Nikki Haley's for Human Rights!
How Nikki Haley’s Background and Beliefs Helped Foster Her Zionist Spirit
In the midst of the continuous storm of anti-Semitism and anti-Israel resolutions that have been produced by the United Nations over the last few decades, there is a light that is shining more brightly now than ever before. Nimrata “Nikki” Haley, the 29th US Ambassador to the UN, is the strong voice advocating for Israel and demanding the bias and hatred towards Israel from other countries must stop immediately. Born to Sikh Indian parents in South Carolina, Haley credits them with first instilling in her a sense of pride and gratitude about living in America. “Well, I am the daughter of Indian parents who reminded my brothers, my sister and me every day how blessed we were to live in this country,” said Haley in an interview at the 2017 AIPAC Convention.
After graduating Clemson University with a BA in Accounting, Haley went to work for her mother’s clothing company, Exotica International. After being involved in numerous executive boards in her community and town, Haley was elected to the South Carolina House of Representatives in January of 2005. She continued this role until January 2011, where she was elected the first female governor of South Carolina. In November of 2016, she was appointed by president-elect Donald Trump to be the 29th United States Ambassador to the UN; she was confirmed in January 2017.
During her career in politics, Haley’s strong Zionistic and pro-Israel stance have been a major focus of hers. While Haley was governor of South Carolina, she signed into law a bill to stop efforts of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. This legislation was the first of its kind on a statewide level. Haley also stated during the announcement of that bill, that "nowhere has the UN’s failure been more consistent and more outrageous than in its bias against our close ally Israel". As Ambassador, Haley has been extremely outspoken about the UN’s blatant bias against Israel and has been extremely vocal in her personal support and her representing the United States supporting Israel. This is a welcome change for many from the stance of former US Ambassador, Samantha Power, and the US’ decision to abstain from the voting of Resolution 2334.
Samantha Power, who was the 28th US Ambassador under the Obama administration, famously abstained from voting on Resolution 2334 in December 2016, which declared that the Israeli settlement building in the West Bank and East Jerusalem was illegal and violated international law. Power told the 15-member U.N. Security Council, “Israeli settlement activity in territories occupied in 1967 undermines Israel’s security, harms the viability of a negotiated two-state outcome, and erodes prospects for peace and stability in the region." It came as a surprise to many that the US would seemingly go against an ally by refusing to vote against the resolution, especially coming from the woman who said “I will stand up for Israel and work tirelessly to defend it” in her Senate confirmation hearing; the resolution passed with 14 votes for and one abstention, the US. Haley later called the decision to abstain “one of the lowest points in our country….when [Power] abstained, the entire Security Council, and the entire audience, got up and applauded, and Israel was sitting there….watching that. Think about what we just did to a friend. You don’t ever applaud in the Security Council. That never happens. It happened that day.”
Haley has unequivocally and steadfastly supported Israel as the voice of the United States to the UN; she has called the UN out on their bias towards Israel dozens of times, especially when the UN named Israel the country with the most human rights violations in March 2017, beating out Iran, Syria, Libya and North Korea. “You know, basically what it comes down to is I'm not there to play,” said Haley during the 2017 AIPAC Conference. “And what I wanted to make sure of was that the United States started leading again. And leading isn't saying and doing things when it's comfortable. Leading is saying and doing things when it's not comfortable.”
When pressed about how she came to have such a strong stance on Israel and how she became so outspoken about defending Israel, Haley said, “[T]he truth is, I have seen so many similarities between the Israeli culture and the Indian culture. We're very close-knit. We love our families. We have a strong work ethic. We believe in professionalism and philanthropy and giving back. It's very true. So that's all the good things.” India and Israel have shared many similarities in values and members of each country frequently visit the other. Around 40,000 Israelis, many of whom have just finished their required military service visit India annually and around 34,000 Indians visit Israel annually. According to a 2009 international study commissioned by the Israeli Foreign Ministry, the greatest level of sympathy towards Israel from a member of the international community can be found in India, with 58% of Indian respondents showing sympathy towards Israel. In 2015, opinion polls showed 70% of Indians had favorable views of Israel.
