Informed Comment

Holy Day attacks Kill at Least 56

Sunni Arab guerrillas seeking to provoke further fighting in Iraq’s sectarian civil war targeted Shiites on the holy day of Ashura, Tuesday, killing 56 and wounding dozens. Many of the Shiites targeted were in smaller towns or cities, or were hit by mortar shells. The deployment of 11,000 men from the army and police in the holy city of Karbala forestalled attacks there.

Reuters reports this and other political violence. Note that Baladruz and Khaniqin, where Shiite mosques and worshippers were targeted, are east or northeast of Baghdad and are in mixed Sunni-Shiite regions.

McClatchy reports that a British base at Basra in the south received an intensive mortar shell bombardment on Ashura’. Some nationalistic Shiite militias in Basra deeply resent the foreign troop presence there.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Bush Comment on Najaf Farcical;
Hawatimah Tribe of Diwaniyah involved in Mahdist Uprising?

Attempts are being made to knock down all kinds of stories about the Najaf uprising. Bush expressed happiness that the Iraqi Army (actually the Badr Corps fundamentalist Shiite militia) acquitted itself well against the rebels. But in fact, the Iraqi security forces were surrounded, cut off and nearly destroyed by heavily armed cultists–and had urgently to call in US troops, tanks and close air support.

Bush told National Public Radio on Monday, “My first reaction on this report from the battlefield is that the Iraqis are beginning to show me something.”

So does the US military not tell Bush when their Iraqi allies get into deep trouble fighting a few hundred cultists and they have to go bail them out? Or was Bush briefed on the situation and he came out and told a bald faced lie to the public about what had happened?

Either thing at a time the country is at war is truly horrifying.

The radical Sunni Arab newspaper Mafkarat al-Islam and the moderate Arab nationalist newspaperal-Zaman weighed in with yet a fourth account of the fighting in Najaf on Sunday and Monday.

In this one, an innocent poor little tribal group from Diwaniyah, the Hawatimah, got up a night-time convoy to the holy city of Najaf on their way to Karbala for Ashura. They happened to have raised anti-Iranian slogans and placards. (At night or early dawn? How could they be seen?) The evil Najaf government authorities, themselves proto-Iranian, suddenly and for no reason launched a massive attack on the Hawatimah, massacring them, as they approached Najaf. In this narrative, the Diwaniyah tribal group had nothing to do with any millenarian cult (al-Mahdawiyah), and were just killed at the instigation of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq and the Badr Corps (pro-Iranian political and paramilitary groupings who basically run Najaf) because they dared object to Iranian influence in Iraq. It is even being alleged in al-Zaman that the Hawatimah were only implementing Bush administration strictures against Iranian machinations in Iraq.

Note that the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, which controls Najaf, is Bush’s major ally in Iraq even though it is close to Iran. Those fighting the Najaf government and Iraqi army forces were anti-Iranian. Rightwing bloggers seem confused on these points.

It is, of course, possible that the Hawatimah got caught up in the fighting between the Mahdawiyah and the Badr Corps as they were proceeding toward Karbala. And the Najaf authorities did themselve no favors by trying to depict this Shiite group as al-Qaeda (a hyper-Sunni movement) or related to the old Baath Party.

But the story in Mafkarat al-Islam makes no sense at all. If the Hawatimah convoy was heading to Karbala, why would it need to go into downtown Najaf? And what was a big convoy of armed tribesmen doing heading for downtown Najaf at night? At night? With Iraq’s lack of security? The al-Zaman narrative even justifies them being heavily armed on the grounds that they were traveling at night. But doesn’t explain why they were operating under cover of darkness in the first place. The traveling at night thing seems suspicious to me.

In contrast, al-Hayat reports in Arabic that its stringers interviewed residents of Zarqa just north of Najaf who confirmed that the Mahdist sect leader, Diya’ Kazim Abd al-Zahra, who also went by Ahmad Hassaan al-Yamaani, of Diwaniyah, 38, had indeed bought orchards there and settled there with hundreds of followers. They kept bringing in truckfuls of sand. When asked why, they said that they wanted to build barriers to mark of “their property.”

