———- Forwarded message ———-
From: BESA Center
Date: Wed, Feb 10, 2010
Subject: BESA Lecture: “Turkey and the Caucasus,” Dr. Alexander Murinson, February 14, 2010

You are kindly invited to a lecture on

Turkey and the Caucasus

Dr. Alexander Murinson
University of London

Sunday, February 14, 2010, 17:00
BESA Seminar Room (Building 203), Room 131
Bar-Ilan University

Faculty of Social Sciences

Dept. of Political Studies

Iran to shut down Google email service: report.

Wed Feb 10, 2010
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) – The Iranian government plans to permanently suspend Google Inc’s email service in the country, the Wall Street Journal reported on its website on Wednesday.

Google said it experienced a sharp drop in email traffic in Iran, and that some users in the country were having trouble accessing Gmail, but said its networks were working properly.

The report comes as Iran braces for new opposition protests on Thursday during rallies marking the 1979 Islamic revolution. Protesters made use of modern networking tools such as Twitter and Gmail instant messaging last June after a disputed election plunged Iran into crisis.

Google is already at loggerheads with China’s government after it threatened to withdraw from the country last month over claims of online attacks and issues over censorship.

Iran’s telecommunications agency announced the suspension and said a national email service for Iranian citizens would soon be rolled out, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Google reported a drop in email traffic, but did not confirm the Journal report.

“We have heard from users in Iran that they are having trouble accessing Gmail,” a Google spokesman wrote in an e-mail to Reuters. “We can confirm a sharp drop in traffic, and we have looked at our own networks and found that they are working properly.”

He added that Google supported free online communication, but “sometimes it is not within our control.”

There was no immediate comment from Tehran, where it was after midnight when the news broke. Opposition leaders have called on supporters to take to the streets on Thursday, raising the risk of renewed violence.

The U.S. State Department could not confirm the report, but said any efforts to keep information from Iranians would fail. “While information technologies are enabling people around the world to communicate … like never before, the Iranian government seems determined to deny its citizens access to information, the ability to express themselves freely, network and share ideas,” State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said.

“Virtual walls won’t work in the 21st century any better than physical walls worked in the 20th century.”

Israel’s top ten water technology companies that help keep the world liquid.

By Karin Kloosterman
February 04, 2010
 http://www.israel21c.org/environment/isr…

A serious lack of potable water has forced Israel to create a flourishing water technology industry. ISRAEL21c brings you the country’s top 10 water companies.

It makes you think of the famous line from Samuel Taylor Coleridge’s The Rime of the Ancient Mariner, “Water, water everywhere, nor any drop to drink.” – Israel is bordered by the Red Sea and the Mediterranean Sea; is home to the freshwater Sea of Galilee and the saltiest sea on earth, the Dead Sea. Rivers and springs run through the country.

And yet, despite all this water, Israel has been battling a severe shortage of potable water since its inception in 1948. To survive, policy and government incentives have contributed to the creation of a new and flourishing industry of water technologies.

From drip irrigation, to water recycling, reclamation, wastewater reuse and desalination, Israel has become a pioneering force worldwide, nicknamed by some as the ‘Silicon Valley’ of water technologies. As more and more countries around the world face similar water shortages, Israel’s expertise and industry are growing fast.

While young companies like Aqwise, which treats wastewater, and Atlantium, which uses ultraviolet to clean water, enhance Israel’s impressive water reputation and are on investors’ hit lists, ISRAEL21c brings you a list of the companies that form the backbone of the country’s water industry – tried, tested and true, these companies are the source of the local water technology industry’s claim to fame and were responsible for a large chunk of the country’s $1.4 billion in exports in 2008.

1. Mekorot Group

Mekorot, Israel’s national water company, is responsible for today’s thriving water export market. It is wholly owned by the government and for the past 70 years has managed the country’s environmental and security challenges in the area of water.

A powerhouse in desalination, water reclamation, water project engineering, cloud seeding, water safety and water quality, Mekorot supplies 90 percent of Israel’s drinking water and manages about 80% of its water supplies. Its subsidiary EMS Mekorot Projects supplies solutions in water works planning, installation, testing, sewage treatment, desalination, rain enhancement and more.

Mekorot’s second subsidiary Mekorot Development and Enterprise offers water solutions in design, feasibility studies, project management, and construction, operation and maintenance of treatment facilities. It recently signed an MOU agreement with a company in California and plans to provide desalination solutions for southern California.

2. Netafim

When every drop counts, why not deliver water straight to the roots where the water is needed; nothing more and nothing less? Israeli company Netafim invented drip irrigation – possibly one of the most significant developments in agrotechnology today – when an engineer discovered that an abnormally large tree growing in the desert was fed by a drip in a water pipe.

The company is a global leader in drip irrigation, supplying both low and high tech solutions in developed and developing nations. The company is also looking to new sustainable solutions to help to grow biofuel crops more efficiently.

3. Arad Group

If you live in the US or Canada, there’s a good chance that your water meter was made by Arad Group. The kibbutz-owned company specializes in the design, development and manufacture of precision water meters for domestic use, waterworks, irrigation and water management companies around the world.

The company just purchased a Spanish water meter company for about $10 million, and it recently developed a new drone plane aims to pinpoint water leaks on the ground from up in the sky.

4. IDE Technologies

IDE is the company that makes Israel a world leader in desalination technology, having built some 400 desalination plants around the world. It runs one of the world’s largest desalination facilities off Israel’s coast in the town of Ashkelon, and also at Hadera. Recently, the company also won a tender to build and operate a new desalination plant in Soreq, which will be the largest of its kind in the world.

The industrial company has been in business since 1965 when it was founded by the government. Today it specializes in more than desalination, also working with wastewater treatment, heat pumps and in producing ice and snow machines. IDE is now privately owned by Israel Chemical and the Delek Group.

5. Tahal Consulting Engineers

Israel’s largest firm of water engineering consultants, Tahal Consulting Engineers is ranked as the top of its kind in the world. In the business since 1961, Tahal runs projects with private and municipal clients both locally and abroad.

The company maintains close ties with leading international institutions including the World Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank and United Nations agencies. Tahal specializes in water resource management, agricultural development, sewage and sanitation, environmental protection, roads and highways, marine engineering, industrial parks and more.

6. Amiad Filtration Systems

A company that specializes in drinking water filtration, Amiad Filtration Systems prides itself on using no chemicals and no polymers in an efficient process.

Founded in 1962, the company maintains a North American office in California and provides environmentally sound water filtration technologies on every continent from Antarctica to Australia. It also provides special solutions for offshore installations and the automotive industry.

7. Bermad

Bermad specializes in pipes, valves and how to control them. Serving its customers globally, the company offers a number of solutions for the control and management of water supplies anywhere, based on its control-valve technology.

Working in high-rise buildings, water works plants in municipalities, at power stations and in the private sector, Bermad’s impressive range of activity includes drip irrigation technology, sprinklers, micro-jets and greenhouse irrigation, as well as tools for commercial and residential gardening irrigation needs. The company also applies itself to fire protection and water metering and was instrumental in creating snow for the 2006 Winter Olympics.

8. Arkal

Efficient cleaning and filtering of water is the name of the game in water management and Arkal is fast becoming a world leader in the field, working with countries like Argentina, Turkey and Spain.

The company is active in plastics plants and in aquaculture and fisheries industries, and is providing sprinkler solutions to increase the effectiveness of irrigation.

9. Global Environmental Solutions (GES)

GES designs water and wastewater plants and can also build and operate them in industrial areas, in cities and for agriculture.
GES was created by a merger of three veteran Israeli water companies: Italchem Ayalon, Aniam, and Chemitaas. The company acquired Texma, a firm specializing in industrial adhesives, lubricants and chemicals for treating metals and Argad, a wastewater treatment company.

The super-company GES offers a full repertoire of water solutions for chemical companies, factories and municipalities and specializes in the food, beverage and hospitality industries.

10. Miya

While it has yet to prove itself, Miya is an ambitious business venture founded by Israeli billionaire Shari Arison.

The $100 million initiative, which was set up in 2006, aims to tackle the problem of urban water loss around the world. Miya is acquiring a base of companies and consultants to offer turnkey solutions, services and consulting to manage and fix leaky pipes and save billions of dollars annually.

How Washington Can Really Help the Greens in Tehran .

from: Trita Parsi.

With the February 11 demonstrations around the corner, Washington is increasingly torn on whether and how to support the Iranian pro-democracy movement. Reality is that Washington’s history of involvement in Iran’s political affairs is not a pretty one. But between doing everything and doing nothing, there is a safe, effective third way. Alireza Nader of RAND and I write about that third path in Foreign Policy Magazine today.

 http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/20…

Trita Parsi, PhD
 http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/20…

Ever since last June’s disputed presidential election, Iran has been in the throes of change, with the nascent “green movement” protesting against an ever-more-authoritarian state. For months, Washington has asked itself: Should the United States actively push for regime change? Torn between the fear of ending up on the wrong side of history by being too cautious and the fear of ending up undermining the pro-democracy movement by being too aggressive, Barack Obama’s administration is playing a difficult balancing act.

History shows that intervention is easier said than done. Past U.S. attempts to sway Iranian internal affairs — such as the CIA-fomented 1953 coup d’état against a democratically elected prime minister, Mohammad Mossadegh — have proven costly for U.S. interests. Most notably, Washington’s support for the shah fueled the 1979 Islamic Revolution, inspiring anti-Western movements in Pakistan, Egypt, and beyond.

To make matters worse, due to its absence from the scene during the last 30 years, the United States is not sufficiently equipped to understand and shape what appears to be a titanic struggle between Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his opponents.

But between the extremes of doing nothing and doing everything, there is a middle ground: providing the Iranian pro-democracy movement with breathing space, rather than engaging in risky and imprecise exercises that would directly involve America as an actor on the Iranian scene. The United States can achieve this through a few simple steps:

First, the United States should tread carefully when it comes to issuing military threats. Under the shadow of a foreign military threat, the uphill battle of the Iranian pro-democracy movement becomes even steeper, as the Iranian regime is quite adept at exploiting foreign threats to stifle criticism at home. Moreover, the possibility of military conflict between Iran and the United States, or their respective “proxies,” might allow the Iranian regime to distract the population from the internal crisis.

Second, the United States should avoid sanctions that put a burden on the Iranian people, rather than the Iranian government. Broad-based sanctions that hit the entire economy hurt common citizens far more than the powerful elites. Any new sanctions should demonstrate not only international discontent with the conduct of the Tehran government, but also an effort by the United States to keep from harming average Iranians.

The shift toward targeted sanctions against the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) — a 100,000-strong paramilitary and security force with significant business interests — is a welcome development. However, because the IRGC controls Iran’s official and underground economy, identifying sanctions that hurt only the IRGC while sparing the general population is difficult. Instead, U.S. and U.N. designation of specific individuals within the government and the IRGC responsible for the repression and human rights violations would make the sanctions both effective and truly targeted. Such designations would discourage foreign governments and companies from engaging with these individuals or conducting business with them and their affiliates, demonstrating to the regime that its domestic and foreign policies will have significant consequences.

Third, Washington should slow down the diplomatic process. Negotiation with Iran in and of itself is not the problem; engagement doesn’t legitimize the Iranian government, as only the people of Iran can do that. But in spite of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s latest offer to accept the International Atomic Energy Agency nuclear deal, Iran remains in political turmoil. It is questionable that Tehran can make enduring decisions on issues of this magnitude under these circumstances. Adopting unrealistic time frames for diplomacy is self-defeating, as time is needed to ascertain Tehran’s ability to come to an agreement as the Iranian political crisis unfolds. Avoiding an unhelpful and unnecessary rush toward an agreement also helps defuse demoralizing fears among the greens that their struggle for democracy is of no relevance to the United States.

Fourth, the international community, including the White House and U.S. State Department, should be vocal in excoriating Iran’s human rights abuses. Condemning abuses should not be confused with interfering in internal Iranian affairs. As a signatory of numerous international conventions, Iran has a legal obligation to uphold its people’s human rights. When it fails to do so, the United States and the world community has a responsibility to speak up. The Iranian government is, perhaps surprisingly, very sensitive in this area, due to its ambition to be perceived as a regional leader. This sensitivity should be utilized to make advances on the human rights front in Iran.

This would be helpful to the green movement in two ways. First, international focus on Iran’s human rights record makes it more difficult for Tehran to proceed with its abuses. For instance, the United States should support a special session on the human rights situation in Iran at the U.N. Human Rights Council. Second, it helps counter the Iranian government’s perception that the United States is willing to sacrifice the human rights and pro-democracy aspirations of the Iranian people for the sake of a nuclear deal.

Finally (Fifth), Washington should exercise patience and view Iran as a long-term factor in shaping U.S. national security interests across the Middle East. The green movement will not and cannot adjust its action plan to suit the U.S. political timetable. But if patience is granted — which includes avoiding a singular focus on the nuclear issue at the expense of all other considerations — Washington will access a far greater potential for change.

Ultimately, the Iranian opposition has shown tremendous strength and vitality without any material support from the United States. Iran’s people, not outsiders, will be the ones to achieve sustainable democracy. The Iranian opposition is not merely concerned about the June election, nor is it a simple creature of Iran’s factional politics. Rather, it represents a historic struggle for democracy and human rights. Between the all or nothing approaches, the United States can best help by providing Iran’s democrats with breathing room.

——————-
Alireza Nader is an international affairs analyst at the RAND Corporation and co-author of Mullahs, Guards, and Bonyads: An Exploration of Iranian Leadership Dynamics.

Trita Parsi is president of the National Iranian American Council and the 2010 recipient of the Grawemeyer Award for Ideas Improving World Order.

========================

UPDATED: Washington will do just that !!!

U.S. plans sanctions to hit Iran’s Revolutionary Guards
The U.S. is building a portfolio of sanctions against Iran that specifically targets the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps in response to Iran’s announcement it will continue efforts to enrich uranium — a process that could contribute to a nuclear weapons development program. Russia joined the U.S. with an atypically harsh response, while China, which has said it opposed sanctions against Iran before, was mute on the announcement. The goal of the sanctions, which would affect a large number of companies that does business with the Revolutionary Guards, would be to drive a wedge between Iranians and the security forces by making it too expensive for companies to do business with Iran.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/10/world/middleeast/10sanctions.html

Arava Power Gets Deals For 15 Mid-Size Solar Fields

Date: 08-Feb-10
Country: ISRAEL
Author: Tova Cohen, Reuthers

TEL AVIV – Israeli solar energy developer Arava Power said on Sunday it signed long-term contracts with 15 agricultural cooperatives to build mid-size solar fields at an investment of 2 billion shekels ($533 million).