Others wonder if perhaps Haley’s conversion to Christianity helped further foster her Zionist feelings. When Haley wed her husband, Michael Haley, who was a Christian, they did both a Sikh and Christian ceremony. Haley said about her choice to convert to Christianity, “We chose Christianity because of the way we wanted to live our life and raise our children — it had nothing to do with me thinking there was anything wrong with the way I was raised, and everything to do with the fact that I am moving forward in my life and had to find a path I felt was right for me.” Many Christians do believe in Israel’s right to exist; these Christians are called “Christian Zionists.” Some Christian Zionists believe that the gathering of the Jews in Israel is a prerequisite for the Second Coming of Jesus. Christian Zionists interpret the prophetic texts as describing inevitable future events, and these events primarily involve Israel, meaning the descendants of Jacob, which are the Jewish people. These prophecies are seen as requiring the presence of Jewish people in the Holy Land; this requirement is sometimes interpreted as being fulfilled by the contemporary state of Israel.
Haley has not made a public comment on whether her Christian views have helped cultivate her support for Israel even more, but whatever Haley’s reasoning, there is no doubt Israel and the American Jews are thankful for Haley’s voice and for tossing her hat into the UN’s ring. “For anyone that says you can't get anything done at the U.N.,” Haley says, “they need to know there's a new sheriff in town.”
We will kill you with rocks
"We don't want to use terror against Israel." or "We will persue you with car rammings and kill you with rocks."? Which statement is true?
The #LetsBeHonest Campaign seeks to expose the duplicitous claims spoken by Arab leaders to the West and exposes their true intentions toward peace.
Download
What Palestinians are Afraid to Tell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrF09CvzyLg
We believe that these voices must be heard!
The international community, and particularly the US and EU, have invested unwisely and irresponsibly in the Palestinian Authority. Much of the money has been stolen in broad daylight by their corrupt leaders. These leaders have absolutely no incentive to ever build a Palestinian state or make peace. The conflict with Israel is very lucrative for them personally, and very little funding is actually monitored or preconditioned on progress or reforms. Instead of building a Palestinian democracy, their leaders have built a radicalized police state which systematically abuses human rights in the West Bank and Gaza. To think that this system is funded by Western democracies is so disheartening.
Turning A Blind Eye: Jeremy Corbyn and Hamas
Jeremy Corbyn
In 2015, Jeremy Corbyn was elected leader of the British Labour Party. This political faction prides itself in representing all sectors of society, specifically minorities and oppressed communities. In line with the party’s ideology, Corbyn has been depicted as a champion of human rights through condemning countries and leaders that violate them and standing up for persecuted peoples. For example, Corbyn criticized British Prime Minister Theresa May on International Human Rights Day for holding talks with delegates from Saudia Arabia and Bahrain, notorious violators of international human rights laws.
But while Mr. Corbyn seems to hold a steadfast position on human rights, his support for certain groups and organizations contradict his purported values. Specifically, their his support for the terrorist organization Hamas has created controversy:
In 2009, Corbyn urged the British government to remove Hamas and its leadership from the British list of condemned terrorist groups. That same year, Corbyn invited representatives from Hamas and Hezbollah to a meeting in the British parliament. Hamas and Hezbollah are both currently classified as terrorist groups by the European Union and the United States of America. During his speech, Corbyn referred to Hamas and Hezbollah as “friends” and “hardworking”.
With the British leaders’ support of the organization, it is important to evaluate Hamas’ poor Human Rights record.
Hamas and Human Rights
The Palestinian Resistance Movement Hamas has been categorized as a terrorist organization by the international community and condemned for their multitude of human rights abuses. The following presents specific examples in which the organization violates international law.
Torture
Torture is labeled as a violation of international law in Article 5 of the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
From December 2016 through March 2017, 38 complaints of torture were reported to the Independent Commission for Human Rights. Reports in Gaza include beatings, suspending detainees to which his shoulders became dislocated, and making prisoners stand in uncomfortable positions for long periods of time.
Prisons
Arbitrary arrest, detention or imprisonment is labeled a violation of international law in Article 9 of the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Hamas has passed legislation that imprisons any Palestinian for 10 years if they are caught interacting with Israeli NGOs. That means any hospital staff or families of patients interacting with an organization like “Save a Child’s heart,” which provides free cardiac treatment, would be arrested by Hamas.
The security forces also arrest Palestinians whom they claim dress improperly. Some men committed the crime of what the authorities called “pop-star” haircuts, while others had pants that were too low or too tight. These perpetrators were arrested, had their heads shaved, and beaten.
Women’s Rights
Article 55 of the Charter of the United Nations outlines “universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion”.
And even though Articles 17 and 18 of the Hamas Charter define the mother the head of household charged with furthering the education of her children and preparing them to fulfill religious commandments, the organization’s treatment of women is anything but egalitarian:
- Hamas has a special police force to ensure that women dress in a conservative Muslim manor.