Hmm. The Mahdist leader was from Diwaniyah. The Hawatimah were from Diwaniyah and were coming in a big armed convoy at night toward Najaf.

If we set aside the claims of this group of Hawatimah to be innocent victims and assume that they were Mahdists coming to help with a planned assault on Najaf (empty and unguarded while all the other Shiites converged on Karbala for Ashura), then it would explain a lot. Heavily armed tribesmen could easily have overwhelmed the Iraqi army, if they had RPGs and automatic weapons. They would have the element of surprise, esprit de corps, and probably some would have served in the old Baath army and might well have much more military experience than the green Iraqi army troops thrown against them. Tribesmen are formidable and often outfitted like private armies. And if they were coming to support the Mahdawiyah cultists in the orchards, that explains where the high-powered weapons came from. They so devastated the Iraqi forces that the US had to send troops, tanks and helicopters to rescue the latter.

If we posit an involvement of the Hawatimah from Diwaniyah in the Mahdist uprising at Najaf, it raises the question as to whether they were the “rogue elements” that launched an uprising in Diwaniyah itself in late August, 2006. At the time, this violence was blamed on the Mahdi Army of Muqtada al-Sadr, but spokesmen for Muqtada at the time complained that “rogue elements” not under his control were stirring up trouble there. The Mahdawiyah was founded in 1999 by Abdul Zahra, a young civil engineer from Diwaniyah who had been a follower of Ayatollah Muhammad Sadiq al-Sadr (Muqtada’s father) but established a group that split off from the Sadrists.

Admittedly, a lot of what I have written is speculative, and I’m open to being corrected by better evidence. (That is the fate of all historians but especially those who try to catch history on the run.) But I think it is pretty easy to resolve the contradictions among the major accounts by assuming that this was a Mahdist uprising aimed at taking Najaf, centered on the coming of the Promised One, to which a group of Hawatimah clans were coming to lend aid. The Hawatimah story of their innocence, as reported in the Sunni press, seems to me to have a lot of holes in it.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Cole in Salon.com: Bush’s Anti-Iran Fatwa

My Salon.com column this week is now available:
“The danger of Bush’s anti-Iran fatwa”:

The president’s decision to use force against Iranian “agents” inside Iraq could snare innocent pilgrims, and raises the risk of open warfare.

Excerpt:

‘ George W. Bush last week announced that American troops in Iraq were henceforth authorized to “kill or capture” any Iranian intelligence agents they discovered in Iraq. The announcement came on the heels of his pledge in the State of the Union address to bring another aircraft carrier into the Persian Gulf, a move that clearly targeted Iran. A prominent Iranian parliamentarian responded to Bush’s threat by saying, “Such an order is a clear terrorist act and against all internationally acknowledged norms.” Iraq’s deputy prime minister, meanwhile, put a pox on both Iran and the U.S. for conducting their geopolitical battle on Iraqi soil. ‘

Read the whole thing.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Mahdist Cult Almost Defeated Iraqi Army at Najaf
Wave of Bombings, Mortar attacks in Baghdad

Marc Santora of NYT reveals that the Iraqi army was very nearly overwhelmed and defeated by the Army of Heaven militia of the Mahdawiya millenarian movement near Najaf on the weekend. They had to call in not only US airstrikes but also US troops to save themselves from being surrounded and killed.

The Mahdawiya is a splinter group of the Sadr movement, which broke away in the late 1990s, and was led by Ahmad al-Hassaani al-Yamani of Diwaniya. He styled himself styled himself Ali b. Ali. b. Abi Talib, that is, he was claiming to be the return of an (otherwise unknown) son of Ali (d. 661), whom Shiites believe was the true successor to the Prophet Muhammad. The Mahdawiya leader is alleged to have been killed in Sunday’s battle.

Al-Hayat’s identification of this movement with another Sadrist splinter group, that of Mahmud al-Hasani al-Sarkhi, appears to have been incorrect.