The fields will produce a total of 100 megawatts of solar energy using photovoltaics, for an average of 6.5 megawatts per field.

Arava said it is advancing rooftop solar installations on cowsheds and factories in the signatory cooperatives.

Last year German conglomerate Siemens invested $15 million in Arava Power to build 10 five-megawatt solar fields.

In December the Public Utilities Authority decided to allow mid-size solar fields at a nationwide capacity of 300 megawatts but many in the industry believe this cap will be filled quickly.

“The goal to produce 300 solar megawatts is an important step toward implementing the government’s decision to produce 5 percent of Israel’s energy consumption from renewable sources by 2014, but it’s not enough,” Arava Power Chief Executive Jon Cohen said.

“In order to achieve this goal, at least 1,000 megawatts are needed, and the market indicates that … mid-size solar fields can fill the gap faster than any other source.”

Arava Power President Yosef Abramowitz said that in each of the 15 mid-size field locations the company plans to build a large-size field, adding another 500 megawatts to its pipeline.

“Together with our partners from Siemens, we are weighing additional proposals from investors,” he said, without providing further details.

Siemens also acquired Israel’s Solel Solar Systems in October for $418 million.

Monday, Feb. 8, 2010

Abbas begins Japan trip with visit to A-bomb museum.

HIROSHIMA (Kyodo) Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas arrived in Japan on Sunday for a four-day visit as part of his Asian tour and visited Hiroshima for the first time.

On the first day of his four-day visit to Japan, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas listens to an explanation of an exhibit at the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum.

After offering flowers at the cenotaph for the victims of the 1945 U.S. atomic bombing of the city, Abbas went to the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum and wrote in a visitors’ book that his heart bleeds for the calamities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the other Japanese city to suffer an atomic bombing.

The Palestinian leader told reporters that the world should eliminate nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. He also said the Palestinians have been tormented by war and need support from other countries to achieve peace.

Abbas, who last visited Japan in May 2005, is scheduled to hold talks with Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyamaon Monday and with Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada on Tuesday before heading for South Korea on Wednesday.

During the talks, the Japanese side is expected to formally notify the Palestinian leader of its intention to provide $20 million in aid and build a solar power plant in the West Bank town of Jericho.
Tokyo is also likely to commit to providing support for the resumption of the Middle East peace process between the Israelis and the Palestinians, which remains in a stalemate.

In Washington DC, Baltimore, Philadelphia and Pittsburgh – the news were the record snow. So, that keeps them busy – the need to dig out from under that snow.

So far as governing goes, the Village Voice – that is Greenwich Village in new York City – wrote that the Republicans won a 41-59 majority as a result from the Massachusetts avalanche.

The new weather predictions are that the President will set now the agenda and expect the Democrats to follow – AMEN!       That is leadership – for God’s sake with 59 still standing – what do they wait for?

Further – he – that is Obama – will try to brow-beat the Republicans to cooperate first. The American people say Washington is too partisan ? If that were true the 59 would be good enough – but really? Who are the Obstructionists?

If Obama invites the Republicans to come on board that would be very clever – it would tell the Democrats to stop being obstructionists.

But, politics might be such that the Republicans feel comfortable to project that they are THE PARTY OF NO!

How do you pull out a rabbit from your top-hat? How do you change unemployment rates with nothing happening in the economy? The Republicans might be happy to see the Administration collapse – the country collapse – so who cares about OSAMA!

Obama tells the Democrats – we will be losers together if you do not shape up and they returned – SHOW US THE WAY!

——————

Next topic:  How long can the World’s biggest borrower continue to be the World’s biggest power?

If we get to the point that we have a difficulty to sell our treasuries in the world we will cease to be a big power – that came from Greenspan – the former head of the Federal Reserve. Henry Paulson, the present holder of that job seemed less convincing.

David Walker, former US Controller General – head of the GAO – now head of te Peterson Foundation – wrote a book on the US deficit that has reached now $1.56 trillion and this is untenable.

—————–

Fareed Zakharia on China-US relations – a US – China economic war is MAD – that is Mutual Assured Destruction – he thinks that the two are symbiotically bound now. I think he is wrong. China has such a huge internal market that it can continue well by producing just for their own people without exports to the US. They may not want to do that because it would mean a too soon push at increasing China’s middle class and risking folks ask for a mellowing down of the political regime. But nevertheless, this does not assure an immediate rebellion. In the US rather – a rebellion is possible – or a call for some real war – internally or externally.

To the latest two skirmishes – the US sending $6.4 billion worth of weapons to Taiwan, and Obama hosting The Dalai Lama at the White House. Both topics are not new. The military hardware agreement with Taiwan was agreed in 2001, and the Dalai Lama has visited every single US previous President since he landed in India. Why did the Chinese get excited right now? That is before the April visit they will be making themselves to the White House? What about the Iran sanctions and the fact that Obama was left to wait outside that China conference room in Copenhagen? Are we going to see some muscle show here?

Christiane Amanpour, on her program had as guest Victor Gao, of the China National Association of International Studies.

He pointed out that the US sells weapons to Taiwan that it does not allow for sale to China. China is now the largest credit maker to the US. What if China buys less for several months? Is 2010 going to be the year that Obama gets tough and China gets nasty? Neither of them can afford a real trade war.

David Rothkopf affirmed that “we are interconnected” so we have to develop a different approach.

Victor Cha – he was on China desk at the National  Security Council. He said – This is a MUTUAL HOSTAGE GAME – both sides lose.

—————-

Fareed Zakharia in Davos, had in front of an audience a half hour interview with King Abdullah II of Jordan.

It started out with Fareed pointing out the two main problems he thinks are facing Jordan: Iran’s nuclear ambitions and the Islamic fighting movement, but he was brushed aside by the King who continued coming back to the Israeli – Palestinian problem.

Fareed said that no-one has yet lost money by betting against Peace in the Middle East, but the King countered that the credibility of the US is at stake. We desperately need the undivided attention of the US – he said. If God forbid we cross the line of the viability of the 2 State Solution, what are we left with – continuing warfare – or even worse – the One State solution that many Israelis dread?

Fareed wanted to know if there is a Jordan option and was told flatly by the King that it will not work – Jordan absolutely does not want the West Bank. Are we talking of a viable entity? A third of the UN do not recognize Israel now.  The building of the wall has made Israel safer Fareed said and he spoke with President Peres who believes in a two States solution for the future of Israel but because of the security threats they think only of today and not the future.

The King disagreed – the injustice felt towards the Palestinian people pushes all other issues. He thinks that if you solved the problem of the Palestinians why should Iran then want the nuclear power. It does not make any sense for them to continue on that path. For now, it is the Palestinian issue that propels Iran’s efforts. When asked if he thinks that if not for the Israeli – Palestinian issue, there would be no Islamic terrorism? The King retreated by saying that – for evil to succeed – is for good men to do nothing. Evil will always exist – the evil always will be evil. On November 9, 2005 we had our own 9/11 and proportionately we lost twice as many people as the US casualties. The Israeli-Palestinian issue is is incendiary that it drives everything else.

Fareed suggested that Professor Bernard Lewis explained that it was rather because of the lack of openness in the Muslim world that created the Al Qaeda – it was against Egypt and Saudi Arabia. We have 400 million young people in the Islamic world that need a direction. My role is to create a viable political Middle Class. If you want to move your country it is education – education – education. Bahrain speaks our language – so is a list of young countries that agree.

————-

Christiane Amanpour had a panel on security issues and wanted to know what are the real security problems today. Surely it was not what you would have expected to hear. She was told:

- Outer Space

- The Open Sea

- The Cyber Space

- The Polar Ice Caps.

So far as the conventional thinking she was told that Washington and Beijing have less to fear from each other then from failed States like Somalia.

When satellites become more crucial they become targets. Where are the National borders in cyber-space? Most governments cannot even define a cyber attack.

Zbigniew Brzezinski said that we have to define the nature of the threat. Today it is not as lethal as it was when within 6 hours we could have had 80 million casualties in the cold war. But today attacks are less predictable even though less lethal.

The US still has a higher sophisticated technology capability. The Google issue is a cyberthreat. Are the hackers from China government? Do they really come from China? We may have to retaliatete selectively and we must have a foreign policy that does not object to this.

The way the domestic policy goes now, will Obama continue the international engagement that he started out with so well? Now we have gridlock.

Brzezinski called for Presidential leadership. Also – the President should persevere with the Iran effort.

The other topic is the Israeli -Palestinian conflict. Rhetorically Obama gets an A, For Performance a B or B-

On space – we must avoid a nuclear race in space – we must have the capacity to shoot down satellites and space vehicles.

———————

From the Kathie Crowley show – her interview with Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, I picked up one fleting issue – the names of the countries the Secretary mentioned as friends to work with in the present world. She clearly mentioned the big two China and India, but then she spoke also of other major economies – Brazil, South Africa and Turkey. I mention this here because it vindicates our recent decision to move Turkey to the Home-page of www.SustainabiliTank.info and it seems that we were right.

Clearly, there were no Europeans mentioned in that segment, neither Mexico nor Canada or Japan.

January 14, 2010 we got an e-mail from the Office of Science and Technology of the Embassy of Austria to the United States, informing us that a documentary “In Search of Memory” will be shown to the public from January 8 t0 January 14, 2010 at the Movie House of IFC on Sixth Avenue in Manhattan. In effect the showings were extended by two additional weeks subsequently, and covered the time period of this year’s Holocaust Remembrance week.

Further, the e-mail said – The documentary had its first US screening tour a year earlier in 2009, and was shown in DC, NY, MA, CA as can be found on http://www.ostina.org/content/view/15/30…

This is a biographical documentary on the life and work of Austrian neuroscientist and Nobel Prize winner Eric Kandel it said.

Also it said: Please find details on today’s premiere featuring a Q&A session with Dr. Kandel, show times, media comments, and details on the movie at – http:// www.ostina.org

and at http://icarusfilms.com/new2009/mem.html

We could not go that opening day but made it up later as this is indeed an exceptional documentary with many good reasons for people to go to see it if the chance is offered again.

Dr. Kandel, then a youngster, arrived with his brother Ludwig, alone, to Hoboken New Jersey in April 1939. They escaped Nazi Vienna as their grandparents did earlier. Their parents sent them to the grandparents and luckily managed to join in a short while also. Please see - http://psychology.wikia.com/wiki/Eric_Ka…

Eric Richard Kandel (born November 7, 1929) is a psychiatrist, a neuroscientist and professor of biochemistry and biophysics at the Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons. He was a recipient of the 2000 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his research on the physiological basis of memory storage in neurons. He shared the prize with fellow recipients Arvid Carlsson and Paul Greengard. His other honors include the National Medal of Science, the Wolf Prize – which is the Israeli Nobel, the Gairdner International Award, the Charles A. Dana Award and the Lasker Award. Kandel has been at Columbia University since 1974, and lives in New York City. Kandel has recently authored “In Search of Memory: The Emergence of a New Science of Mind” (WW Norton), which chronicles his life and research. The book was awarded the 2006 Los Angeles Times Book Award for Science and Technology.

Eric Kandel was born in 1929 in Vienna, Austria, in a middle-class Jewish family. His mother had come from Kolomyya in Eastern Poland (Eastern Galizia that was under Austrian rule until WWI – he used to joke “as with all bright people, my roots are in Poland”) and his father from Olesko in Western Ukraine. His parents met in Vienna and married in 1923, shortly after Hermann Kandel, Eric’s father, had established a toy store. They were a thoroughly assimilated and accultured family, which had to leave Austria after the country had been invaded/annexed by Germany in March 1938, Aryanization (Arisierung) started and attacks on Jews and Jewish property escalated. Eventually Eric and his brother Ludwig, and later their parents, succeeded in moving to the US.

Eric Kandel’s initial intellectual interests lay in the area of history, and that was his undergraduate major at Harvard University. He wrote an honors dissertation on “The Attitude Toward National Socialism of Three German Writers: Carl Zuckmayer, Hans Carossa, and Ernst Jünger.”

“While at Harvard, a place dominated by the work of B. F. Skinner, Kandel became interested in learning and memory. (It should be noted, however, that while Skinner championed a strict separation of psychology, as its own level of discourse, from biological considerations such as neurology, Kandel’s work is essentially centered on an explication of the relationships between psychology and neurology.)”

“The world of neuroscience was first opened up to Kandel through his interactions with a college girlfriend, Anna Kris, whose parents were Freudian psychoanalysts. Freud, a pioneer in revealing the importance of unconscious neural processes, was at the root of Kandel’s interest in the biology of motivation and unconscious and conscious memory.”

I will stop here and refer the reader to the above mentioned link. My  reason for going up to this point was to show the thorough  Viennese cultural home environment of this refugee family that had to escape for their life to the new world of freedom they found in the US, and how at first, at Harvard, Eric Kandel was still trying to understand what happened to his parents first adopted homeland – Austria. It was this search for understanding that turned perhaps to his scientific search to understand the process of memory – so now this explains the trip back to Vienna, after years of having had no direct relationship to that part of his roots, he eventually goes there and the whole event turns into an exercise in practical memory.

On the other hand, interesting is also the way how the New Austria looks at Dr. Kandel, and many of the other refugee families that managed to escape the Nazi planned extermination of the Jews – really without even a consideration of who among those Jews still had any relationship to his/her Jewish origin. Yes, after he got the Nobel Prize, Austria claimed him back and restored his Austrian citizenship – now it is claimed that he is an Austrian scientist – something that from his personal make-up he might well be, but then – who deserves what kudos for his success story? Austria? Harvard? Columbia? Plain humanity?

Dr. Kandel is an amazing fellow – great are also all the members of his family that went with him on that trip back to Vienna, and also back to France where Dr. Kandel’s wife was saved by good Samaritans in a Cahors monastery. Amazing how they were able to show no single sign of bitterness about those past events, and how they were able to make new connections with friendly young Austrians, including the people that live in his parents old apartment, that swooned about them and relished in Dr. Kandel’s success in making for himself a successful life in spite of everything.

I would like also to suggest to the good people of the UN outreach program, that for next year’s Holocaust Remembrance week at the UN headquarters they figure a program with the Kandel family and Austria. This will be a clear chance to show that it is possible to overcome memories when one manages to bring them up from the unconscious – and have the courage to explain them scientifically as well.

Sunday, Feb. 7, 2010

U.S. Afpak path comes full circle

By BRAHMA CHELLANEY
NEW DELHI, for the Japan Times online  — What U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration has been pursuing in Afghanistan for the past one year has now received international imprimatur, thanks to the well-scripted London conference. Four words sum up that strategy: Surge, bribe and run.