- A woman can only file for divorce under certain circumstances, such as if the husband can’t afford to pay her dowry. A woman can attempt to separate from her husband under the claim of mistreatment, but the courts decide what constitutes such abuse and generally do not sway in favor of the wife. Overall, divorce stemming from the complains of a woman is more of an exception than a normative right.
- Adultery is punishable by imprisonment under Hamas. While both men and women are subject to consequences for such, women carry out usually double the prison sentence as compared to men who commit adultery.
Freedom of Thought and Expression
Under article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, “everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion”.
While Muslims represent 99% of the population in Gaza, there is a very small minority of Christians, constituting about 1% within the territory. Even though the Hamas Charter claims to allow them to live peacefully under Islamic rule, Christians are constantly harassed and threatened by Hamas. For example, shortly after the terrorist group assumed control of Gaza, Hamas burned down and invaded a church and Catholic school.
A Christian bookstore in Gaza was burned down that same year. The owner of the store was also kidnapped and killed by Hamas.
Under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, all people have the “right to freedom of opinion and expression…without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers”.
The media in Gaza has been under Hamas’ control since 2007, with journalists only allowed to report on topics approved by the government.
Western journalists reporting on the poor living conditions in Gaza are subject to threats and mistreatment by Hamas. Many recounted that Hamas officers have destroyed or confiscated their materials and cameras due to depicting the true situation within the territory.
Children’s Rights
According to the convention of the Rights of Children and the UN Declaration of Human Rights, recruitment and Use of Children is one of the grave violations against children during armed conflict. The UN defines a child as anyone under the age of 18.
Izzedim Kassam, the military wing of Gaza, implemented a program in 2013 that youth from the ages 15 to 17 in preparation for combat. Some of the lessons in this program include handling grenade launcher and urban warfare.
War Crimes
Human shields are considered a war crime, is described by the Rome Statue as: “utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations”.
From June 13th to August 26th 2014, during the Israeli-Hamas conflict, the citizens of Gaza were under constant threat from Hamas. The group often uses their own people as human shields by carrying out terrorist activities in civilian areas.. These infrastructures are then targeted and bombed because they are the origin site of rocket fire. And while Israel warns Palestinians to evacuate beforehand, Hamas operatives stop citizens from leaving, intentionally putting their own people in direct danger.
The bodies of those killed in Gaza are then showcased to the media to rally against Israel, but really they in reality victims of the Hamas terrorist agenda.
Conclusion
As outlined above, Hamas has clearly violated a multitude of UN Human Rights and international laws. However, British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn has made statements and carried out actions supporting the organization.
The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights outlines the laws and values that all nations and leaders must abide by. The principals set out are supposed to be followed whether at home or abroad by signatory nations. Mr. Corbyn’s contradicting commitment to the Declaration and his support of Hamas, a gross violator of human rights, undermines the legitimacy and importance of Human Rights in Gaza and validates the abuses of the Hamas government. With Great Britain being a leading world power, turning a blind eye to the terror carried out in Gaza can only lead others to follow and further human rights violations to continue into the future.
Financing the Suffering of the Palestinians
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5YPCenFVS0
United Nations employs two groups to help refugees. One group helps refugees settle, while the other keeps them in limbo for generations. Watch this video to see how this contradiction developed and how we can help Palestinians escape decades of poverty in refugee camps.
Peace Vs. Incitement
This infographic shows Palestinian Authority's President Mahmoud Abbas duplicity towards Israel. The #LetsBeHonest Campaign seeks to expose the duplicitous claims spoken by Arab leaders to the West and exposes their true intentions toward peace.
Download
The "Trump Effect" and Hamas
Donald Trump’s ascent to the United States presidency has had a domino effect on the Arab world, with the aftershocks directly targeting the Palestinian organization Hamas. Under Trump’s foreign policy, the president takes a hardliner approach to global terrorism. Trump hopes to defeat Islamic radical terrorism through partnering with other countries in “aggressive joint operations.” Trump also emphasizes that the United States is always happy when “old enemies become friends” and help aid in their military ventures. Various Arab leaders who have had rocky relations with past presidential administrations see this conciliatory approach as an opportunity and are making political decisions that align with Trump. Saudi Arabia specifically has benefited from the President’s willingness to look towards the future, evidenced by the recent meetings and arms deal between the two countries. The Palestinian Authority (PA), in preparation for their meeting with Trump as well as the resurgence of peace negotiations, cracked down on Hamas in Gaza. By cutting funding for electricity to Gaza, the PA is attempting to prove to Trump that they are committed to fighting against global terrorism. Differently than Obama, Donald Trump is willing to look past human rights concerns in favor of furthering his goal of eradicating global terrorism.
