strategy of patience and play its waiting game to secure its
regional interests before agreeing to any deal brokered by the Obama
administration.
Accordingly,
Iran’s interests in the region and its plans of expansionism were not
challenged by the deal. Iran was able to expand its powers in Lebanon, Syria,
Iraq, and Yemen without US hindrance, until Trump’s administration came along
and sanctions were imposed.
However,
this time around, Iran is in the corner and does not have the luxury of time.
On the other hand, Biden would be at the beginning of his first term and will
be in no need to rush signing a new deal with Iran, although he might ease off
some of the pressure. Biden will also have other priorities, such as the
COVID-19 challenges, China, and Russia.
In Lebanon,
until Hezbollah faces the reality that Lebanon is not going to be Trump’s or
Biden’s priority, and that time is not on their side, Lebanon might be
completely lost and become a failed state.
Meanwhile,
it has become clear to all parties involved – the US, the Europeans, the
French, regional powers, and all of the Lebanese, including the Shia community
– that Hezbollah is the main culprit behind the failure of the French
initiative, and the reason why Lebanon has collapsed. It will be very difficult
to walk back from this.
__
Hanin Ghaddar is the Friedmann Fellow at The
Washington Institute’s Geduld Program on Arab Politics, where she focuses on
Shia politics throughout the Levant.
https://english.alarabiya.net/en/views/news/middle-east/2020/09/29/Lebanon-awaits-the-US-presidential-elections-but-will-collapse-faster-while-it-waits
-----
Do We Still Need Cities In A Virtual,
Post-Pandemic World?
By Fahd Abdulmohsan
Al-Rasheed
September
29, 2020
Ever since
the first cities were established some 7,000 years ago, humans have been
ineluctably drawn to one another. Whether round fires to keep warm or round
town squares to be part of the commercial action, we are a species innately
inclined to congregate, thanks to our basic needs and wants.
And when it
came to habitation, the majority of us were compelled to set up sticks in urban
centers. Over millennia of industriousness and innovation, we gradually
transformed these urban hubs into dynamic hives of activity, which kick-started
human productivity, innovation and invention.
These human
hives of activity came to be known as cities. And they, in turn, became the
heartbeat of our economies, the lifeblood of our societies.
Today, 55
percent of the world’s population live in cities. Combined, our cities produce
70 percent of the world’s GDP. By 2050, the UN’s Department of Economic and
Social Affairs predicts that 68 percent of Earth’s population will live in
urbanized areas.
In the last
nine months, however, the road we were travelling forked unexpectedly and we,
as a collective humanity, collided with a major speed bump. The coronavirus
(COVID-19) pandemic changed our world and the way we live.
As the new
reality dawned, our cities became the front lines and the epicenters of the
chaos caused by the virus. And many struggled to cope with the sudden increase
of public-health demands placed on them.
Typically,
the infrastructure of the city is not designed to deal with a viral pandemic
that spreads most effectively in close human contact. Dense living quarters,
large gatherings, public transit systems, skyscrapers, shops and restaurants
are all designed for the very opposite of social distancing. They are built to
bring many, many of us together at the same time, in the same place.
Amid this
time of reckoning and a new virtual reality, an urgent question emerged: Have
cities become obsolete?
This
question has driven the work done by the Urban 20 (U20) Engagement Group’s work
for the last nine months. It has informed and infused the hundreds of pages of
research and urban analysis conducted by our three special task forces.
And it is
being discussed and debated at great length during the 2020 U20 Mayors Summit,
where we will officially present our communique to the G20, with policy
recommendations to create more sustainable and inclusive urban spaces in the
years ahead.
Before we
do that, however, let us say this much: The city will never be obsolete. We are
a social species that does our best work and achieves our best when we are
together. We will always be drawn to the excitement and buzz of the city. But
they will have to change and adapt with the times if our socioeconomic
development is to continue sustainably.
It was also
telling that, in our hour of utmost need, our cities demonstrated an inherent
flexibility, agility and resilience. Many were able to transition to a virtual
world almost overnight. They supported us when we needed it most.
Despite the
momentous shock that we underwent — adapting to working from home, families,
friends and colleagues relocated or stuck at home, in some cases in different
continents — we have never been better connected. Everything changed, but our
productivity did not slow; in fact it increased.
You may
think that this returns us to the question: Do we really need cities in 2020?
The answer does not change. While we can now seamlessly host summits and forums
virtually, cutting travel and commute times, virtual meetings don’t allow us to
develop the trust, rapport and chemistry required for us to build highly
productive and cooperative relationships.
Virtual
events don’t spring the random chance encounters, the ad-hoc ideation,
co-inspiration and the spontaneous meeting of the minds that have driven
innovation throughout history.