Obama has designed his twin troop surges not to militarily rout the Afghan Taliban but to strike a political deal with the enemy from a position of strength. Without a deal with Taliban commanders, the United States cannot execute the “run” part.

The Obama approach has been straightforward: If you can’t defeat them, buy them off. Having failed to rout the Taliban, Washington has been holding indirect talks with the Afghan militia’s shura, or top council, whose members are holed up in Quetta, capital of Pakistan’s sprawling Baluchistan province, including the one-eyed chief, Mullah Mohammad Omar. The talks have been conducted through the Pakistani, Saudi and Afghan intelligence agencies.

Obama, paradoxically, is seeking to apply to Afghanistan the Iraq model of his predecessor, George W. Bush, who used a military surge largely as a show of force to buy off Sunni tribal leaders and other local chieftains. But Afghanistan isn’t Iraq, and it is a moot question whether the same strategy can work, especially when Obama has not hidden his intent to end the U.S. war before he comes up for re-election in 2012.

In a land with a long tradition of humbling foreign armies, payoffs are unlikely to buy peace. All that the Pakistan-backed Taliban has to do is to simply wait out the Americans. After all, popular support for the Afghan war has markedly ebbed in the U.S., even as the other countries with troops in Afghanistan exhibit war fatigue.

If a resurgent Taliban is now on the offensive, with 2008 and 2009 proving to be the deadliest years for U.S. forces since the 2001 American intervention, it is primarily because of two reasons: the sustenance the Taliban still draws from Pakistan; and a growing Pashtun backlash against foreign intervention.

The Taliban leadership — with an elaborate command-and-control structure oiled by Wahhabi petrodollars and proceeds from opium trade — operates from the comfort of sanctuaries in Pakistan. Fathered by Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency and midwifed by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency in 1994, the Taliban emerged as a Frankenstein’s monster.

Yet President Bill Clinton’s administration acquiesced in the Taliban’s ascension to power in Kabul in 1996 and turned a blind eye as the thuggish militia, in league with the ISI, fostered narco-terrorism and swelled the ranks of the Afghan war alumni waging transnational terrorism. With 9/11, however, the chickens came home to roost. The U.S. came full circle when it declared war on the Taliban in October 2001. Now, desperate to save a faltering military campaign, U.S. policy is coming another full circle as Washington advertises its readiness to strike deals with “moderate” Taliban (as if there can be moderates in an Islamist militia that enforces medieval practices).

In the past year, the U.S. military and intelligence have carried out a series of air and drone strikes and ground commando attacks from Afghanistan in Pakistan’s tribal Waziristan region against the Pakistani Taliban, the nemesis of the Pakistani military. The CIA alone has admitted carrying out a dozen drone strikes in Waziristan to avenge the bombing of its base in Khost, Afghanistan, by a Jordanian double agent, who in a prerecorded video said he was going to take revenge for the U.S. attack — carried out at Pakistan’s instance — that killed the Pakistani Taliban chief, Baitullah Mehsud.

Yet, the U.S. military and intelligence have not carried out a single air, drone or ground attack against the Afghan Taliban leadership in Baluchistan, south of Waziristan. The CIA and the ISI are again working together, including in shielding the Afghan Taliban shura members so as to facilitate a possible deal.

Obama’s Afghan strategy should be viewed as shortsighted and apt to repeat the very mistakes of American policy on Afghanistan and Pakistan over the past three decades that have come to haunt U.S. security and that of the rest of the free world.

Washington is showing it has not learned any lessons from its past policies that gave rise to monsters like Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar and to “the state within the Pakistani state,” the ISI, which was made powerful during Ronald Reagan’s presidency as a conduit of covert U.S. aid for Afghan guerrillas fighting Soviet occupiers.

To justify the planned Faustian bargain with the Taliban, the Obama team is drawing a specious distinction between al-Qaida and the Taliban and illusorily seeking to differentiate between “moderate” Taliban and those that rebuff deal-making.

The scourge of transnational terrorism cannot be stemmed if such specious distinctions are drawn. India, which is on the frontline of the global fight against international terrorism, is likely to bear the brunt of the blowback of Obama’s Afpak strategy, just as it came under terrorist siege as a consequence of the Reagan-era U.S. policies.

The Taliban, al-Qaida and groups like the Lashkar-e-Taiba are a difficult-to- separate mix of soul mates who together constitute the global jihad syndicate. To cut a deal with any constituent of this syndicate will only bring more international terrorism. A stable Afghanistan cannot emerge without dismantling the Pakistani military’s sanctuaries and sustenance infrastructure for the Afghan Taliban and militarily decapitating the latter’s command center in Baluchistan. Instead of seeking to achieve that, the U.S. is actually partnering the Pakistani military to win over the Taliban.

Even if the Obama administration managed to bring down violence in Afghanistan by doing a deal with the Taliban, the Taliban would remain intact as a fighting force, with active ties to the Pakistani military. Such a tactical gain would exact serious costs on regional and international security by keeping the Afpak region as the epicenter of a growing transnational-terrorism scourge and upsetting civilian reconstruction in Afghanistan, where Japan and India are two of the largest bilateral aid donors.

Regrettably, the Obama administration is falling prey to a long- standing U.S. policy weakness: The pursuit of narrow objectives without much regard for the interests of friends.

Brahma Chellaney, professor of strategic studies at the privately funded Center for Policy Research in New Delhi, is a regular contributor to The Japan Times.

from Uri Avnery
6.2.10

Peace – A Four-Letter Word .

MANY IMPORTANT struggles in Israel are calling out to people of conscience. Among others (in random order):
The struggle for preserving the environment and the future of the planet.

The struggle for democracy against fascist trends.

The struggle for human rights and civil rights.

The feminist struggle.

The struggle for the rights of gays and lesbians.

The struggle for social justice and social solidarity.

The struggle for equal rights for Israel’s Arab citizens.

The struggle against the discrimination of Oriental Jews.

The struggle for the separation of religion and state.

The struggle for animal rights.

Etc. etc. etc.

What do all these causes have in common?

All of them belong to the liberal, “progressive” world view.

Each and every one of them deserves full-hearted devotion, especially of young people.

But after all, all of them serve today as substitutes for the main battle – the struggle for peace with the Palestinian people.

THERE IS a danger that all these struggles will become something like “cities of refuge” for young idealists, who desire to devote themselves to a noble cause, but have no desire to take part in the main struggle.

Since every one of these struggles is indeed important and is for a good cause, no one can argue with these activists. Scores of organizations are now active in these fields, and thousands of wonderful people – male and female, old and young – are devoting themselves to these causes. I, too, would willingly join every one of them, were it not – - -

Were it not for the fact that all of them – all together and each of them separately – are now draining the life out of the struggle for peace. As I see it, peace stands above all other aims, not least because the success of all other struggles depends on the outcome of this fight.

The unending war creates a reality of occupation and oppression, of death and destruction, brutality and cruelty, moral degeneration and general bestiality. Can any ideal be realized in this situation? Can feminism, for example, achieve its aims in a country that is in the throes of an unbridled chauvinist militarism? Can animals be saved from torture when the torture of human beings is routine? Can rivers and forests, birds and leopards be saved when residential quarters are bombed and shelled with white phosphorus?

THE MAIN question is, of course, why people of conscience are running away from the vision of peace.
This is a fact: peace has become a four-letter word. (In Hebrew, the word for peace, shalom, indeed consists of four letters.) A decent person does not want to be seen in its company. It should not be uttered in polite society.
People do verbal exercises, almost acrobatics, to explore the range of circumlocutions for the word. Politicians speak about “the end of the conflict”, “permanent status”, “political settlement”, just to avoid the taboo term.

Why?

First of all, the word “peace” has been exploited so many times that it has almost become meaningless. It has been misused so often that it has been worn out. To paraphrase the classic sentence of the British philosopher, Dr. Samuel Johnson: “Peace is the last refuge of a scoundrel”. Or, to repeat the slogan of the evil empire in George Orwell’s 1984: “War is Peace”.

The hope for peace has been raised and dashed to pieces so many times that the hope itself now arouses suspicion and fear. What has happened to the greatest hope of all, the Oslo agreement and the historic handshake of 1993? What has happened to the triumphal journey of Ehud Barak to Camp David in 2000? One cannot demand from ordinary people that they find out what really happened there, and who is to blame. They see only the plain facts: we hoped for peace, we got war.
Things have come to the point where even peace movements are afraid to mention the word in their political statements. They, too, look for synonyms.
It is now generally accepted that one should not approach young people with talk about peace. God forbid. They are convinced that war is a permanent condition, that peace is an illusion, nothing but an empty phrase of old. They believe that they are condemned, they and their children and their children’s children (if they remain here), to go to war again and again, till the end of time. They do not want to waste their energies on this peace nonsense. Better to save the last leopards in the Judean desert or the eagles on the Golan Heights than to search for the doves of peace, which they have never seen.

Leftists are proud that the solution of “Two States for Two peoples”, once the vision of a handful of crazies, has now become a worldwide consensus. A huge victory, indeed. But it is trumped by the success of the right in turning “We Have No Partner For Peace” into a national credo.
In modern language: peace is Out, all the rest is In.

THIS WEEK the journalist Gideon Levy remarked on a TV talk show that in the present Knesset there is no longer a single Jewish member for whom peace is the No. 1 objective.

Some people mention in this context the new member of the Meretz faction, Nitzan Horowitz. For years he served as a TV foreign affairs commentator and infected the viewers with his enthusiasm for every struggle for peace and freedom throughout the world. His emotional style and his tendency to identify with the underdog have earned him the love of the audience.

But since entering parliament, his flame seems to have gone out. Now he is conducting a noisy fight against the price war among the book stores. So what about peace? What about the occupation? Silence, please.

That is true for his entire Meretz faction, which, in its heyday, served as the vanguard of the Zionist peace camp in the Knesset. Since then, things have changed for the worse. In order to regain some of their strength, they ignore the matter of peace as far as humanly possible. When there is no way out, they mention it perfunctorily, like a Jew kissing the Mezuzah or a Christian crossing himself – and hurry on.

It’s an interesting story. When Shulamit Aloni founded the party in 1973, on the eve of the Yom Kippur war, she was known mainly as a civil rights activist. She was especially engaged in the struggle for women’s rights and against religious coercion. Peace was a secondary aim on her agenda. But as the leader of Meretz, she gradually became convinced that none of her aims could be realized in an atmosphere of war, and peace became central to her views. When the party grew, it became the leading Zionist peace faction.

In recent years, the process has gone backwards, like a video film in reverse. Peace was pushed from the center of the Meretz agenda and has almost disappeared. Meretz has become again a party for civil rights, while going down from 12 Knesset seats to a mere three.

THE ISRAELI right, which is financed by right-wing American billionaires, both Jews and Christian evangelicals, this week launched an all-out attack against the liberal New Israel Fund, which donates generously to all the struggles mentioned above.

Honest disclosure: Gush Shalom has never received a cent from it. The fund has avoided peace movements like the plague. But that has not saved it. The rightists persecute it. Even if one deals “only” with human rights, one cannot escape this lot. The city of refuge offers no safety.

THE CAUSE of peace will inevitably return to center stage because it will decide our destiny – as individuals and as a state. There is no escape.
Of course, none of the struggles for the other causes should be given up, even though the fight for ending the occupation and achieving peace must head all others.

I am looking forward to the day when the organizations engaged in all these struggles will unite their wonderful activists, their enthusiasm, talents and courage, and especially their ability to devote themselves to an idea – into one single force fighting for the Other Israel, whose spearhead is the fight for peace. In one great, united movement, the various causes will complement and feed each other.

Together they will conduct the decisive campaign: the struggle for the Second Israeli Republic.

DIRECT QUOTES: BASHAR ASSAD
FEBRUARY 3, 2010, Posted by Seymour M. Hersh who wrote this for the New Yorker
I spoke to Bashar Assad, the president of Syria, this winter in Damascus. Assad assumed the presidency after his father’s death, in 2000, when he was thirty-four years old, and he expressed some empathy for President Barack Obama, who, like Assad, was confronted with a steep learning curve.

One note: a transcript of our talk, provided by Assad’s office, was generally accurate but it did not include an exchange we had about intelligence. A senior Syrian official had told me that, last year, Syria, which is on the State Department’s list of state sponsors of terrorism, had renewed its sharing of intelligence on terrorism with the C.I.A. and with Britain’s MI6, after a request from Obama that was relayed by George Mitchell, the President’s envoy for the Middle East. (The White House declined to comment.) Assad said that he had agreed to do so, and then added that he also has warned Mitchell “that if nothing happens from the other side”—in terms of political progress—“we will stop it.”

Quotes from our conversation follow.

President Barack Obama:

Bush gave Obama this big ball of fire, and it is burning, domestically and internationally. Obama, he does not know how to catch it.

The approach has changed; no more dictations but more listening and more recognition of America’s problems around the world, especially in Afghanistan and Iraq. But at the same time there are no concrete results…. What we have is only the first step…. Maybe I am optimistic about Obama, but that does not mean that I am optimistic about other institutions that play negative or paralyzing role[s] to Obama.

If you talk about four years, you have one year to learn and the last year to work for the next elections. So, you only have two years. The problem, with these complicated problems around the world, where the United States should play a role to find a solution, is that two years is a very short time…. Is it enough for somebody like Obama?

Hillary Clinton:

Some say that even Hilary Clinton does not support Obama. Some say she still has ambition to be President some day—that is what they say.

The press conference of Hillary with [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu [in which she appeared to walk away from the Administration’s call for a freeze on settlements] was very bad, even for the image of the United States.

Israel and the United States:

To be biased and side with the Israelis, this is traditional for the United States; we do not expect them to be in the middle soon. So we can deal with this issue, and we can find a way if you want to talk about the peace process. But the vision does not seem to be clear on the U.S. side as to what they really want to happen in the Middle East.

Negotiations with Israel:

I have half a million Palestinians and they have been living here for three generations now. So, if you do not find a solution for them, then what peace you are talking about?

What, I said, is the difference between peace and a peace treaty? Peace treaty is what you sign, but peace is when you have normal relations. So, you start with a peace treaty in order to achieve peace…. If they say you can have the entire Golan back, we will have a peace treaty. But they cannot expect me to give them the peace they expect…. You start with the land; you do not start with peace.

The Israelis:

You need a special dictionary for their terms…. They do not have any of the old generation who used to know what politics means, like Rabin and the others. That is why I said they are like children fighting each other, messing with the country; they do not know what to do.