While President Trump has not issued any directive orders against Hamas, his demanding rhetoric has influenced Arab countries to act against the organization to curry favor with the United States. Originally, Hamas viewed the Trump presidency as an opportunity to restore relations with the US. They saw Trump as “having a greater threshold for boldness than [his] predecessors…could be a historic opportunity to pressure Israel.” Well aware of Trump’s policy towards terrorism combined with the rising humanitarian crisis in Gaza, Hamas knew that relations with the administration could make or break their ten-year regime in the territory. In early May, Hamas published a new policy document for the first time since their founding charter in the late 1980s. While Hamas leaders publically argue that this is part of the natural evolution of Hamas, the document appears to be largely moderated from their original position. They state that they are prepared to accept a two state solution with 1967 borders. Compared to their original stance that would not accept anything less than all of Israel, this an apparent large concession. Hamas also provides that their conflict is not with Jews specifically as a people, but with the “Zionist project”. In moderating their policy, Hamas is hoping to open a new era of relations with the United States to retain their power hold in the Gaza strip.
Much to the disappointment of Hamas leadership, President Trump was not swayed by their apparent mainstreaming. With many analysts calling the new document simply window dressing to appeal to Western audiences, the President’s administration barely acknowledged their change in policy. A few weeks later, Trump addressed 55 Arab countries at the Rihyad Summit in Saudi Arabia in which he emphasized the necessity of partnering with other countries to “stamp out extremism” and labeling Hamas as a terrorist organization. He repeated to the delegates present to “drive them out” and “strip them of their access to funds.” By formally connecting Hamas and his goal of eradicating terrorism, Trump laid out to these Arab countries a clear path to contracting better relations with the United States.
Just a few days later, four Arab countries spurred the President’s demands into action. Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia cut diplomatic ties with Qatar over their support for groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran that the United States categorized as terrorist entities. Qatar has invested millions into Gaza’s infrastructure, given substantial financial aid to the territory and also provides refuge for the organization’s exiled leaders. However, days after the beginning of the crisis, Qatar expelled Hamas leaders from Doha due to “unspecified pressure” as well as suspended electricity funding to Gaza. Hamas expressed their outrage at being ostracized by the Trump administration and the subsequent punishing of Qatar, one of their largest backers. A spokesman decried “the statement describing Hamas as a terror group…is a distortion of our image and shows a complete bias to the Zionist occupation.”
With this seemingly waning support from Qatar combined with the Palestinian’s Authority recent crack down on Hamas, the organization needs to secure partnerships with other actors in order to keep control of the Gaza strip and stay in power against the Palestinian Authority. As the humanitarian crisis will only escalate with the loss of funding and electricity, Hamas’ proximate actions will determine the organizations future. Their search is already bringing more contention to the region as they have begun to cozying up with more extreme factions such as Iran and Hezbollah due to regional isolation. The Palestinian Authority is also keeping a close eye on the reconciliation with exiled Fatah leader Mohammed Dahlan who keeps close relations with Egyptian leadership.
Hamas’ true colors:
While Hamas seemingly moderated their policy in early March, the organization returned to their original extremist ideology just a few months later. In his first public speech to the people of Gaza in early July, the new political leader Ismail Haniyeh did not attempt to appeal to Western audiences and directly contradicts their new policy document. . Hamas’ hopes for negotiating with the US are extinguished due to regional developments such as the Gulf Crisis that was indirectly affected by Trump’s anti-terror rhetoric. Where Hamas conceded to accepting a two state solution with 1967 borders, the political leader calls for a Palestinian State that “can not give up a grain of soil” and “will foil any attempt to the so-called solution of ‘alternative homeland’.” He also refers to “schemes of Judaization,” detracting from the previous statement that Hamas’ issue is not with Jews but solely Zionism. He slams President Trump for labeling Hamas a terror organization, encouraging the “Zionist enemy” and “blackmail[ing] the Arab and Islamic forces” against the “Palestinian cause.” He also berates the Palestinian Authority for “responding to American dictations.”