The buzz in the Right blogosphere that the Mahdawiya is somehow linked to Iran is a profound falsehood. Sadrist splinter groups in Iraq generally are Iraqi nativist and deeply distrust Iran. These cultists wanted to kill Sistani (an Iranian).

The LA times reports:

‘ Every day someone claims he’s the Mahdi,” [Iraqi security official Ali Nomas] said.

Nomas said the leader of the hitherto unknown Heaven’s Army had told followers that he was a missing son of the Imam Ali, the cousin and son-in-law of the prophet Muhammad. Ali’s remains are entombed in Najaf.

“They believe that the Mahdi has called them to fight in Najaf,” Nomas said, adding that fighters had converged on the Najaf area from other predominantly Shiite cities in Iraq.

He lamented that Iraq’s death and destruction had convinced some Shiites that the end of days was coming.

“There’s nothing bizarre left in Iraq anymore,” Nomas said in a telephone interview. “We’ve seen the most incredible things.” ‘

McClatchy wire service gives some more details of the leader, including further pseudonyms.

Al-Sharq al-Awsat reports in Arabic that Ahmad al-Hassaani claimed to have descended directly from the heavens.

For more on the ideas of al-Hassaani, see Reider Vissar’s comments at Helena Cobban’s Just World News.

The claim of the Najaf authorities that the Mahdawiya has “al-Qaeda” ties is just propaganda and should not be taken seriously. They are embarrassed that there was Shiite on Shiite violence.

Dan Murphy of CSM has more on the background of Shiite millenarianism. I am quoted to the effect that the hatred of the Mahdawiya for the grand ayatollahs is akin to the sentiment among some Protestants that the pope is the anti-Christ.

Reuters reports numerous car bomb and mortar attacks in Baghdad on Monday. Also a sectarian attack in Kurdish territory:

‘ *TUZ KHURMATO – Five worshippers were killed when a rocket propelled grenade hit a Shi’ite mosque in the town of Tuz Khurmato, 70 km south of Kirkuk, police said.

BAGHDAD – Three mortars killed 11 people and wounded 28 more in Zaafaraniya, southeast of Baghdad, a police source said . . .

BAGHDAD – A bomb planted inside a minibus killed four people and wounded five others near al-Mustansiriya Square in northeastern Baghdad, police said. . .’

McClatchy says that police found 21 bodies in Baghdad on Monday. There was also heavy fighting in Baquba, Diyala province.

LAT also reports on the renewed tensions over the Shiite Askariya shrine in Samarra, the blowing up of which last Feb. threw Iraq into a whole new level of communal violence.

‘OK, if you say so’ Department:

The USG Open Source Center translates:

Iraqi Kurdish leader, Al-Sadr delegation discuss ties
Kurdistan Satellite TV
Monday, January 29, 2007 T14:46:23Z

Iraqi Kurdish leader, Al-Sadr delegation discuss ties

Text of report by Iraqi Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) satellite TV on 29 January

(Iraqi) Kurdistan Region President Mas’ud Barzani received yesterday a delegation of the Al-Sadr Current, led by the head of the movement’s bloc in parliament, Nassar al-Rubay’i, and comprising Al-Sadr leadership member and MP Falah Hasan Shanshal, leadership member and head of parliament’s Legal Committee Baha al-A’raji and leadership member and MP Salih Hasan Al-Agili.

In a meeting, relations between the people of Kurdistan and the Al-Sadr Current were discussed and the need for further cooperation in moving Iraq’s political process forwards was stressed. Moreover, views on the security situation in Baghdad were exchanged.

The visiting delegation shed light on the Al-Sadr Current’s operations within the political process and in the federal government of Iraq.

The need for cooperation between the people of Kurdistan and the Al-Sadr Current, with a view to serving the interests of the people of Iraq, was stressed.

(Description of Source: Salah-al-Din Kurdistan Satellite TV in Sorani Kurdish — Iraqi Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) satellite TV)

City/Source: Salah-al-Din

Muqtada is also sending his people to talk to fundamentalist Sunni leaders.

Abdul Aziz al-Hakim is still promoting the idea of a Shiite regional confederacy, an idea the Sunni Arabs and the (Shiite) Sadrists vehemently oppose.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Cole Interview on CNN Monday

Cole on CNN.