[The Israelis] wanted to destroy Hamas in the war [in December, 2008] and make Abu Mazen strong in the West Bank. Actually it is a police state, and they weakened Abu Mazen and made Hamas stronger. Now they wanted to destroy Hamas. But what is the substitute for Hamas? It is Al Qaeda, and they do not have a leader to talk to, to talk about anything. They are not ready to make dialogue. They [Al Qaeda] only want to die in the field.

Europe and the Iranian nuclear negotiation:

This is not European but Bush’s initiative adopted by the Europeans. The Europeans are like the postman; they pretend that they are not like this but they are like a postman; they are completely passive and I told them that. I told the French when I visited France.

Iran:

Imposing sanctions [on Iran] is a problem because they will not stop the program and they will accelerate it if you are suspicious. They can make problems to the Americans more than the other way around.

If I am Ahmadinejad, I will not give all the uranium because I do not have a guarantee [in response to American and European insistence that most of Iran’s low-enriched uranium be sent abroad for further enrichment to make it usable for a research reactor, but not for a bomb]…. So, the only solution is that they can send you part and you send it back enriched, and then they send another part…. The only advice I can give to Obama: accept this Iranian proposal because this is very good and very realistic. [Note: the Iranian position appeared to be shifting this week.]

Lebanon:

The civil war in Lebanon could start in days; it does not take weeks or months; it could start just like this. One cannot feel assured about anything in Lebanon unless they change the whole system.

Cooperating with the United States in Iraq:

They [American officials] only talk about the borders; this is a very narrow-minded way. But we said yes. We said yes—and, you know, during Bush we used to say no, but when Mitchell came [as Obama’s envoy] I said O.K.… I told Mitchell by saying this is the first step and when find something positive from the American side we move to the next level…. We sent our delegation to the borders and [the Iraqis] did not come. Of course, the reason is that [Nouri] al-Maliki [the Prime Minister of Iraq] is against it. So far there is nothing, there is no cooperation about anything and even no real dialogue.

George Mitchell:

I told him, you were successful in Ireland, but this is different…. [Mitchell] is very keen to succeed. And he wants to do something good, but I compare with the situation in the United States: the Congress has not changed…. But the whole atmosphere is not positive towards the President in general. And that is why I think his envoys cannot succeed.

Criticisms of some Israeli policies at the J-Street founding conference:

Ahh … that is new!… But we should educate them that if they are worried about Israel, then the only thing that can protect Israel is peace, nothing else. No amount of airplanes or weapons could protect Israel, so they have to forget about that.

Pakistan’s government:

They supported [Afghan President Hamid] Karzai and realized he cannot deliver. I do not know why they supported him and why—nobody knows why.

American power:

Now the problem is that the United States is weaker, and the whole influential world is weak as well…. You always need power to do politics. Now nobody is doing politics…. So what you need is strong United States with good politics, not weaker United States. If you have weaker United States, it is not good for the balance of the world.

AJAMI NOMINATIONED FOR OSCAR – ARAB-ISRAELI COLLABORATION MARKS THIRD ISRAEL NOMINATION
IN A ROW

The Israeli film, Ajami, was selected as one of the five nominees for the Best Foreign Language Film Oscar. The Oscar nominees in all categories were announced Tuesday in a press conference in Los Angeles.

This is the third year in a row that Israel received an Oscar nomination in this category and Israel’s ninth nomination. No Israeli film has ever won the Best Foreign Film Oscar.

Ajami, a drama about crime in Jaffa, was directed by Scandar Copti, an Israeli-Arab Christian, and Yaron Shani, an Israeli Jew. While it’s anyone’s guess whether the film will be the first Israeli feature film to win an Oscar, the fact that it received a nomination at all is a triumph for its young directors, both first-time filmmakers.

The Israeli film, Ajami, was selected as one of the five nominees for the Best Foreign Language Film Oscar. The Oscar nominees in all categories were announced Tuesday in a press conference in Los Angeles.

This is the third year in a row that Israel received an Oscar nomination in this category and Israel’s ninth nomination. No Israeli film has ever won the Best Foreign Film Oscar.

Ajami, a drama about crime in Jaffa, was directed by Scandar Copti, an Israeli-Arab Christian, and Yaron Shani, an Israeli Jew. While it’s anyone’s guess whether the film will be the first Israeli feature film to win an Oscar, the fact that it received a nomination at all is a triumph for its young directors, both first-time filmmakers.

They spent seven years making the film, which features a cast of almost all non-professionals, mainly from Jaffa. Its complex narrative involves the conflicts and alliances among Israeli Arabs and Jews, Arab Christians and Muslims, as well as West Bank Palestinians and Bedouins. Ajami, which won a prize for Special Distinction in the Camera d’Or competition for first-time filmmakers at Cannes, also won the Ophir Award (the Israeli Oscar) last September, which made it Israel’s official entry for the Oscars.

Copti told The Jerusalem Post, “We’re still on a hysterical adrenaline rush from it all. This is more than I dreamed of in my wildest dreams.” It’s also a triumph for Israel in a year in which prominent film industry figures called for a boycott of a program of Israeli films at the Toronto film festival last fall. Ajami is a partnership between directors, producers and actors of different religions and points to the openness of Israeli society. It received funding from the Israel Film Fund, a government body.

The other nominees in this category are El Secreto do Sus Ojos (Argentina), Un Prophete (France), The White Ribbon (Germany) and The Milk of Sorrow (Peru).

from:
 http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jspet=110299081386… e=001rraRBJWP4w1dU4WfNtv0DZvIr9HijLwWpr293xtqq9G5jwvUonbZxQC6HXelPGKu8ZbOlIleOmQgStRzWUQJhvxscbcXVF3GPE0CUHdIn2qpFhEfXK-A0KBGIIvoqmDylvPBmHP-CwUEyEKMUvnUDA==]

e-consultation on setting of an independent scientific body on land degradation/desertification

from: Pam Chasek

Dear Colleagues,

We invite you to participate in a global scientific e.consultation on the needs, usefulness and options of an independent, international, interdisciplinary scientific advisory body on land degradation/desertification. The proposed body would primarily provide scientific advice to the United Nations Convention on Combating Desertification (UNCCD) to aid decision-making to combat land degradation and to achieve sustainable land management and development in drylands. It may also be relevant to various on-going efforts to harmonize knowledge on land matters.

DesertNet International and UNU-INWEH have developed this e.forum to canvass contributions from different regions and interested parties on this issue and as an input into the decision made at COP9 that requests the Committee on Science and Technology (CST) to assess how to organise international, interdisciplinary scientific advice. This activity thus, supports the follow-up of the first scientific-style UNCCD conference to the CST SS-2 in 2010 which will be making recommendations to COP10 of the UNCCD.

You can register to participate in the e.forum at: redmine at example.net. You will have to activate your account by clicking on the link that is given in this e.mail.

If you have any problems registering or answering the questions please let us know.

Please note that in the e.forum survey questionnaire you have to press the <save> button before proceeding to the next question!

Please forward this e.mail also to other experts.

The e.forum starts on 25 January 2010 and will end on 25 March 2010.

We acknowledge the generous assistance and sponsorship of the GTZ CCD Project in this exercise.

Best regards,
also on behalf of the DNI Bureau members Richard Escadafal and Giuseppe Enne who are members of the international steering committee of the E.forum.
Mariam Akhtar-Schuster and Richard Thomas

********************************************************************
Dr. Mariam Akhtar-Schuster
Sekretariat DesertNet International (DNI)
c/o Biocentre Klein Flottbek and Botanical Garden
University of Hamburg
Ohnhorststr. 18, 22609 Hamburg, Germany
Tel  +49 (0)40 42816 – 533
Fax +49 (0)40 42816 – 539
E-mail:  makhtar-schuster at botanik.uni-hamburg….
********************************************************************

Richard Thomas
Assistant Director (Drylands)
United Nations University
Institute for Water, Environment and Health
(UNU-INWEH)
175 Longwood Road South, Suite 204
Hamilton, ON  L8P 0A1
CANADA
Tel: +1 905 667 5511
Tel: +1 905 667 5490 (direct)
Fax: +1 905 667 5510
Email:  rthomas at inweh.unu.edu
Web: www.inweh.unu.edu

Pamela S. Chasek, Ph.D.
Executive Editor, Earth Negotiations Bulletin
IISD Reporting Services

300 East 56th Street #11A New York, NY 10022 USA
Tel: +1 212-888-2737- Fax: +1 646 219 0955
E-mail:  pam at iisd.org
International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD)
 http://www.iisd.ca/email/subscribe.htm

The Auschwitz Album

This Album memorializes the arrival of Hungarian Jews to Auschwitz in May of 1944.

It is the only one of its kind, and it is solely due to this album that we have a visual history of what occurred in the Auschwitz-Birchenau death camp.

The album was discovered after the war by an Auschwitz survivor, Lily Jacob, who donated it to Yad Vashem in 1980.

Ambassador Rick Barton
U.S. Representative for Economic and Social Affairs
U.S. Mission to the United Nations
New York, NY
January 26, 2010

AS DELIVERED

Mr. Secretary-General, distinguished guests, and friends, thank you all. It’s an honor to be with you.

Tomorrow is January 27, the day in 1945 when Auschwitz-Birkenau was liberated. Thanks to the diligent efforts of Yad Vashem and others around us, we see the blueprints for history’s largest factory of death—a vast machine, designed with cold-blooded efficiency, built to mass-produce the murder of innocents.

These terrible plans remind us, we have seen nothing quite the same as the Shoah—nothing quite the same as its unique reach, its systematized spite, its murderous bureaucracy, its premeditated, purposeful, and planned malice.

Cruelty was the essence of that vast system of slaughter. Each and every life was taken by a long chain of breathing, thinking people, manning the guard towers, calculating the train schedules pulling the switches and the triggers.

We have just drawn down the curtain on the bloodiest century in human history. The United States is determined to ensure that the 21st century takes a lesser toll. The words “never again” should mean that genocide has ended forever.

As President Obama said in Oslo, we must face the world as it is—a world in which human beings can rise to the most astonishing heroism or sink to the most awful depravity—a world in which we must do more than just bear witness—a world in which choices matter.

Let us stand up for those targeted by killers and demagogues, with those hounded from their homes by the callous and the cruel.

Let us celebrate diversity, human rights, freedom, decency and respect.

Atrocities are not inevitable. They need not be part of the landscape of world politics—unless we let them be. We have a responsibility to protect and must find ways to protect the innocent. We may never find an end to oppression. The search must be eternal. Judaism, the faith and heritage of a million men, women, and children murdered in the camp built through the plans that stand before us here, offers a simple and stern teaching that has inspired countless people to try to part the waters of injustice. Even those who are comfortable and prosperous are obliged to identify with the powerless and the desperate—to be voices of the voiceless—to stand up for those who endure the bite and burden of shackles from new oppressors today.

We cannot bring back those lost, millions in Cambodia, Rwanda, Srebrenica, Darfur or in Poland or Germany. We can only rededicate ourselves to a shared commitment to human dignity.

Above all we must have the courage and the compassion to act. So today, let us renew our determination to work together to save the innocent and the vulnerable—and to heal our broken world.

Morocco, in bold moves shows the Islamic World That It Does Not Agree With The Ahmedi-Nejad Dictum That There Was No Holocaust – But Do  Arabs Note This, and can Morocco do it all by itself?

Ariele Nahmias is a Jewish teacher in France and she organizes courses for French and Belgium teachers about Jewish issues. She also heads the French Desk at the International School for Holocaust Studies of the Yad Vashem.   http://www1.yadvashem.org/yv/en/educatio…

Having looked up The Yad Vashem Jerusalem Quarterly Magazine of January 2010, I found on page 4 an article by Ariele Nahmias:

“From Morocco to Jerusalem: First-Ever Seminar for Moroccan Educators.”
 http://www1.yadvashem.org/yv/en/pressroo…

The article tells about 18 teachers from Morocco that came to the Yad Vashem International School for Holocaust Studies to participate in a tailor-made seminar on Holocaust Education. This effort started when one of those teachers heard about the School’s Mario Sinai – the European Director – lecturing in Spain – and approached him to organize a special seminar for Moroccan teachers. Eventually – the group that came to Jerusalem included Berber community social activists. In Israel they met and listened among others to two Members of the Israeli Parliament (the Knesset) that originate from Morocco – Yaacov Edri of Kadima and Daniel Ben Simon from Labor – who also is a known Journalist. There are 600,000 Jews originating from Morocco living now in Israel. They came in the early 1950s – after the establishing of the State of Israel in 1948 – as there was a strong reaction against the Jewish State that was fueled by Arab Nationalists everywhere.

The Moroccan Group Leader that came to Israel December 2009, is Boubaker Outaadit who said that he got interested in the Holocaust while studying German History at the University of Casablanca. Others looked at it from sociology angles. Moroccan poet Ali Khadaoui – one of the participants – already expressed his sentiments in writing  and said he will continue to be involved in an effort by educators back home who “informally teach students the History of the Holocaust.

—————

Short History of Morocco:  Morocco´s location at the northwest corner of Africa, at the straights or the mouth of the Mediterranean opposite Spain, has attracted invading many forces and settlers. Phoenicians came to trade and settle, about that time arrived also the first Jews – that is 3,000 years ago. Then successive waves of Romans, Vandals, Visigoths, and Byzantine Greeks arrived to dominate and rule.

The Arabs began bringing their civilization in the 7th century, and the Alaouite dynasty, which claims descent from the Prophet Mohamed, is ruling  Morocco since 1649.

The Portuguese controlled the Atlantic coast in the 15th century and the French arrived in 1830.

In 1904 Morocco was divided into spheres of French and Spanish influence and a 1912 treaty established these zones as protectorates.

Morocco began to assert its independence after World War II with the formation of the Istiqlal (Independence) Party. Active opposition to foreign domination erupted in 1953 after France deposed the highly respected Sultan Muhammad V and replaced him with his unpopular uncle.

France allowed Muhammad V to return in 1955 and granted political independence on March 2, 1956. In 1956 and 1958, Morocco reach agreements to gain authority over the Spanish-controlled areas and Tangier, an international zone since 1923, was also reintegrated with Morocco.

Muhammad V was Sultan of Morocco from 1927 to 1953, exiled from 1953-55, where he was again recognized as Sultan upon his return, and was declared King from 1957 to 1961. His full name was Sidi Mohammad ben Yusef, or Son of (Sultan) Yusef, upon whose death he succeeded to the throne.

Muhammad VI is the current King. He was born in 1963  and became King of Morocco in 1999 upon the death of his father King Hassan II who was King of Morocco from 1961 to 1999.