Haniyeh is reacting to Trump’s foreign policy by crafting his speech to appeal to potential Arab backers. The Hamas leader hopes to quell some of the regional pressure against the organization by reaffirming their commitment to their “Arab brothers”. Haniyeh argues that Hamas is a resistance movement solely focused on furthering the Palestinian cause, that their issue is not with Arab countries but solely Israeli occupation. His promises are most likely directed at Egypt who has accused Hamas of aiding guerilla rebels within their country. Haniyeh claims that Arab countries will “only see virtue from Hamas and…wish[es] them security, stability and protection.” Haniyeh further paints a number of Arab countries as friends of the Gazan movement even as many of them have had cold ties with Hamas, in hopes of facilitating warmer relations. Haniyeh thanked Egypt, Qatar and Turkey for their historical and hopefully continued support of the Palestinian people in Gaza. He also labeled Saudi Arabia as an ally, even as the country condemns Hamas as a terrorist organization after meeting with Donald Trump. Most importantly, Haniyeh publically confirmed the organization’s ties with other US condemned extremist groups such as Iran. He thanked the country for “developing its military power,” confirming what had only previously been rumored throughout the Middle East.
Hamas looks for allies:
With Donald Trump indirectly influencing Gulf Countries, the Palestinian Authority and even Qatar to break with Hamas, the organization must secure other financial backers for survival. But although Egypt cut ties with Qatar after Donald Trump’s speech, the country and Hamas have been in recent talks. As the two share a border, reopening negotiations is critical for Hamas’ survival and in aiding the humanitarian crisis. Hamas and Egypt have had especially rocky relations since the 2013 overthrow of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, of which Hamas is a direct offshoot of. Since the coup, the Egyptian government has accused Hamas of being responsible for a number of attacks, to which the organization refutes. Egypt has further blockaded the Rafah border in an attempt to control smuggling of weapons into Egypt to support the government’s adversaries. In their new policy document, Hamas attempts to distance themselves from the Muslim Brotherhood by negating to mention their ties with the organization, in an effort to restore relations with Egypt.
Current talks between Hamas and Egypt are also being facilitated by the presence of former Fatah leader Mohammed Dahlan. Once a high ranking official in the Palestinian Authority leading the fight against Hamas in 2006, Dahlan was exiled and expelled from Fatah in 2011 because he of his perceived threat to Abbas’ power. The former Hamas adversary sees Hamas’ isolation as an opportunity to align with the organization against the PA. Dahlan enjoys close relations with Egypt’s president Abdel Fattah al-Sisi and has been acting as an intermediary in meetings between Egypt and Hamas. For his efforts, Dahlan would be allowed to return to Gaza to be in charge of foreign relations while Hamas keeps control over the territory’s security. After what Hamas called “9 days of constructive meetings with Cairo officials,” Egypt agreed to provide some electricity in exchange for a commitment to tighten security on the border to stop smuggling weapons into Egypt to aid government enemies. They also demanded that Hamas stop negotiations with Iran. In an effort to prove their commitment to the negotiations, Hamas began construction in late June on a no-go security zone to control and boost border security.
However, President Abbas is worried by the resurging negotiations between the two forces. The PA president needs Hamas at its weakest to regain control over the Gaza strip and to be seen as the legitimate voice of the Palestinian people in future Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations. As Abbas was set to meet with the Egyptian president in Cairo, purchased fuel from Egypt was drastically reduced in Gaza due to interference by the PA. Relations with Egypt may not only be subject to fissure due to external sabotage by Abbas, but also because of Hamas’ recent cozying up to Iran. As part of their negotiations, Egypt warned Gaza leadership not to reconcile with the country. Once the strongest of allies, Hamas and Iran have been at odds since 2012 when the Palestinian organization supported the wrong side in Syria. Subsequently, Iran cut off public relations and military aid. However, as the Trump administration has condemned both Iran and Hamas as terrorist entities, the two are facing regional isolation together and has only brought them closer. Iran is also pleased with the change in Hamas’ political leadership, as they favor Ismail Haniyeh over the former political chief Khaled Meshaal. After reportedly meeting with a delegation in Lebanon, Iran allegedly agreed to resume financial funding to Hamas in the near future. In Lebanon, Hamas began to reconcile with another labeled terror organization, Hezbollah, “under an Iranian umbrella”. The day after Haniyeh’s July speech that publically affirmed the reconciliation, another high ranking Hamas official declared the next day that ties with Iran are “as close and strong as ever.” If Hamas continues to entertain relations with Iran, budding negotiations with Egypt may dissolve even without the meddling of the Palestinian Authority. This would force Hamas to be almost completely dependent on Iran. This resurgence of alliances can only mean bad news for Israel as the two unite to carry out attacks from both Lebanon and Gaza.