Virtual
meetings are planned meetings. But cooperation, ideation and innovation happen,
in many cases, when spontaneity is at its unfettered best — through chance,
unplanned encounters.
While friends
and families can catch up over a virtual dinner through an app, it will never
replace the genuine social bond that grows and blooms from sharing that same
meal face-to-face across the same table.
And while
our kids can learn from home and do their homework on their smart devices, we
should remember the reason we have schools is not to just to offer children a
structured pedagogical curricula, but to also, and almost as importantly, to
provide them with exposure to social situations that equip them psychologically
with the skills required for them to succeed in the outside world.
Although
this pandemic has forced us into social distancing and to productively digitize
many of our daily routines, we yearn for that deep and inherently human
connection that comes from physically connecting and congregating. And that
will never change.
So, the
real question should be: How can we enable cities to adapt to this and future
shocks? The answer is: Investment in agility and resilience measures. The
importance of investing in the resilience of our cities and our citizens is the
headline takeaway from 2020 for urbanites and city planners.
We must
find a way for our people to thrive, in business and in private life,
regardless of circumstance. We must help people adapt. We must help people
become more agile and resilient. We must prepare them for a future shaped by
climate change, contagion and connectivity.
----
Fahd Abdulmohsan Al-Rasheed is the Chair of the
Urban 20 (U20) 2020 and the President of the Royal Commission for Riyadh City.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/1741986
-----
Annexation without Declaration: The Israeli
Case
By Najla M. Shahwan
SEP 30,
2020
In the
previous months, the world was sent up in arms by Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu’s plan to annex 30% of the West Bank. However, after the
plan was halted temporarily the outcry faded, an alternative date remained
unannounced, and it began to matter little whether the annexation had a formal
date or that there was not, in fact, a continuous de facto annexation gradually
taking place on the ground in the West Bank.
As part of
the Oslo Accords, the occupied West Bank was divided into three parts. Area A
constitutes 18% of the occupied West Bank, where the Palestinian Authority (PA)
controls most civilian affairs and internal security, while Area B constitutes
about 22% of the area in which the PA is in charge of education, health and the
economy. Area C makes up 60% of the occupied West Bank and was supposed to be
gradually handed over to the PA, but instead, Israel still retains total
control of it.
Israel's
exclusive control includes law enforcement, planning and construction, while
most of the area has been reallocated for the benefit of Israeli settlements or
the Israeli military, at the expense of Palestinian communities.
The
Palestinian population in Area C comes to around 300,000, most of them small
herding communities scattered in remote areas, mainly on the eastern and
southern slopes of the West Bank.
Twenty-five
years have passed since the Oslo Accords, and this complicated situation became
a permanent condition of ever-tightening Israeli control over Palestinian life
and development in Area C, within a process of dispossession and land seizure
designed to expand Israeli settlements and restrict the territory available to
the Palestinians who live in the region.
The process
has involved the demolition of Palestinian homes, schools, medical facilities
and a refusal to recognize private property rights.
Israel’s
apartheid project not only violates international law and the Palestinian
people’s right to self-determination but jeopardizes hope for a two-state
solution, making territorial compromises increasingly difficult.
Years of
neglect and suppression have left the Palestinian people living in Area C in a
desperate situation, isolated from other areas in the West Bank and highly
vulnerable to forcible displacement and ever-worsening policies.
Israel’s
ongoing control of all critical aspects of security and civil affairs in this
area has been guided by the intertwined goals of minimizing the Palestinian
population while facilitating the expansion of Israel’s illegal settlements and
settler population in the same territory which ballooned from just 1,500 in the
early years of occupation to almost 430,000 in 2020.
Israel's Silent War
Recently, a
report by Israeli daily Haaretz has shed light on Israel's battle over Area C,
as the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee held two meetings, late
July and mid-August, dealing with what they called a "Palestinian
takeover" of Area C, complaining in the discussion of Palestinian
construction in 61% of the West Bank, which they claimed was choking off
Israeli settlements and sabotaging the chance for further expansion – which is
the opposite of the reality on the ground.
Furthermore,
the report highlighted Israel's intensifying demolition campaign in Palestinian
communities targeting the existence of Palestinians in Area C and how the
Israeli officials proudly testified in the meetings about the efforts taken to
target and destroy Palestinian agriculture and construction in Area C.
According
to the head of Israel's Civil Administration, Israeli forces have uprooted
42,000 trees planted by Palestinians over the past 20 years, including 7,500 in
2019 while in the same year, Israeli forces confiscated 700 excavators and
other equipment from Palestinians.
Figures
from the Civil Administration show that from 2016 to 2018, Palestinians
submitted 1,489 requests for building permits in Area C but approval for only
21 of these – 1.4%. During this same period, 2,147 demolition orders were
issued for Palestinian structures in the same area.