Formerly Muhammad ben Al-Hassan, crown prince Sidi Muhammad, he studied at Muhammad V Univ., Rabat, where he received bachelor’s (1985) and master’s (1988) degrees in law, and at the Univ. of Nice, France, where he obtained his doctorate in law (1993). In the 1990s, as the health of his father King Hassan II declined, the crown price assumed a greater role in the government. In 1994 he was promoted to general and became coordinator of the Royal Armed Forces, and in 1998 he initiated a wide-ranging antipoverty program.  He has worked toward various social and economic improvements and has established a reputation as a generally moderate monarch.

In foreign policy, Morocco is officially non-aligned but generally sympathetic to the West. Its long-term goals are to strengthen its influence in the Arab world, Africa, and the Maghreb (Algeria, Tunisia, and Morocco), while maintaining close ties to Europe and the United States.

Its major foreign-policy problem involves its absorption of Western Sahara when Spain relinquished its claim in 1976. This claim has entailed a long and costly war against the Algeria-based Polisario Front and for many years caused the rupture of diplomatic relations with Algeria. Diplomatic relations – as well as rail links, air links, and a gas pipeline deal – are back in place and agreements to negotiate a final solution have been reached.

In 1975, thousands of Moroccans crossed the border into Spanish Sahara to support Moroccan claims to the northern part of the territory. Mauritania then occupied the southern half of Spanish Sahara. After Spain pulled out, Algeria supported Spanish Saharan claims to self-determination and backed the Polisano Front guerrillas.

Mauritania made peace with the insurgents in 1979, but Polisano resistance to Moroccan occupation of the north and hostility between Algeria and Morocco continue.

Relations with other North African states improved significantly in the late 1980s. In May 1988 Algeria and Morocco agreed to re-establish diplomatic relations. (Diplomatic relations with Mauritania had been suspended in 1981 and resumed in April 1985).

In February 1989 North African Heads of State, meeting in Marrakesh, signed a treaty establishing the Union of the Arab Maghreb. The new body, which included Morocco, Algeria, Libya, Mauritania and Tunisia, aimed to promote trade by allowing the free movement of goods, services and workers.

—————

Regarding the topic of our present posting – the nature of relations the Moroccan Kings nurtured in regard to their Jewish citizens, World Jewry, and Israel let us start by noting that King Muhammad V, though bound to the Vichy French Rulers by the Protectorate agreement, made nevertheless efforts to mellow the impact of the Nazi anti-Jewish laws and now King Muhammad VI is trying to distance himself from the general anti-Israeli stands popular on the streets under most other Islamic ruling governments. In so far as the 2010 UN led International Holocaust Remembrance week, we noted the presence and good words, “Remember We Must” at the Saturday, January 23, 2010 Park East Synagogue event organized by Rabbi Arthur Schneier.  Present and speaking at the luncheon were both – the Moroccan Ambassador to the UN, Mohamed Louichki, as well as   Serge Berdugo who has the title of Itinerant Ambassador, and is actually also the Head of the Jewish Community and a former Minister of Tourism.

Later in the week, Thursday January 28, 2010, a second event with Moroccan participation, was arranged as a UN DPI briefing to the NGOs and the UN somehow managed to avoid the much more useful potential had they arranged to have this event also broadcasted to the UN community at large. After all, the fact that Morocco is more open to the Jewish people then any other Arab or Islamic State should be taken as an example to the rest of the UN membership – an act more important then just try to enhance the image of this State with the Civil Society as represented by the NGOs.

Whatever the case, our website has picked up the presentation by Itinerant Ambassador, or is it Ambassador to the Civil Society and World Jewry, with tourism implications, Mr. Serge Berdugo, at
 http://www.sustainabilitank.info/2010/01…

Here we will look at the second presenter – Mr. Andre Azoulay, Counsellor to His Majesty the King, who spoke via videoconference on an OECD screen, and answered questions.

There were two more speakers. – both from the Jerusalem-based program of KIVUNIM – New Directions – The Institute of Experimental Learning for Israel and World Jewish Communities Studies the head of the organization, Mr. Peter Geffen, a well known educator  who founded the Abraham Heschel School in New York City, and American Student Micha Stettin who dedicated himself to Middle East Studies, Hebrew and Arabic, now at Mc Gill after having spent a year in Israel with Kivunim. His presentation was dubbed as “Voices of Youth,” and this is correct in the sense that the grandchildren of the Holocaust can now start looking at the events of the 30s-40s of last century and start asking new questions. Micha’s question is – “Why did we not find anywhere in our studies what happened during the Holocaust to the Jews of Morocco?” He said that while learning about the good and the bad we must also learn about the collective identity as viewed in the Arab lands. What happened between Jews, Berbers, and Arabs in Morocco of that time – and King Muhammad V should be recognized as the right man he was.

Peter Geffen created first a project under the Shoa Foundation on memories from the Holocaust, and with King Muhammad VI embarked on the Morocco project. He did not make a presentation and left the Kivunim presentation to Micha, but read a special letter from the King:

“Praise be to God – May peace and blessings be upon His Prophets and Messengers.” “None of us can claim to have an understanding of the Holocaust that is-all-encompassing, absolute and without concession or compromise.” “Amnesia has no effect on my understanding of the Holocaust, or that of my people – in fact we perceive it as a wound to the collective memory, which we know is engraved in one of the most painful chapters in the collective history of mankind,” was the way the King started his message to the panel. Then he passe on to make a real complaint:

“In what history or civic education textbooks used in the West is it taught that Morocco had opened its doors, as early as in 1930s, to European Jewish communities who had seen the peril looming on the horizon?”

“In what institutes or intellectual forums, in Europe or the United States, is the exemplary and historic attitude of ny late grandfather – His Majesty King Muhammad V – blessed be his soul – discussed? Notwithstanding the implacable realities of the French protectorate., which severely constrained his power, His Majesty managed to oppose the enforcement of racist Vichy laws against Moroccans -  citizens of Jewish faith.”

The King continues beyond above admonition with an important call to reality – and asks us to look at the potential of what he is up to:

“Each of you will understand that when I call for exhaustive and faithful reading of the history of this period, I do not merely do justice to actual facts, ” he said and continues – “We live in a time that is not neutral. A time in which the collective imagination of all of our societies is also fueled by the prospect of exclusion and failure when it comes to the promises of dialogue between civilizations, our cultures and our religions,” and gets to the real point in the last lines: “in its depth as much as in its tragic specificity, this duty of remembrance strongly imposes ethical, moral and political standards which will, tomorrow, be true guarantors of this peace – based on equally shared justice and dignity – and for which most Palestinians and Israelis yearn.”

So, what we have here is a complaint that Europe oriented attention by the world, when dealing with the Holocaust, has forgotten (amnesia – he said) the fact that in an Arab country the Muslim ruler – at the time Sultan and later, upon full independence, King Muhammad V – his grandfather -  did what he could, under Vichy France “protectorate,” to save his Jewish citizens from the worst of Nazi treatment. Then he said that the recognition that there was a history of good relationship between Jews and Muslims in Morocco – this has to become the motor for a solution of the Palestinian – Israeli fight in the Middle East. This line was seconded via videoconference by his Jewish Councellor Andre Azoulay and these statements were then the base for a lively Q&A exchange with Mr. Azoulay answering from the screen.

Mr. Azoulay did not mince words when saying that while in Christian Europe barbarian Nazism was raging, it was a Muslim Sultan in Morocco who told his Vichy French “Protectors” that his Jews will not wear a yellow star – they are Moroccans like all other Moroccans. He said this was no accident nor coincidence – it was rather the recognition that the Jews were in the country had a 3,000 year history and they arrived 1,500 years before the arrival of Arab Islam. There were here many centuries of mutual respect and knowledge. He stated: “We are proud Jews and proud of Morocco being part of the Arab civilization, Muslim culture and related to Middle East cultures – we feel ourselves enriched by all these three dimensions and we feel having a special role and responsibilities – we are Jews in Morocco and as Moroccan citizens we have responsibility as Jewish activists in the Arab World. That is also why we want to emphasize the role Morocco played in the Shoa and we want to break through the amnesia on this topic.

Looking back at the duality of being Jews and Moroccans, and what was achieved there during the days of the Nazis in Europe, he feels that the coexistence in Morocco brings him to the Arab cause for a logic of coexistence of living in TWO STATES IN PALESTINE AND ISRAEL – for the people there with all the measures of Human Rights and respect. WE REACT STRONGLY TO RESIST THE TRIVIALIZATION OF THE HOLOCAUST TRAGEDY – MOROCCO DOES NOT BELONG TO THE CLUB OF THE HOLOCAUST REJECTIONISTS – he said then followed up by saying that I am the only member of that Club that has Jews in an Arab country with all their rights – it is the Moroccan specificity in face of the Holocaust and this leads him to fight for the rights of the Palestinians and Israelis to live side by side.

The Chairman of the Panel was UN Director for Outreach – Mr. Eric Falt. It seems that his taking over by himself as moderator of the panel was a later decision as the first announcement that reached me mentioned the introducer, Maria-Louisa Chavez, Chief, NGO Relations, Department of Public Information (DPI) as Moderator, but seemingly there was some rethinking about this allowed at DPI. Mr. Falt was obviously a more appropriate choice for an event that should have been intended for a wider audience to include even the UN itself. This became obvious at the interesting Q&A time.

The background of this meeting was not presented in full by the panel. Indeed there was a history of peaceful coexistence in Morocco and high level of achievements during thousands of years, and colonial anti-Semitic policies imposed upon Moroccan Jews by the Vichy-regime of German-occupied France were opposed by the local leader of the country – the future King Muhammad V – but then, with the creation of the State of Israel, tensions  in the country arouse with riots against the Jews and Moroccan Jews fleeing to France and Israel as Arab – Israeli wars broke out in the Middle East. In spite of everything, and the inter-Arab solidarity, King Muhammad V and his son Hassan II still managed to protect the remaining Jews and tried to play intermediary roles in the Arab-Israeli peace process.

The present King – His Majesty King Muhammad VI faced by 2003 suicide bombing incidents against Jewish institutions in Casablanca,  did indeed step out  against Arab perpetrators of these crimes, and continued the historic mainly tolerant attitude towards Jews in Morocco.  I visited the place that included a Jewish social club close to after it happened, with 57 members of a family of Moroccan Jews living in Israel that went to see their place of origin. We were received royally even though it was clear that there was an implied reason for that visit – the question of real estate that the family left behind when fleeing the country. Even so – I witnessed friendly encounters that included even two visits with people living then in the former Levy family owned homes. One of the Levy brothers had a grocery store and a bakery – and these business were still functioning – we were honored with freshly backed bread by the new operator who was from a family of friends of the Levys. I did not follow what happened to the potential claim – but it was obvious to me that in the context of a settlement of claims former Palestinian  owners have over properties in Israel, these claims will be clearly part of the counter-claims in a balanced solution – and there is no rejection of this idea by Morocco – even though Morocco shows interest in helping find a solution for the Middle East conflict – that might mean its own financial loss of sort.

Thinking of the above – the importance of this Thursday, January 28, 2010, panel at the UN International Holocaust Remembrance week, at the UN Headquarters, takes an even higher level of importance and deserved maximum visibility and exposure.

Mr. Abdelkader Abbadi, originally from Tunisia, former UN official, and now a UN-DPI accredited correspondent, asked the first question, and it was about the position about Jews in the larger Arab context – the position of the Moroccan Jews in a larger reconciliation between the Muslim and Jewish Worlds. The answer was that Morocco is still playing a major role to give peace a chance. It was during the 60-80s they were the main place of contact. Mr. Azulay, from the screen, said: “We are still in total coherence in what can bring a feature of security for the State of Israel. By keeping alive the historical Moroccan legacy – the role played by the King and the message sent to the Nazi barbarity, and applying to the denial of the Holocaust in parts of the region, we are showing Morocco as it is. He added “Let me also say that when fighting for the above we also fight Islamophobia – the new anti-Semitism we see in Islamophobia. It is the same legacy that pushes us to say how Morocco can show the chance of coexistence between Muslims and Jews.

A question from Mauricio of the Brazilian Mission to the UN brought from Mr. Azoulay the following answer: When I went to Brazil I feel at home.  In Salvador, Bahia  I saw all three cultures celebrating in one – the logic gives us strength. Yes, we had also black pages. When we think of the Inquisition of the 15th century – it killed millions of Jews. In the Arab world of that time we stood together on the page of humanity. We had the mathematicians and the philosophers together – we held them for the rest of  humanity. Jews in the Arab & Muslim World is not just cosmetics. We feel enough confident, committed, powerful to share it with you first – because it is true today and centuries ago.

Serge Berdugo added to this:  In Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil, there is a large Jewish community from Morocco since 1882. Last year we had 500 people that came to Morocco to look for roots.

A question on books: Mr. Azulay said the answer is in education. We published about the Shoa in Arabic as there is enough inflammatory material in Arabic like The Protocols of Zion. In March 2009 we took the initiative to translate “The Diary of Anne Frank” and books like Hitler and the Jews. This was immediately effective. We have the books on our website and they can be freely downloaded. We find that they are printed out also in Iran. This is the first real effective answer to feed the ignorants. We have to do our best to inform the people. WE MUST GIVE A CHANCE TO THOSE THAT DO NOT KNOW – TO KNOW. It is a unique opportunity for the rest of the world and for the Muslim community to get the information. We have to mobilize NGOs, Universities, Academics, Governments, States to the realization of relations between Jews & Muslims.

——

Eventually came the question I thought all the time that it will appear out there at any moment: What about Israel – why not live there Jews and Arabs as one community. Serge Berdugo answered without difficulty –

IN ISRAEL THESE ARE TWO SEPARATE COMMUNITIES – IN MOROCCO WE LIVE TOGETHER. IN ISRAEL – ISRAEL MUST GET SECURITY FIRST WITHOUT THAT NOTHING WILL HAPPEN!

Almost all bridges in the Middle East were made in Morocco. We have very good contacts with Palestinians & Israelis when they come to Morocco they speak to each other to find solutions. We are in the supermarket – security and realism – and we have the dreams.

——

Question from a former employee of Joint in Morocco: How do you transmit your experience to others?

Petter Geffen answered – About the Vichy – Morocco stands – I learned about this only 6 years ago – now I tell it to everyone. THE POWER OF MUTUAL RESPECT AND COEXISTENCE,

Some people have vested interests in keeping us separate – that does not lead to change.