While Donald Trump envisions his hardliner approach as the best way to combat terrorism, recent developments in the Middle East such as the Gulf Crisis and actions by the PA have only radicalized Hamas away from their attempt at moderating their policy in March. As the hot summer progresses and the humanitarian crisis only worsens, Hamas will pursue whatever course of action to maintain power in the Gaza Strip, with Iran seeming to be the most probable and reliable ally.
The "Trump Effect" and the Palestinian Authority
On April 27th, 2017, the Palestinian Authority announced that it would no longer be paying Israel to supply electricity to the Gaza strip. President Mahmoud Abbas’ stated rationale for this drastic decision was to increase pressure on Hamas by withholding finances and shake the terrorist group’s ten-year reign. The Gaza strip already only had six hours of electricity per day, but with this new lack of funding will be reduced to a mere 2-4 hours. This aggressive strategy is a result of years of failed attempts between the Palestinian Authority’s governing faction, Fatah, and Hamas to reconcile. But occurring only one week before his first face-to-face meeting with US president Donald Trump, the timing of Abbas’ decision calls into question the true purpose behind his actions.
Being dubbed the “Trump effect” by academics, the new US president’s rhetoric on cracking down on global terrorism and de-emphasis on human rights has influenced decisions of middle Eastern leaders. For Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, cutting off funding for electricity in Gaza one week before his meeting with Trump was a strategic decision to gain the favor of the new United States president. Trump is eager to restart the peace process between the Israelis and Palestinians, and with his extremely pro-Israel sympathies and anti-Muslim rhetoric, the United States will likely side with the Israelis at the negotiating table. Abbas, aware of Trump’s “Israel bias” as well as claims by Netanyahu that there is no united voice of the Palestinian people to negotiate with or true partner for peace, needed to prove that he is a legitimate partner and committed to aiding the war on terror.
Abbas has been formulating a strategy to best approach Donald Trump since November. Shortly after the election, Abbas reportedly assembled a committee of experts on US policy and government to advise and aid him on the audacious and unpredictable president. With Trump announcing his intent to move the US embassy to Jerusalem, Abbas likely knew that were the peace process to restart between the Palestinians and Israelis, he could not count on the Trump administration to act as an unbiased mediator. In order to be considered a legitimate and equal partner in negotiations, the Palestinian Authority needed more than just idealistic rhetoric to gain favor with Donald Trump. Abbas had to take action tailored specifically to the policy goals of the new president.
Cracking down on global terrorism is a foremost prerogative of the Trump administration. Their “highest priority” is to to gain “peace through strength” by “defeating radical Islamic terror” by working with “international partners to cut off funding for terrorist groups.” As both the United States and the Israel condemn Hamas as a terrorist organization, Abbas cutting off funding for the Gaza strip follows directly from the Trump policy and works in accord with the outline set by the administration. Two weeks before his meeting with Trump, Abbas stated to the Arab Gulf States that he was “tired of funding the Hamas government in Gaza.” One week later, he put his words into action. The Palestinian Authority is attempting to exhibit to the Trump administration that they can be seen as a committed ally in the war on terror. By taking action against Hamas and further separating themselves from the radical organization, they are creating a foundation with the United States and Israel to combat a mutual enemy. This commonality may serve to gain them legitimacy and favor in the eyes of the Trump administration that will be helpful in future negotiations.
Not only did Abbas need to present the Palestinian Authority to Trump as committed to peace and eradicating terrorism, he needed to present a unified Palestinian front to the United States. Since the split between Fatah, the governing party of the Palestinian Authority and Hamas in Gaza in 2007, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has claimed that peace negotiations with the Palestinians are futile because there is no united voice of their people. Abbas needs to regain control and power over Gaza in order to frustrate attempts by Hamas to carry out actions that may unravel any progress. He hopes that pressuring Hamas by worsening the humanitarian crisis in Gaza will loosen the organization’s hold on the territory and acquiesce back to the PA. With both territories back under his jurisdiction, Abbas can invalidate Israeli claims that there is no unified representative of the Palestinian people. Trump has also stated that “there cannot be lasting peace unless Palestinian leaders speak in a unified voice…against violence and hate.” Israel believes that “Abbas is trying to force Hamas into a move that would – a least symbolically – demonstrate Palestinian unity” in preparation for meeting with the United States. After yet another failure to create a unity government between Fatah and Hamas by the middle of April, Abbas consequently had to look for other ways to regain control over the Gaza strip to present a united front.