Haaretz
noted that senior Israeli officials had drawn up regional priorities for
demolishing Palestinian structures, which "at this stage" include
"the area surrounding Jerusalem," the South Hebron Hills and the
Jordan Valley.
According
to Knesset committee member and senior Likud MK Nir Barkat, Israel aims to
settle 2 million Jewish settlers in the occupied West Bank, adding: "They
have enough territory in A and B."
In another
step, Israel has significantly reduced the number of internationally (mainly
European) financed Palestinian projects in a plan to eliminate European
involvement in financing humanitarian projects in Area C.
According
to Haaretz, last week the Israeli government allocated about $6 million to
survey and map out unauthorized Palestinian construction in the West Bank's
Area C, which is under full Israeli control. This is the first time that funds
have been specifically allocated for such a survey as part of the state budget.
Even though
the authority for enforcing the Israeli law on illegal construction in Area C
is in the hands of the Civil Administration, the survey budget was allocated to
the newly founded Settlement Affairs Ministry.
In
addition, 19.5 million shekels ($5.64 million) were allocated for grants to
local government in West Bank settlements. These funds were approved as part of
an 11 billion-shekel addition to the budget, while no final state budget for
2020 has been decided on.
New Settlement Construction
In complete
defiance of international outcry against the Israeli regime’s land grabbing and
illegal settlement expanding policies in the occupied lands, last week the
Palestinian Ma’an Arabic news agency cited a report published by Israel’s
Channel 7 media network that the 70-year-old chairman of the Likud political
party had given the green light for plans to build over 5,000 units, after more
than six months during which such construction had been frozen.
The report
added that there have been contacts between settlement leaders and Netanyahu
over the past few days, where Jewish extremists have called on the Israeli
premier to end the freeze on settlement construction activities in the West
Bank or face large-scale protests against his administration.
On Aug. 13,
Israel and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) agreed to a U.S.-brokered deal to
normalize relations and under the agreement, the Israeli regime has supposedly
agreed to "temporarily" suspend applying its own rule to further
areas in the occupied West Bank and the strategic Jordan Valley that Netanyahu
had pledged to annex.
While
Emirati officials have described the normalization deal with the Israeli regime
as a successful means to preventing annexation and save the so-called two-state
solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Israeli leaders have lined up to
reject the UAE's bluff, the Israeli prime minister himself having underlined
that annexation was not off the table, but had simply been delayed.
On the
other hand, Palestinians, who seek an independent state in the occupied West
Bank and Gaza with east Jerusalem as its capital, view any Arab normalization
deal with Israel as a betrayal of their cause.
U.N. Data
Last week
Jamie McGoldrick, the humanitarian coordinator for the United Nations Office
for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA), released data on the
demolishment of Palestinian structures built without Israeli building permits.
Between
March and August 2020, 389 structures owned by Palestinians in the West Bank
were demolished or confiscated – including in Areas A, B, and in east
Jerusalem. On average, this is about 65 structures a month, which, according to
the U.N. agency, is the highest average number of demolitions in the past four
years. About 79% of the structures demolished or confiscated were located in
Area C.
Their
demolitions “hit the most vulnerable of all and undermined emergency
operations,” the statement said.
Adding that
during the COVID-19 pandemic, Israeli authorities indicated that they would
restrain their longstanding policy of demolishing inhabited Palestinian homes.
"Sadly, demolitions during the period March-August 2020 left 442
Palestinians homeless, further exposing many to risks associated with the
pandemic. In August alone, 205 people were displaced, more than in any other
single month since January 2017," he said.
Beyond
homes, the targeted buildings included water, hygiene or sanitation assets and
structures used for agriculture, among others, undermining the access of many
to livelihoods and services. Moreover, 50 of the structures had been given to
Palestinians as humanitarian aid, and their destruction hit the most vulnerable
of all and undermined emergency operations.
"Of
specific concern is Israeli authorities' increased use of an expedited
procedure (Order 1797) for the removal of structures as soon as 96 hours after
delivering a notice, largely preventing owners from being heard before a
judicial body," added the U.N. coordinator, saying these took place
without “declaration" or fanfare. Israel is grabbing more lands, expanding
illegal settlements in the West Bank and by all unlawful means turning out the
Palestinian lands of Area C into Israeli territories.
-----
Najla M. Shahwan is a Palestinian author, researcher and freelance journalist; recipient of
two prizes from the Palestinian Union of Writers
-----
https://www.dailysabah.com/opinion/op-ed/annexation-without-declaration-the-israeli-case
-----
URL: https://newageislam.com/middle-east-press/middle-east-press-presidential-elections,/d/122990