He then told of Raphael David Almaleh who went to a village of Berbers that once had 400 Jews – Arazan – and asked children – Where was here a Synagogue? They did not know but said ask that old man at the top of the street. The 65 year old man knew – and more. He pulled out a key and took them to the Synagogue. “They left when we were children – the Rabbi gave me the key and said give it to the Jews when they come back” he said.

Geffen then continued saying that the amnesia was not on purpose  – it is rather a result of our Eurocentricity that caused us not to look at Africa. When we asked Mr. Azulay to get involved in our effort to bring some redress to the lost years, he had first to ask the King’s endorsement and given this endorsement helped bring it to the open. We should not go away without making this knowledge a way to lead to change.

Serge Berdugo added – “we feel we have a story for the rest of the world.” Our website feels he deffinitely has a story for the UN – actually this was the novelty in this year’s Holocaust Remembrance Week of the UN.

————–

Further, as our website is known for our interest in environmental issues such as the impact of burning fossil fuels on Global Warming, we could not resist to note here also that the Turkish head of the Organization of the Islamic Conference has called fot the first meeting of the OIC Executive Bureau on Environment and Climate Change for Rabat -  January 18-19, 2010.

This meeting was obviously not connected to the subject matter of above panel – but on a different level it surely is related nevertheless, and it is interesting  that  two non-oil exporters from among the Arab States, but the countries positioned at the two geographical ends of the Mediterranean divide between Europe and the main mass of the Islamic World, Morocco and Turkey – are involved in this growing -in-importance global issue.
 http://www.sustainabilitank.info/2010/01…

From sergeberdugo@yahoo.fr

The Statement by Morocco Itinerant Ambassador Serge Berdugo, a Jew of prominent standing in Morocco, to the UN International Holocaust 2010 Commemoration. The Importance of the Panel was more then anything else – towards the Islamic World of today.

January 28, 2010

Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is my privilege to be part of this ceremony on the history of the Jewish Community of Morocco during the Second World War and to tell you how the European policy on Holocaust impacted the lives of this community. This presentation will illustrate and I quote His Majesty Mohammed VI: “tell the rest of the world how Arab and Islamic countries, such as mine, resisted Nazism and said “No” to the barbarity of the Nazis and to the villainous laws of the Vichy government”.

Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen,

First, let me remind you that in 1939 Morocco was under the French and Spanish protectorate.

Following the defeat of France and the coming into power of the Vichy Government, the Jews were faced with a systematic ideological anti-Semitism that led to the implementation of the Vichy anti Jewish legislation in Morocco.
On October 31st 1941, the King was compelled to enact legislation called the statute of Jews but not without obtaining major concessions to limit the scope and the impact of such measures as applied in France.
The first concession was related to the very notion of “Jew”. In Morocco, the Jews would be identified by the practice of the Jewish religion and not with reference to race or affiliation as referred to in Nazis ideology. “A Jew is a person who practices the Jewish religion”.

According to the second concession, bans and quotas were not applied to the Jewish religious institutions. This concession allowed Jewish institutions including schools to function properly and to receive 80% of their funding from the State budget.

Furthermore, business and handicrafts activities remained open to Jews.
The implementation of the Jews’ Laws by Moroccan authorities was another major concession granted to the King. This allowed the King to monitor and delay as much as possible, the implementation of these laws.

These concessions obtained by the King had considerable and practical implications on the daily life of the great majority of the Jews: the 90% that maintained a traditional way of living in Mellah and enjoyed a lifestyle similar to that of their Muslim neighbors.

The anti Jewish laws had only a little impact on them. They continued to practice their religion and do business. Their children received a Jewish and secular education of good quality.

Nevertheless, the minority of Jews, who embraced modernity and the European lifestyle, suffered all types of discrimination, humiliation and exactions.   They were forced to live in overpopulated Mellah.

They were excluded from the civil service, from the private sector (no more than 2% of Jewish doctors and lawyers) and from French schools (a maximum of 10% of Jewish students in high schools and 3% in universities).
Finally, the real estates of all the Jews had to be identified and listed.

From 1940 to 1943, the life of the Jews was certainly difficult and precarious but not more than that of the Muslims, who were themselves victims of discrimination by the Europeans.

Discrimination against Jews as well as Muslims included access to swimming pools, public places, theaters and stadiums.

During this enduring period, no major tension existed between the Jews and Muslims. In fact, the war had a little impact on the relationship between the two communities.

The opposite was true of relations with the European which were enterable to the extent that the Jews lived in a permanent fear to be humiliated and sometimes beaten by European mobs.

This violence reached its climax with the French fascist group “S.O.C.” which planned a pogrom targeting Jews in Casablanca on November 15th, 1942. In these circumstances, the Jews could not rely on the French police to protect them.

Fortunately, on November 8th, 1942, the landing of American forces in Casablanca prevented the implantation of such hideous action.
Nevertheless, it took more than one year to revoke the “Jews statute”.

Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen,

It was thanks to the courage and fairness of the young Moroccan Sultan that the discriminatory laws targeting those whom the King referred to as “his loyal Jewish subjects”, were never applied in an integral and uniform way.
Since the inception of the discriminatory laws, the Sultan consistently emphasized to his Jewish subjects that his door will always be open and that he will remain in a listening mood to their claims and complaints.
To illustrate this commitment, let me recall the testimony of my father Joseph BERDUGO, than President of the Jewish Committee of Meknes on the Census law of the Jewish assets that the French authorities intended to implement and which were viewed by the Jewish Community as a prelude to expropriation of their properties (as in France).

Indeed the Presidents of the 4 most important Jewish communities were taken secretly in a covered small van, walking then through the kitchens and the offices, to be received thereafter by the Monarch in his Apartment without any Protocol present.

The King said ‘I know your fears but I ask you to assure my Jewish subjects of my constant and full protection. Let them know that nothing will affect them that it did not affect first my family and myself’.

Informed that the French requested an inventory of the Jewish assets, while the law concerned only the real estate, the Sultan gave then his instructions to slow down the census and abstain from transmitting the files to the French authorities.

Following the landing of the US in November, 1942, and upon a request by the Sultan, my father was an eyewitness of the destruction of all the documents related to the census.

Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen,

Beyond all these clear statements and positions, in favour of his Jewish subjects, the King of Morocco undertook courageous actions. He took brave initiatives that the recent disclosures of French and British archives illustrate eloquently.

Let me quote from a confidential report drawn in 1985 from the French MFA archives:
“Dissidence, 24 May 1941 – Telegram AF1 Change of Attitude of the Sultan of Morocco toward the French authorities, by René Touraine.

Credible sources informed us that the relations between the Sultan of Morocco and the French authorities became much tenser the day the Residence put into application the decree on the “measures” against the Jews despite the strict opposition of the Sultan. The Sultan refused to make differences amongst his loyal people and he was offended to see that his authority was overtaken by the French authorities. The Sultan waited for his crowning anniversary and publicly announced that he forbade the measures against the Jews. On this occasion, the Sultan generally offered a banquet attended by the French representatives and eminent Moroccan personalities. For the first time, the Sultan invited to the banquet the representatives of the Jewish community who sat next to the French officials. He declared to the French officials, who were surprised by the presence of Jews at this meeting: “I absolutely do not agree with the new anti-Semitic laws and I refuse to associate myself with a measure I disagree with; I reiterate as I did in the past that the Jews are under my protection and I reject any distinction that should be made amongst my people”. End of quote.

This sensational statement has been widely circulated among the French and Moroccan population”.
Obviously, in order to protect the subjects of Jewish confession, the Sultan took considerable risks in challenging the authority of the French Protectorate, which ended up discharging and exiling the king and His family in 1953.
Since then we understand why the Moroccan Jews venerate Mohammed V as the righteous among nations who saved them from the Shoa.

Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen,

In assuming his spiritual role as “Commander of the faithful”, the King of Morocco, as descendant of the Prophet, is bound to protect Jews as much as he does Muslims.

The Sultan guarantees the security and the safety of the three components of the Kingdom: Arab, Berber and Jew, who for centuries lived in Morocco in harmony and brotherhood.

Today, “His Majesty the King Mohammed VI reiterated ‘His religious, historical and constitutional responsibility in the preservation of the persons, the rights and the sacred values of His subjects of Jewish confession”.

Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen,

We cannot address the issue of Holocaust in North Africa without referring to ‘forced labor camps’; these real ‘concentration camps’ created by Vichy to receive Gaullist, socialist, and communist opponents, Germans anti-Nazis, Spanish Republicans, Jewish refugees of Central Europe, Gypsies and even Muslim resistants.

These camps were under the total control of the French Army.

The prisoners who were at the mercy of their European Guardians experienced horrible conditions of detention. The 2000 Jews detainees representing 30% of the overall number of prisoners kept in over 30 camps. The camp of Berguent received exclusively 400 Jewish prisoners.

According to testimonies made by former prisoners in these camps, collected by British Foreign Office.

‘The only signs of humanity came from Muslim guards who took risks to relieve our sufferings’.

I draw your attention to the fact that as long as Moroccan Jews were enjoying the protection of the Sultan, no one was in custody in any of these camps.

This dramatic episode of the war was forgotten rather than hidden.
The existence of Camps in North Africa was revisited in 2007, in Robert Satloff’s book entitled: ‘Among the Righteous’.

Since the publication of this book, which tackles the Holocaust in the Arab countries, the Moroccan media published long surveys and articles on this ‘Forgotten story’, thus demonstrating that in an Arab and Muslim country, such as Morocco, one could speak about the Holocaust without taboos or any temptations of delayed .

This attitude of the Moroccan populations is in perfect symbiosis with the message of support addressed by King Mohammed VI to the ‘Aladin Project on the Holocaust’.

In this message read by the Moroccan Minister of Religious Affairs in UNESCO in March 2009, the Monarch stated:

‘My reading and that of my people are not one of amnesia. Our reading is the one of a memorial wound which we recorded in one of the most painful chapters in the Pantheon of the World history’.

The King invited also the participants: ‘to think differently about one of the most tragic and the most terrible stigmas of the Contemporary History, while nobody can pretend to make a total reading of the Holocaust, that is irrefragable and without concession nor dishonest compromise’.
In this perspective, Morocco cooperated with several NGO’s, to undertake exhaustive studies on the Holocaust in Morocco.

Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen,

One has to draw one lesson it is the importance of a Head of State in setting the tone for recognition, respect and treatment of minority faiths within its territory.

We can only hope that other Heads of State, seeking the enduring affections of their people, will come to realize that the way forward lies not in fanning the expedient fires of the moment, but in setting, as the King of Morocco does, a tone for tolerance and peaceful coexistence that will endure forever.

In conclusion, I would like to stress that although life for the Jews in Morocco was not always one of “wine and roses”, it was better than what other Jews experienced in most parts of the world, particularly in Europe.
Thank you for your attention.

DEMONIZING THE BIELSKI HEROES

OP-ED in The Jewish Press.
DEMONIZING THE BIELSKI HEROES.

Posted Jan 14 2009 on http://www.jewishpress.com/pageroute.do/…

And yet the slurs continue.

On December 31, Paramount Vantage released “Defiance,” which tells the
story of Tuvia, Asael, and Zus Bielski, three Jewish brothers from a
tiny village in Nazi-occupied Belarus. They formed a guerrilla unit in
the dense woods, created a makeshift village from ghetto escapees and,
in the end, saved some 1,200 Jews from Hitler. The Bielski brothers
have long deserved to be mentioned with Oskar Schindler and the
fighters of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising.

The film, which is based on a book of the same title by Nechama Tec,
has garnered a shower of positive attention. It stars Daniel Craig,
the current James Bond, as the visionary Tuvia, who ended his life as
a Brooklyn truck driver. Liev Schreiber and Jamie Bell (of “Billy
Elliot” fame) play Zus and Asael respectively.

The project has also drawn a more negative response.

Although smears against the brothers have long enjoyed currency among Polish
anti-Semites – who can’t seem to decide whether the Bielskis were
simpering cowards or heartless savages – they had not reached the
respectable press until word of the film’s release began to spread.

In June, Gazeta Wyborcza, an important Polish daily edited by
Solidarity hero Adam Michnik, gave prominent airing to the charge that
“Bielski partisans were involved in the massacre of 128 [Polish]
civilians by a Soviet partisan unit in the village of Naliboki in May
1943,” according to an English language translation of the article on
its website.

As a source, the paper cited an investigation being conducted by the
Lodz branch of the Instytut Pami?ci Narodowej or Institute of National
Remembrance (IPN), a Polish government-affiliated body charged with
prosecuting crimes against the Polish nation.

Since the Gazeta Wyborcza article appeared, other periodicals have
followed suit. A Polish “historian” named Jerzy Robert Nowak told
Variety, the daily newspaper of the entertainment industry in
Hollywood, “We Poles are furious. It is a scandal that anyone could
think of making a film casting the murderers who massacred Polish
villagers as heroes.”

On December 31 The Times of London published a story, “Poland Split
Over Whether Daniel Craig is Film Hero or Villain,” which repeated the
IPN accusation and said that some “Poles fear that in telling
Bielski’s story Hollywood has airbrushed out some unpleasant
episodes.” (The piece concluded by pointing out that “several members
of the Bielski family served in the Israeli armed forces,” which the
writer seemed to regard as a damning fact.)

The Daily Mail (of London) followed up a few days later with a story
on Tuvia Bielski headlined, appallingly, “Jewish Savior or Butcher of
Innocents?” It said that “critics” accuse him of “terrorizing ethnic Poles.”

None of the articles noted that the IPN’s accusation is utterly
lacking in solid evidence. It is, in fact, little more than an
exercise in character assassination.

The IPN, which has been investigating the Naliboki incident since
2001, has said that Soviet partisan detachments – which began a covert
war against the Nazi occupiers soon after the invasion of the Soviet
Union on June 22, 1941 – murdered a group of 128 Polish individuals,
mostly men but also three women, an unspecified number of teenage boys
and a ten-year-old child, on May 8, 1943.

In the roughly 300-word description of the investigation e-mailed to
me in 2007, the word Bielski is only mentioned once, in the final
line: “Jewish partisans from Tweje Bielski’s detachment also
participated in the attack on Naliboki.”

Then in June 2008 the IPN issued another statement, one that
backtracked considerably from its previous statement. Noting that some
eyewitnesses claimed Bielski partisans were “among those who
attacked,” it added that the “eyewitnesses don’t say on what factual
basis this statement is based.”

Their statements were “not supported by any other proof, for instance
by archival documents.” (The Soviet documents on the Naliboki attack
do not mention the Bielskis.) The IPN also said that “some historians”
allege the Bielski detachment was involved “but the authors don’t give
sources of this information in their works.”