The different stances on human rights between Barak Obama and Donald Trump were another factor shaping the decision of Abbas to cut off electricity funding to Gaza. Obama’s foreign policy program Countering Violence Extremism emphasized the importance of recognizing human rights violations as the drivers of terrorism. In a 2011 speech on “Remarks by the President on the Middle East and Africa,” Barak Obama stated that support for human rights was not a secondary interest but a “top priority” in the war on terror. This policy marked his years in office with an “awkward balance” between condemning human rights violations in states such as Saudi Arabia, but allying with these nations to fight against terrorist organizations. Cutting off funding for electricity in Gaza would have likely been condemned by the Obama administration as a human rights violation. Abbas then would not have utilized such a strategy as it would not have been looked on favorably by the previous president. The PA’s actions to pressure Hamas would have likely been exceedingly different under the Obama administration.
Trump, however, is not so much concerned with the human rights consequences of policies that progress the war on terror. Trump stated in an interview that “first we have to confront and eradicate terrorism” and that the “way you address human rights issues… is to improve conditions in the region…human rights would improve as security and stability do.” Trump has been criticized for this stance by Democrats who argue that he is de-emphasizing human rights in favor of focusing solely on fighting terrorism. This is evident in his failure to discuss Saudi Arabia’s notorious human rights violations during his visit to the country. He told leaders that he wasn’t there to “lecture them” but instead to only discuss the mutual goal of fighting global terrorist groups such as ISIS and Hamas. Where the Palestinian Authority’s actions would have been condemned by the Obama Administration due to escalating the human rights crises in Gaza, the Trump administration would instead view this as proof that Abbas is committed to fighting against Hamas and gain legitimacy as peace partners.
The success of Abbas’ tactical decision comes at the cusp of Trump’s remarks at a press conference after the two leaders’ meeting. Trump stated that “President Abbas has spoken out against…terrorist groups, and we must continue to build our partnership with the Palestinian security forces to counter and defeat terrorism.” Abbas’ proximate actions against Hamas worked in his favor, as the Trump administration recognized his work against terrorism. Looking at the implications of Trump’s foreign policy on decisions of the Palestinian Authority is necessary to predicting as well as understanding the motivation behind future actions of President Mahmoud Abbas. With Trump committed to restarting the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, Abbas needs to show the new administration the Palestinians are ready and wanting for peace. By carrying out action in accord with Trump’s harsh on terrorism policy, the PA hopes to butter up the new president. In the press conference after their meeting, Abbas regaled to Trump and the world that “we are endeavoring to bring about security, free and peace…we believe that we can be…true partner, to you to bring about a historic peace treaty.” With his actions against Hamas, Abbas now has substance to back up his words. Abbas will likely continue to cater his actions to appease Trump in the immediate future in preparation for the renewal of the peace process.
Deflection and Evasion: Human Rights in the Gulf
On March 15, 2006, the United Nations General Assembly established the United Nations Human Rights Council (hereafter UNHRC). This would replace the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, which had been heavily criticized for admitting to its membership the repressive regimes of countries such as China, Zimbabwe, Syria and Saudi Arabia.
So how far has the Council progressed? Surely after the upheaval and rebranding of an institution that had stood since 1946, a new wave of human rights advocacy and legitimacy would sweep the 193-member state organization.
Along with Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, the trusted old guard Saudi Arabia continues to enjoy a seat at the table.
At a time where the US is reportedly considering withdrawing its membership of the UNHRC due to its criticism of Israel, it behooves one to consider how Israel’s human rights record compares to that of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE.
In regard to civil and political rights, otherwise termed as ‘the first wave' or 'first generation' of human rights, Israel boasts a significantly better record than that of its Gulf state counterparts. It does not practice the death penalty, with the last execution being that of Adolf Eichmann – the notorious Nazi convicted of war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity – in 1962. It is home to a diverse group of competing political parties, ranging from religious Zionist parties such as the Jewish Home Party to explicitly anti-Zionist parties such as Balad.
By contrast, due to the varying degrees to which their legal systems incorporate Sharia Law, these three Gulf nations all retain the practice of the death penalty for crimes as serious as murder to those as minor and dubious as apostasy, adultery and sodomy (homosexuality). Between January 1 2016 and July 27 2016, Saudi Arabia executed 108 people. In 2016, Freedom House rated the Kingdom’s political rights a score of 3/40 and their civil liberties a score of 7/60. Saudi citizens face criminal prosecution for political dissent, and the ban on political parties has virtually eliminated any opposition to the monarchy’s decrees. The most notable case is that of Saudi blogger Raif Badawi, who was sentenced to a flogging of 1000 lashes in 2014 for ‘insulting Islam’.