YOUR WORLD TODAY Aired January 29, 2007 – 12:00 ET

JIM CLANCY, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Now, from the raging battle outside Iraq, to the political posturing by Washington and Tehran, what’s really at stake? Earlier, we spoke with Juan Cole, professor of modern Middle East history at the University of Michigan, first asking him about that cult that was allegedly aiming to reshape religious and political history.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JUAN COLE, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: The Iranians are coming into Iraq for development aid. They’ve pledged a billion dollars, there are going to be joint refineries. And the U.S. announcement that it would kill or capture anyone that it thought was an intelligence agent has the potential for roiling relationships between the two.

CLANCY: Now, the U.S., Washington, clearly upset with Iran’s nuclear program, but it’s important to remember here there’s a complete difference between Iran and other countries in the Middle East, and that’s say it’s not only because it’s Shia, and these are Iranians and the other countries are Arabs. It’s because if you go to the street in Iran, you will find people that are very supportive of Americans, want good relationships, while leadership is very anti- American.

This is the opposite what you find in other Arab countries. How important is it for Washington to take that into account as they go ahead with what appears to be confrontational policy?

COLE: Well, the Iranian public is very pro-American, and it’s one of the few publics in the Middle East, I think, that would reform, if it could, in a way that was friendly to U.S. interests. If the United States goes into a frontal confrontation with Iran, however, it will push the Iranian public away. The Iranians are very nationalistic and they don’t want to be dominated by the U.S.

CLANCY: Let’s go back and focus though on the situation in Iraq. This short-term troop increase appears to be a last-ditch effort to improve security in the country.

What chance does this mission have and the overall mission in Iraq?

COLE: Well, I think it’s very difficult for the United States to establish security in Iraq now. We simply don’t have enough troops to do proper counterinsurgency. And the country really is now mobilized politically.

As we have just seen, you know, the Shiite south was considered to be relatively calm. Then out of nowhere you get this millenarian movement that thinks the promised one of Islam is about to come, and invades Najaf, so the country is really in a great deal of chaos. And securing a few neighbors in Baghdad just isn’t going to do it.

CLANCY: What would do it? Will anything do it? Does anyone have an answer?

COLE: Well, I think the big Iraqi political leaders, who are usually communal leaders as well, need craft a national pact, a compromise that they can all live with and convince each other to put away their arms. This is the kind of thing that ended the Lebanese civil war in 1989. That’s the only thing really that would work in Iraq.

CLANCY: We don’t see much leadership there in Baghdad. Often the elected leaders wait until someone form outside the country comes in with these ideas.

Does Iraq have a leadership problem?

COLE: Well, there are big communal leaders — Abdul Aziz al- Hakim of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, the Kurdish leaders. The problem is that they’re not willing to compromise with one other.

They’re pushing for their maximum goals. And I think the U.S. could do the most good by just knocking some heads together and getting them to compromise.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CLANCY: Some advice there for Washington coming from Juan Cole, a professor of modern Middle East history at the University of Michigan.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Fighters for Shiite Messiah Clash with Najaf Security, 250 Dead
Over 60 Dead in Baghdad, Kirkuk Violence

Well, a big battle took place at the Shiite holy city of Najaf on Saturday night into Sunday, but there are several contradictory narratives about its significance. Iraqi authorities, claimed that the Iraqi army killed a lot of the militants (250) but only took 25 casualties itself. The Shiite governor of Najaf implied that the guerrillas were Sunni Arabs and had several foreign Sunni fundamentalist fighters (“Afghans”) among them. He said that they based themselves in an orchard recently purchased by Baathists. Other sources said that the militants were Shiites. I’d take the claim of numbers killed with a large grain of salt, though the Iraqi forces did have US close air support. I infer that the guerrillas shot down one US helicopter.