“So the fact of the participation of the partisans from the Bielski
detachment in the attack on Naliboki is only one of the versions
accepted in the course of the investigation,” the IPN said.

Yet even the Polish journalist who co-authored the original Gazeta
Wyborcza story, Piotr G?uchowski, has come to believe the charge is
shockingly flimsy. In a December 28, 2008 e-mail message to me, he
said he tracked down a Polish war survivor, Wac?aw Nowicki, who wrote
a memoir in 1993 suggesting the Bielski unit was involved in the
attack.

The book has been a primary source for Polish anti-Semites wishing to
denigrate the brothers’ achievements. “After a two-hour interrogation
he said to us that he is not sure that the Bielskis were in Naliboki
on May 8, 1943,” he wrote.

Nowicki claimed he was relying on testimony from “Lova from
Novogrudek,” whose words were confirmed for him by “Vanya from
Lubocz,” wrote G?uchowski in a subsequent article for Gazeta Wyborcza.

Here’s the simple truth: The Jewish unit was not “stationed in the
Naliboki dense forest” nor “active in the area” in May 1943 at the
time of the Naliboki attack, as the IPN has alleged.

The Bielski brothers, strapping sons of a miller, hailed from
Stankevich, a speck on the map in a borderland region that has been
part of Lithuania, Poland, and Russia at various points in its
history. After the Nazis and their collaborators began conducting mass
slaughters of the Jewish population, they slowly built a ragtag
community of desperate Jews in the woods where they had tromped as
boys. On the day in May 1943 when the Naliboki attack occurred, the
brothers’ group was located in a forest called Stara-Huta near
Stankevich. It is more than 50 kilometers to the west of Naliboki
village.

It is true that since February 1943 the brothers’ unit (then a few
hundred strong) had been formally integrated into the Soviet partisan
structure, pledging allegiance to a cause that provided cover for its
rescue and resistance efforts. At the time of the Naliboki attack, it
was officially known as the second company of the October Detachment
of the Lenin Brigade in the Lida District. (The official name would
change a handful of times over the course of the war.) All of the
group’s movements were recorded in Soviet documents that now reside in
the archives of the Belarussian branch of the Soviet partisan movement
in Minsk and in Yad Vashem in Jerusalem.

According to the IPN, the attack on Naliboki village was not
perpetrated by detachments from the Lenin Brigade in the Lida
District. Instead, the IPN said it was carried out by three
detachments from the Stalin Brigade and “partisans from” the Chkalov
Brigade. Both brigades, based in the Naliboki forest, were members of
the Ivenets District.

The IPN didn’t respond when I asked if wandering members of the Jewish
unit participated in the attack, acting under the orders of someone
other than the Bielski brothers and operating outside of their
designated brigade structure. It probably doesn’t need to be stated
that the Soviets were very serious about adhering to lines of
authority. Soviet partisans were executed for violating even the most
minor of regulations.

The Bielski partisans eventually did reach the Naliboki forest, which
may explain why they have become mixed up in this allegation. They
first arrived in August 1943, after it became too dangerous to remain
in the area near Stankevich, only to be driven out by German attack.
Then in September and October 1943 they returned with nearly a
thousand men, women, and children and created a legendary shtetl, an
extraordinary place with tailors, shoemakers, blacksmiths, and
gunsmiths.

It had a large kitchen, a central square for gatherings, a mill
powered by a horse, a main street, a theater troupe, and a tannery
that doubled as a synagogue. It was well known to the gentile peasants
in surrounding communities like Naliboki village on the forest’s
eastern edge. They called it Jerusalem.

It is an outrage that wartime achievements of this magnitude can be so
casually denigrated. The Bielski brothers were far from perfect. But
what they accomplished in the woods of Belarus deserves the highest of
acclaim.
———————————

Peter Duffy is the author of “The Bielski Brothers”
(HarperCollins, 2003).  He writes for The New York Times, the Wall
Street Journal, and other publications.

.

The Best at the UN ends up reflecting also on the worst: The UN Headquarters have many people of value – of compassion and of hope for a better future – this besides of some in the bureaucracy that might be innocents with no vision, others might be plants from Member States that want no part of human rights, dignity, or even of plain truth – so be it.

The good people under the leadership of Eric Falt and Kimberly Mann came up with a very interesting program that we posted earlier so people from outside the UN could know how to find their way in order to participate at these events. The list is in our following link:
 http://www.sustainabilitank.info/2010/01…

Later we found out that the information about these events was sent to parties outside the UN, was made available to the Press accredited to the UN, but as it turned out – from the 6 events listed by UN Outreach – only two events were printed in the Daily Journal of the UN. That journal is not made available now to NGOs – only to the diplomats – but then NGOs get their information from reading the Journal on the internet – so you can say that the UN Department of Information – the source of the Journal – even though it can contend that it made the information available to the PRESS – can in no way justify why it did not make available the information to the in-house members of the UN – except may-be say that some of those were not interested in the Holocaust as more pressing issues are at hand. But what about the educational aspects that were so important to the good people of the UN Outreach Division?

The day after the main event of Wednesday, a head of an NGO Committee that is daily at the UN, asked me – how did you know about the concert? I did not see it listed anywhere. And trust me – that was neither a question of space nor of security. Then what?

The UN In-House events numbered six, and participation was being granted by various sources – some of them outside the UN.

Let us start with the two events that appeared continuously in the Journal announcements:

These were the Wednesday January 27, 2010 event organized by the Jewish B’nai Brith International NGO in cooperation with the UN Permanent Mission of the Czech Republic. It dealt with the “Inter religious responses to the Holocaust – 65 years after liberation.” Tickets to this event were sent out by the B’nai Brith organization. There was no problem obtaining them after the appropriate phone call.

The other event was on Thursday January 28, 2010 – titled “The Moroccan Jews and Their legacy of survival.” The Journal does not mention that it was organized by the Moroccan Government but directed those interested to contact the DPI/NGO section as it was booked as a regular, weekly, DPI briefing to the NGOs. When approached – the appropriate UN officials said – send us a letter on NGO letterhead. So – this event was being treated as a regular NGO event – not as the important message that the Moroccan Government intended to put forward before members of the UN, and others who actually had no knowledge that during the terrible days of the Holocaust – there was indeed one Arab King – H.M. King Muhammad V of Morocco – who told the Nazis – the Jews of Morocco are my subjects and I do not discriminate between Jews and other Moroccans. Now that was a powerful message that deserved to be heard at the UN – and if not – the organization does not deserve the funds the world sends its way. I had no doubt that I had to take a stand on this issue – and I did.

———

The other four events of the week, none of them listed in the Journal, included two quentesential exhibits organized by Non-Governmental factors outside the UN.

On Monday, January 25, 2010,  there was a show of hope – it was actually called “Generations: Survival and Legacy of Hope,” for which entrance was obtained from the Shoa Foundation Institute in Los Angeles. This organization, funded initially by Mr. Steven Spielberg from Schindler’s list funds, has documented on video the stories of survivors and their descendants. Two families were present at the showing of material. Despite the terrible material it is the hope that shows through in the success of having picked up their lives again – this is what gives a reason for having hope in institutions that were established under the “Never Again” logo. This event – paired up with the following day opening – together form the raison d’etre for the UN institution – but you would not know this from the way the UN kept these two events of its Journal.

On Tuesday. January 26, 2010, the Exhibit – “Architecture of Murder: Auschwitz-Birkenau,” for which entrance was obtained from the Yad Vashem – Holocaust Martyrs’ and Heroes’ Remembrance Authority. At this event participated also the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, The Israeli Minister for Public Diplomacy and Diaspora Yuli-Yoel Edelstein, and US Ambassador Rick Barton.

——–

The other two events that were not listed in the Journal are:

- The main Holocaust Memorial Ceremony and Concert in the General Assembly Hall for which one needed special tickets – so it was clearly a more controlled participation, and that was the event that the lady I mentioned earlier asked me about as she would have wanted to come had she known about it.

- The Thursday January 28, 2010 screening of the film “Defiance” that was co-sponsored by the Permanent Mission of the US and had present the lady that wrote the book, Nehama Tec, and her son who made the movie. The great thing about this movie is that it depicts the true story of the Bielski brothers – a story of Jewish fighters in the forests of Belarus – as the UN release says correctly – it depicts  “the struggle of a group of brave Jews who fought against overwhelming odds thus providing a sharp contrast to the countless WWII movies that portray Jews just as victims.” The two Bielski Brigades – the one under one brother that fought with the Russian partisans, and the other – under another brother that guarded the Jewish families in the forest. When the two groups fought together – they turned around the Nazi effort to clear the forest. 1200 people survived thanks to the Bielskis’ leadership. Two of the three Bielskis survived and eventually owned a small trucking business in the US.

On November 1, 2005, SIXTY YEARS SINCE THE END OF WORLD WAR II, THE LIBERATION OF THE AUSCHWITZ EXTERMINATION CAMP BY THE SOVIET ARMY, AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE UN, finally, the UN that in major part came about because of the fact that the world realized that walking in the ashes caused by anti-Semitism and other isms, is not the will of the human race; the UN was created to learn from that experience – but did it? It took 60 years, the creation of the State of Israel, the travails of Zionism is Racism abomination, and one strong Ambassador of humanity to the organization – US Professor/ Senator/Ambassador Moynihan, to start to beat the anti-Semitic UN steel into compliance.

—————

UN Designates International Holocaust day
November 1, 2005, release:

The UN General Assembly has decided by acclaim to designate January 27 as international Holocaust Day.

This is the first time ever that a resolution introduced by Israel has been adopted by the UN General Assembly. Some not inconsiderable distance has been traveled from the infamous “Zionism is Racism” resolution to this resolution. At least, the world can be united in condemning genocide, even if “Zionists” propose the initiative. The vision of Austria and Germany co-sponsoring and approving of such a resolution is certainly heartening to the surviving victims of Nazi persecution, to the Jews, gypsies and others whose families died in the Holocaust and to the state of Israel.

Unfortunately, it is not at all certain how some countries will mark this day. Some of the rhetoric of the UN discussion is ominous: Several Muslim and Arab governments expressed “reservations.” Some countries believe that the Holocaust, in which a state turned against noncombatant civilians, was the same as bombing the cities of enemy countries at war. In many of the countries that approved of this resolution and even among those whose representatives spoke kind words about humanitarianism, Mein Kampf and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion are best sellers. Some of those countries have been accessories after the fact to genocide, or committed it themselves. In those countries, every day is Holocaust day. From the remarks of the Ukrainian representative, you would not know that the Jews of the Ukraine were rounded up by Ukrainian SS, or that the gas chambers at Auschwitz were run by a Ukrainian nicknamed “Ivan the terrible.”

What public activities will mark Holocaust day in Iran, where President Ahmedinejad has called for a world without Zionism and America? In Syria, a book about the Blood Libel (the accusation that Jews kill Christian children in order to use their blood for baking Matzot) was written by the former minister of Defense. Syria also made notable contributions to the history of racial persecution in its treatment of the Kurds. Will Syria mark this day in sympathy with the victims, or will they celebrate it by showing, perhaps, a screening of Lenni Riefenstahl’s Triumph of the Will? Will this day become an occasion for so-called “anti-Zionists” to trot out Holocaust denial and accusations that Israel is committing a Holocaust against the Palestinians, or that the Zionists collaborated with the Nazis?

Will the world again stand aside at the next genocide, as it did in Rwanda, and as it did for a very long time in Darfur, and as it continues to do in Tibet? In the discussion, each state was quick to accuse others of genocide, but unwilling to accept responsibility for crimes of their own states and governments. The Venezuelans spoke about Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Chinese alluded to Japanese crimes. The Ukrainians alluded to Soviet crimes. The discussion would have more meaning if the Americans had spoken about Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Chinese had spoken about their activities in Tibet, the Japanese had spoken the rape of Mongolia and the Turks had spoken of the Armenian genocide.

The implementation of the resolution will be of more consequence than the paper or the words themselves,  and the reality of the actions of states will be more important than either.

The proliferation of vile Web sites and articles about the “Holocaust Myth,” claiming the Holocaust never happened and is yet another Jewish plot, points up the urgent need for this day of remembrance.

Alert readers of what was said that say will note some bitter ironies in the remarks of representatives of some states, whose people and governments were active collaborators or passive accessories in the crime of the Holocaust.

The date – January 27 – was picked as that was the date the Auschwitz-Birkenau extermination machine was closed by the Soviet army. http://www.zionism-israel.com/news/holocaust_day.htm

The first commemoration was held at the UN in 2006 and this year we have thus the fifth such event – or actually a series of events, that traditionally start on the Saturday before the actual date with a ceremony at the Park East Synagogue located on Manhattan’s East Side – Midtown.

The list of this year’s events at the UN, as provided to parties outside the UN – and published on our website is:
 http://www.sustainabilitank.info/2010/01…

But besides the UN itself, the fact that the UN has thrown the light upon the Holocaust atrocities, and the world’s need to remember these atrocities by having an International day of Remembrance, it is now that even in unexpected places in the civilized world, we find events being organized for the purpose of remembering and of learning from that experience. We thought thus to mention here one such event in a place we hardly expected to find it – the main Carnival city of the North-East of Brazil – Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil.
 http://www.sustainabilitank.info/2010/01…

We will be reporting on this year’s week-long series in several postings that will involve also other related events – for now we will put up the clear Jewish angle to the comemoration – as it reflected in the Park East Sybagogue events and in the political official presentation at the UN main event of January 27, 2010

REMARKS AT PARK EAST SYNAGOGUE IN MEMORY OF THE VICTIMS OF THE HOLOCAUST

by H.E. Srgjan Kerim President of the 62nd session of the United Nations General Assembly.

Park East Synagogue
New York, 26 January 2008

Rabbi Schneier,
Excellencies,
Members of Park East Synagogue,
Dear Friends,

I am very grateful to Rabbi Schneier for inviting me to the Park East
Synagogue – a historic architectural treasure in the heart of
Manhattan.

I am sure that you are all very proud of Rabbi Schneier for his
commitment and spiritual leadership that has brought this synagogue
international recognition.

It was only five years ago that I had my first opportunity to attend
and participate in a Jewish ceremony, here at the Park East Synagogue.
The experience inspired me to write a poem entitled ‘Temple’. I would
like to share a short extract with you today. I hope you will
appreciate it;

Nowhere in the world is it possible
To find such a grandiose temple
That would keep for ages
The layers of human sin
And all our shame.

I’ve always believed
There’s nothing greater in a temple
Than the final sounds melting
In the concluding Amin
Until I heard the word
Of a great friend of mine
Who walked in the steps of Moses
And is called a Rabbin.