LGBT rights have rightly emerged as a preeminent concern for human rights activists. The Israeli legal system maintains strong protections for the rights of LGBT people. Consensual same-sex acts have been de facto legal since 1963 and formally legal since 1988. The concept of ‘sodomy’ has no legal validity or relevance within Israeli legal system. LGBT people are protected under the law from discrimination within society and the military, with violent crimes motivated by sexual orientation considered hate crimes and requiring double the punishment of regular violent crimes. Furthermore, same-sex couples are afforded extensive adoption rights.
The Gulf nations paint a very different picture of livability for LGBT people. Article 177 of the Dubai Penal Code states that consensual sodomy is punishable by up to 10 years in prison. Along with the near-identical Qatari policy, these procedures almost seem lenient when compared to that of Saudi Arabia. The Kingdom’s wahhabist ultra-conservatism views homosexuality as the ultimate deviancy, as well as what are perceived to be the related issues of transgender citizens and cross-dressing. The legal punishments for homosexual sex in Saudi Arabia include fines, prison sentences, floggings, chemical castration, torture and execution – often by beheading.
The Israeli-Gulf divide also occurs along the lines of women’s rights. Israel ranks 18th in the world in terms of gender equality according to the United Nations Development Program. Women are protected from discrimination under the law and have enjoyed prominent positions within Israeli society such as Prime Minister, President of the Supreme Court, Chairperson of the Reserve Bank and Major General. The Knesset’s Committee on the Status of Women has as its stated objectives: the prevention of discrimination, combatting violence against women, and promoting equality in politics, lifecycle events and education.
Conversely, women’s rights in Saudi Arabia are abysmal by international standards. The country ranked 134th globally in the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Report of 2015. Saudi law requires all women to have a male guardian in public and as such are not permitted to shop, conduct business or drive without a male companion. Saudi authorities also mandate draconian laws regarding the modesty of women’s clothing. Failure to comply with these laws can incur harassment from the Mutaween (religious police). Polygamy remains legal as does the marrying of child brides. In court, the testimony of one man equals that of two women. Domestic violence is a common occurrence, as is the denial of property and employment rights to women.
Although Israel defines itself as a Jewish and democratic state, it also guarantees freedom of religion to all its citizens. Christian, Muslim and Baha’i communities have jurisdiction over their own adherents in matters of marriage, divorce and burial. Synagogues, mosques, churches and khalwats (Druze prayer houses) can operate without fear of government intrusion or closure. Importantly, Israeli law does not prohibit leaving a religious group, otherwise known as ‘apostasy’.
In Qatar, the idea of religious freedom is at best illusory for its Muslim population. Under Articles 245-260 of the Qatari Law 11 of 2004, blasphemy and other insults or challenges to the doctrines of Islam are punishable by prison sentences, whilst the offence of apostasy is punishable by the death penalty. Apostasy is similarly punished in the UAE and Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia retains the more archaic beliefs of the Gulf trio, by prosecuting people for sorcery and witchcraft. It also tasks the Mutaween with enforcing Sharia law throughout the country. This involves reporting unrelated males and females who socialize, enforcing strict Islamic dress codes, enforcing Muslim dietary requirements, prohibiting people from proselytizing other religions and banning consumer products deemed to be un-Islamic.
As the nations of the world vote on 15 new members to the UNHRC at the convening of the General Assembly in September, two concerns should be at the forefront of their minds. Firstly, human rights are important and adherence to their norms requires constant introspection and critical self-examination. Their inalienability is an equalizer for people across the globe, be they rich or poor, black or white. They serve to allow people, among other things, the freedom to speak their mind and guard the dignity and liberty to which they are naturally entitled. Secondly, having a UNHRC characterized by hypocrisy ultimately undermines their principled mandate. Allowing repressive regimes like Qatar, the UAE and Saudi Arabia to deflect their horrendous records onto Israel is an exercise in evasion. Israel is an imperfect democracy; elevated by morality yet burdened with deficiencies. Nonetheless, we should set the bar higher than floggings, chemical castrations and beheadings.
Hamas Terrorizes The People of Gaza
Learn more about how Hamas abuses the rights and freedoms of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.