That’s one narrative. Here is another. The pan-Arab London daily al-Hayat reported that the militiamen were followers of Mahmud al-Hasani al-Sarkhi. It says one of his followers asserted that the fighting erupted when American and Iraqi troops attempted to arrest al-Hasani al-Sarkhi. The latter tried last summer to take over the shrine of al-Husayn in Karbala. It may have been feared that he would take advantage of the chaos of the Muharram pilgrimage season to make a play for power in Najaf. Al-Hayat says that although As’ad Abu Kalil, governor of Najaf, said the attackers were Sunnis, the director of the information center in Najaf, Ahmad Abdul Husayn Du’aybil, contradicted him. The latter said, “At dawn, today [Sunday], violent clashes took place between security forces and an armed militia calling itself “the Army of Heaven,” which claims that the Imam Mahdi will [soon] appear.” He added, “The goal of this militia is the killing of clergymen and the grand ayatollahs.” The group follows Ayatollah Ahmad al-Hasani al-Sarkhi, called al-Yamani, who is said by his followers to be in direct touch with the Hidden Imam or promised one. In the fighting 10 Iraqi security police were killed and 17 wounded. One official said that the death toll among the militants was not known.

Al-Hayat, however, quotes a member of the group, Abu al-Hasan, who is said to be close to al-Hasani al-Sarkhi. He said that the rumors that the group intended to conduct a campaign of assassinations inside Najaf was “devoid of truth.” It says that an attempt had been made to arrest al-Hasani al-Sarkhi, who was present in the al-Zarkah, an agricultural area east of Najaf, which caused his followers to revolt.

Al-Hasani al-Sarkhi’s followers had earlier burned down the Iranian consulates at Basra and Karbala, and demonstrated in Hilla and elsewhere.

Sawt al-Iraq in Arabic says that a number of al-Hasani al-Sarkhi’s aides were arrested early last week as part of the current crackdown in preparation for the American surge.

Then there is yet a third narrative. Al-Zaman reports in Arabic that on Saturday night into Sunday morning, a Shiite millenarian militia calling itself “The Army of Heaven” (Jund al-Sama’) attempted to move south from the Zarqa orchards just north of Najaf to assassinate the four grand ayatollahs of Najaf– Ali Sistani, Bashir Najafi, Muhammad Ishaq Fayyad and Muhammad Said al-Hakim. The holy city of Najaf, where Ali is buried, is the seat of Shiite religious authority in Iraq. The militiamen, devotees of an obscure religious leader named Ahmad Hassaani, are said to have infiltrated the area from Hillah, Kut and Amara. The well-armed, black-clad militiamen were heard to call upon the Mahdi, the awaited Promised One of the Muslims, to return on that night.

This group is not the Mahdi Army of Muqtada al-Sadr, which bears no enmity toward the grand ayatollahs, but rather a separate and different sect altogether. Shiite clerics told the NYT that the sect is the Mahdawiya of Ahmad al-Basri (possibly Ahmad Hassaani al-Basri?). Although the NYT was told that this millenarian sect (it believes that the end of time is around the corner) was supported by Saddam, you can’t pay any attention to that sort of allegation when it comes to Iraqi sectarianism.

It seems most likely that this was Shiite on Shiite violence, with millenarian cultists making an attempt to march on Najaf during the chaos of the ritual season of Muharram. But who knows? It is also possible that the orthodox Shiites in control of Najaf hate the heretic millenarians and the threat of the latter was exaggerated. Darned if I know. The reports of the Army of Heaven being so well armed make no sense if it was a ragtag millenarian band. But those reports could be exaggerations, too.

It seems most likely that the Mahdawiya is the sect of Sheikh Mahmud al-Hasani al-Sarkhi and that al-Basri was the founder of the sect. That would be a way of reconciling al-Zaman with al-Hayat.

The dangers of Shiite on Shiite violence in Iraq are substantial, as this episode demonstrated. Ironically, given Bush’s mantra about Iran, the trouble makers here are a sect that absolutely hates Iran.

According to Reuters, Sunday would have been a horror show in Iraq even if you hadn’t had the Najaf clashes. Three US troops were killed Sunday, and more were announced killed. Police found 29 bodies in the capital, victims of sectarian violence. Over 20 people died in bombings in the capital, including a mortar strike on a girl’s school. More deadly bombings in the northern oil city of Kirkuk.