Park East Beit Knesset,

I wish there would not have been such an occasion for me to address
you today. However, as we all know the Holocaust happened. It is
definitely one of the darkest pages in the history of mankind.

Unfortunately, we are still facing some lonely, desperate attempts to
blur the horrifying dimensions of the Holocaust.

We gather here today to remember and pay homage to those who lost
their lives in the Holocaust; the atrocities that they were subjected
to can never be forgotten.
The perpetrators of the Holocaust fed man’s ego with delusions of
supremacy and tried to erase the bonds that all human beings share.

The liberation of the Nazi concentration camps over 60 years ago
revealed one of the most evil crimes against humanity. The
consequences still reverberate in the present.

Elie Wiesel – Nobel Laureate, a Holocaust survivor and champion of
moral responsibility – has best put this into perspective:

“Let us remember, let us remember the heroes of Warsaw, the martyrs of
Treblinka, the children of Auschwitz. They fought alone, they suffered
alone, they lived alone, but they did not die alone, for something in
all of us died with them.”

We must also remember to pay tribute to those who survived and bravely
carried on with their lives – and in doing so inspired others. I would
like to salute the strength and perseverance of all Holocaust
survivors and their families.

I know that some of you are with us today.

Not only have you survived, but you have rebuilt communities all over
the world, become stronger, and enabled future generations to thrive.
You just have to look around at all the people gathered here today to
recognize this fact.

The recognition of this day of Holocaust remembrance by the
international community heralded a change of tide at the United
Nations; and, a step forward in the collective memory and conscience
of our world.

Dear Friends,
Remembrance of the Holocaust is more than the recognition of a tragic
past – or the darker side of human nature.

Remembering is an ethical act; it has ethical value in itself.

Remembrance is also a means through which we can understand ourselves:
an engine for change that should enable us to create and sustain a
better, more just future.

I am reminded of my father and his family. During the Second World War
he bravely helped to save and protect the family of Isac Sion – his
school friend – amidst the terror of occupation.

At the age of twenty my father and Isac subsequently joined the
National Liberation Movement of Macedonia to fight for freedom,
against the Nazi dictatorship, alongside the Allies.

Isac Sion subsequently went on to become Vice-governor of the Central
Bank of the Former Yugoslavia and following this was appointed as
Yugoslavia’s trade representative to the United Kingdom.

My father and many others like him served the Jewish people in their
hour of need. Their actions epitomize the practical meaning of
something profound that the famous Irish politician and philosopher
Edmund Burke once said, and I quote;

“All that is needed for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”

When I had my first opportunity, in some small way, to redress the
atrocities committed during the Holocaust – as foreign Minister of
Macedonia – in 2000, I appointed Elie Wiesel as our first Special
Envoy and Goodwill Ambassador. He then became the United Nations
Messenger of Peace for Human Rights and the Holocaust.

And, in honour of the Jewish community, my country will soon complete
the construction of a Holocaust Memorial Centre. This is a symbolic
gesture to bring back the memory of the victims from Treblinka to
Skopje.

Looking back at the turbulent history of the Balkan region there are
some bitter lessons that we must learn: war begins when the perception
of the pain of others ends. We can also turn this around to say that
when the perception of the pain of others begins there is no room for
war.

We must remember that every religion and culture must be tolerant of
the legitimate right for others to assert their difference in freedom.

Furthermore, intolerance of other religions or cultures is often a
sign of the degree of intolerance within a particular religion or
culture.

Dear Friends and members of Park East Beit Knesset,

The United Nations was founded on the ashes of the Holocaust, when the
world was in need of hope for a better future.
It was created to embody that hope as a promise to humanity. However,
most disturbingly, since the Holocaust there have been genocides and
serious crimes against humanity in Cambodia, Rwanda, and Yugoslavia.

That these atrocities occurred is not necessarily the failure of the
United Nations as an organization; but rather, represents the lack of
collective will of its Member States to take the decision to act or
intervene.

Even while we gather here, there are places – like Darfur – where
people suffer from the very crimes, which, time and time again, we
have vowed would never again happen.

For the dignity of all humanity, we must strengthen our ability – our
collective resolve – to prevent such atrocities, whenever and wherever
they might occur.

Indeed, terrorism, violence, rape, murder, poverty and discrimination
on the grounds of race or religion continue to be part of the everyday
lives of many people. This fact alone should jar us with indignation.

Despite the tragic failures of the international community to prevent
crimes against humanity since the founding of the United Nations,
there is hope – failure is not an option.

In 2005, the General Assembly passed a resolution that included the
‘Responsibility to Protect’. In doing so, all nations signaled their
commitment to take action – to hold themselves accountable – to
recognize that with sovereign rights come responsibilities to their
peoples.

In fact all of us here today can add our voice, with the United
Nations, to ensure that this new paradigm within international
relations comes to life.

Rabbi Schneier offers us an example of what we can do. He has been a
great advocate for human rights, and the promotion of religious and
ethnic tolerance. He has worked tirelessly to strengthen ties with
communities from different faiths and backgrounds through his good
works and publications.

In 2003 we jointly organized the first ever South East European
regional conference on ‘Dialogue among Civilizations’, at Lake Ohrid
in Macedonia.

In this spirit, and as we have just celebrated the life of the great
Martin Luther King Jr., I think it is fitting that I should recount
something he once said. It captures the same call to action that needs
to be instilled in the world today if we are to prevent a repeat of
the Holocaust;

“injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere….. Whatever
affects one directly, affects all directly.”

Dear Friends,

On the occasion of the International Day of Commemoration in memory of
the victims of the Holocaust, as well as of the 60th Anniversary of
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, let us embrace our
diversity, and honor our interdependence, as the only path to peace
and justice.

Together, it is our common challenge to eliminate all distorted
notions that deepen barriers and widen divides: for they all originate
in the discriminatory practices of the mind.

We can achieve this by promoting intercultural dialogue and
cooperation for peace as a means to replace misunderstanding with
mutual respect and acceptance.

But we must also move from words to action, from principled intentions
to deeds that promote human security, human rights, the responsibility
to protect and sustainable development. For herein lies the hope of a
new culture of international relations with the United Nations as its
centerpiece.

Members of Park East Beit Knesset,
And, all those gathered here today,

Let me wish all of you and the wider community peace, health and prosperity.

Let all our thoughts honour the victims of the Holocaust, and let us
spare no effort to ensure that we never again witness such evil. We
may not be able to change the past, but we must have the courage and
vision to change the future.

In order to do so, it is not enough to reiterate solemn gestures; we
must do everything possible to transform our attitudes to have full
regard for the dignity of all individuals, communities and nations.

Thank you. Shalom.

————–

But that was the last President of the UN General Assembly to be welcome

to speak before a Jewish Audience – in those 5 years. Before him were: Mr. Jan Eliasson of Sweden #60,

and Sheikha Haya Rashed Al Khalifa of  Bahrain #61.

Now it is UNGA’s 64th session: On 10 June 2009, Ali Abdussalam Treki

of Libya was elected by acclamation at a plenary meeting of the

192-member body of the United Nations General Assembly.

Treki assumed office as president of the 64th session on 15 September 2009,
succeeding General Assembly president, Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann of
Nicaragua who was 63rd President of the UNGA. Both these gentlemen
have made anti-Israeli statements and were also mentioned in this
context as plain anti-Semites, thus making it impossible to listen to
their linguistic expressions when it comes to the commemoration of the
liberation of Auschwitz. Thus, these last two years, the presentations
at the UN, it was Vice Presidents of the UNGA that spoke in their
place, and the UN General Assembly as such was not represented at the
Saturday pre-commemoration service at the Park East Synagogue.

But in 2009, The Park East Congregation had the honor to host the UN
Secretary General.

—————-
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon
24 January 2009

Remarks at Holocaust Remembrance Day Ceremony at the Park East Synagogue:

Thank you very much, Rabbi [Arthur] Schneier, for that kind introduction.

I especially appreciate you for calling me a mensch. With apologies to
those of you who do not speak Yiddish, I have to say: thank goodness
he didn’t call me meshugenah.

To all, I wish you Shabat Shalom.

Excellencies, distinguished Ambassadors to the United Nations,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Today we mark the International Day of Commemoration honoring victims
of the Holocaust. This is a most important and solemn occasion.

As you know, my friend, the late Tom Lantos, died shortly after last
year’s observance. Some of you may have met him when he came to this
Synagogue. He was dear to me, as he was to you. He made an
extraordinary journey from a Nazi labor camp to the halls of Congress.
He became a leading champion of truth and justice. Like those of you
who also lived through the Holocaust, he was never defeated by the
unspeakable horrors that he survived.

I can only imagine what he endured. Yet I, too, have witnessed man’s
inhumanity to man. I have seen it as Secretary-General, traveling in
places torn by war. And I saw it as a six-year old boy fleeing to the
mountains to escape fighting in my own country.

The UN helped South Korea to recover. Like Tom Lantos, like many of
you, I came to believe in the transformative power of the United
Nations.

Today, the UN is on the cusp of a great transition. Never have global
challenges been so large. Climate change, terrorism, the global
financial crisis – these troubles transcend borders. They affect all
countries, rich and poor. They will be overcome only when all
countries come together in response. That’s why we have a United
Nations.

Yes, the UN has its imperfections. It’s not perfect. Because of this,
from day one since I took office, I have pushed to change it. I have
insisted on a new culture of transparency and accountability. I have
worked to make the UN more efficient, effective, modern. In short, we
have tried to make it a better instrument to serve mankind.

We are here to mark the Holocaust. Like you, the United Nations is
determined to tell its timeless lessons.

Precisely two years ago, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution
condemning, without reservation, any denial of the Holocaust. I quote:
“Ignoring the historical fact of those terrible events increases the
risk they will be repeated.”

With you, I stand in saying: never again. Never. When I paid tribute
to Holocaust victims at Yad Vashem, I wrote in the book there, “Never
again. Never.”

Memory speaks. That is why it must be preserved and passed to future
generations.

Our Holocaust Outreach Program sponsors exhibits, workshops and panel
discussions. The aim: to confront deniers, or those who would minimize
the importance of the Holocaust.

When President Ahmadinejad of Iran declared that Israel should
“disappear,” or be “wiped off the map,” I strongly condemned his
remarks – twice.

We at the United Nations stand for human rights.

We stand for democracy and the rule of law. By working for economic
and social development, we build the foundations for peace.

We have a new instrument in our hands. It is called the Responsibility
to Protect – the idea that every nation has a legal obligation to
protect its people from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and
crimes against humanity. Where nations fall short, the international
community has the right to take collective action.

Yes, it is difficult in practice. But I assure you. This is a major
advance in safeguarding mankind from crimes against humanity.

My friends,

Today is not simply a time for remembering. The Holocaust has lessons
for us, here and now. Let us heed them.

My job can sometimes be terribly painful. I see unbelievable hardship,
the worst human suffering. You are familiar with the grim catalogue of
names and places: the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Darfur,
Somalia and, of course, the Middle East.

I am just back from the region. I went to push for a cease-fire. More,
I went in search of a lasting peace.

The recurring violence between Palestinians and Israelis is a mark of
collective political failure – by both sides and by the international
community.

I saw first-hand what most people saw on television. I met a child and
his parents in Sderot, southern Israel, traumatized by falling
rockets. Never for one moment have I forgotten that a million people
in southern Israel live in a daily state of terror and fear.

In Gaza, I saw the most appalling devastation. I saw the UN compound,
still burning.

I said to all I met, on both sides: This must stop.

I left the region more determined than ever to work toward a world
where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace and
security. War can never be an answer. We need to strengthen the forces
of peaceful coexistence and dialogue.

No one sees this more clearly than your own Rabbi Schneier. He has
devoted his life to overcoming hatred and intolerance.

You all know him as the founder and president of the Appeal for
Conscience Foundation. What you may not know, and what I am very
grateful to him for, is his pioneering work for the UN’s Alliance of
Civilizations.

He knows first-hand that no one man or nation has all the answers. He
knows the sacred value of tolerance. He has survived the greatest
trials that life can hurl at a man or a woman and emerged not only
with his humanity and spirit intact but stronger. He survived the
Holocaust. Like others among you, he never lost sight of man’s
essential humanity, our capacity for good, our inherent dignity.

So, let us be frank. We must recognize the limits of power and
goodwill. We here know that we can never entirely rid the world of its
tyrants and its intolerance. We cannot turn all extremists to the path
of reason and light. We can only stand against them and raise our
voices in the name of our common humanity.

Tom Lantos was fond of saying that even the littlest actions, the
smallest of our daily deeds, can do much to leave this earth better,
less evil, less selfish, less monstrous than we found it. And he
stressed that doing these things, even in a modest way, gives you the
energy to keep moving forward. On this day of days, that seems to me
to be good advice.

As we remember the victims of the Holocaust, let us reaffirm our faith
in the dignity of humankind and our extraordinary resilience – our
moral strength – even amid history’s darkest chapters.

Thank you very much.

—————–

On January 23, 2010, before a full house at Park East Synagogue, the
main speaker for Saturday Pre-Commemoration of the International
Holocaust Remembrance Day was  Ambassador Susan Rice of the USA, and
at the actual ceremony at the UN General Assembly Hall was German
Ambassador to the UN H.E. Peter Wittig.

The remarks were:
 http://usun.state.gov/briefing/statement…

 http://www.newyorkun.diplo.de/Vertretung…

At the Park East Service this year, a further Honored Guest was Rabbi Ricardo Di Segni, the Chief Rabbi of Rome, who has been visited at his Synagogue by the Pope, also as part of this year’s Holocaust Remembrance.

Also present were Ambassador Thomas Mayr-Harting of Austria, Ambassador Peter Wittig of Germany, Ambassador Gerard Araud of France, Ambassador Anastassis Mitsialis of Greece, Ambassador Marta Horvathne Fekzi of Hungary, H.E. Most Reverend Celestino Migliore the Permanent Representative of the Vatican, Ambassador Yukio Takasu of Japan, Ambassador Cesare Maria Ragaglini of Italy, Ambassador Mohamed Loulichki of Morocco, Ambassador Jim McLay of New Zealand, Ambassador Andrzey Towpik of Poland, Ambassador Juan Antonio Yanez-Barnuevo of Spain, Ambassador Rayko S. Raytchev of Bulgaria, Ambassador Kim Won-soo, from the UN Secretary General’s Office, and about further twenty top Diplomatic Representatives. But I must remark that from all the Islamic and African Countries only Morocco was present – and from the newly emerging States only Brazil and China were present.