NYT strikes me as being a little breathless about Iranian plans for investment and development aid in Iraq. These plans were negotiated by two Iraqi prime ministers, Ibrahim Jaafari and Nuri al-Maliki on trips to Iran where wreaths were laid on the tomb of Ayatollah Khomeini. They were reported on at length at the time of those visits, and there is nothing new here. As for American officials, when asked about such plans in the past, they said that they hoped Iraq would have good relations with all its neighbors and understood that there would be economic relations with Iran. I can’t see what the big crisis is. By the way, the Iranians are building an airport at Najaf to bring in the Shiite pilgrims, too.

Hillar Rodham Clinton made the reasonable point that George W. Bush has a responsibility to get the US back out of Iraq and end the quagmire by January 2009, instead of bequeathing this disaster to his successor.

Unfortunately, Cheney, who really decides these things, thinks the US will be there for decades. Of course in the 1940s Winston Churchill thought Britain would be in India for decades. Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.

Sabrina Tavernise of the NYT says goodbye to Iraq and to any illusions she might have had. She’s done a great job there, and has illumined the situation for us in a clear-eyed way. She also told us more about the situation of women and families than most other reporters.

You have to wonder whether Iraq can any longer be reported on in any ordinary sense of the word.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Elhanan Guest Editorial: Another Way for Israel

Another Way for Israel

Elik Elhanan
Combatants for Peace
Via The Jewish Alliance for Justice and Peace

This is the message we want to bring to the American Jewish community: Let us try another way. In the eyes of many, the key to this conflict lies in the US. Your support is invaluable just as the lack of it is disastrous. Israel is now refusing to negotiate with Syria, the reason being that Washington wants it so. My question is: What do you want?

For many people in Israel this bleak picture serves to prove that indeed there is no partner and that the formula of land for peace does not work. These attitudes are supported by the political system both in Israel and internationally, and are frequently promoted by the media as undisputable truths. Both societies, the Palestinian and the Israeli, seem to be locking themselves in a violent nationalistic mindset where the needs of the other simply do not exist.

How should one deal with such a situation? The simplest answer would be to play along. The other answer is to confront these false notions, to insist on telling truth to power, to work and expose the contradictions that exist in any black-and-white vision of reality.

Our organization, Combatants for Peace, is trying to do just that. Through our dialogue group, where Israeli and Palestinian former combatants meet regularly, we try to touch the hearts and minds of both societies. We try to help our communities become more aware of the reality of the other side, so that nobody can say “I didn’t know.” We want Israelis to comprehend the full scale of the oppression inherent to the Israeli occupation, and we want the Palestinians to know that behind the occupation there are humans, who are also suffering. We want both sides to understand the price of violence. Our message is simple: Peace is possible. The only way to reach peace is through dialogue and negotiations, and the only solution is a two state solution — an end the occupation, in keeping with UN resolutions.

People frequently respond to us as if we were detached from reality, yet nothing could be farther from the truth. Our Palestinian members were all active in violent opposition to the occupation, serving long prison terms for their activities; the Israelis among us all served many years as combat soldiers on the conflict’s front lines. We know the lay of the land, and we know the reality. We know the price we’ll have to pay for peace, and we’ve learned with our very flesh that the price of war is a hundred times greater. We live among our peoples and we see and suffer the consequences of this conflict.

People often say “but you’re just a few good people. The majority feels differently.” But this is not the case. First of all, we’re not good people. Indeed, until not long ago, we were very bad. As soldiers we killed and maimed, we bombed and tortured. Our Palestinian counterparts stabbed, and shot and planted bombs, killing and maiming as they went.

But we’ve changed. We understood that power has limits and that violence can only lead to more violence; that non-violence is better, as both a tactic and as way of life. Like us there are many more “bad” people who might change, who will change, if they’re given just a bit of hope.

In some cases our members are even treated as traitors. But we have all proven our merits in long years of service. Though we’re presented as radicals, we don’t contest the national values of our respective peoples; on the contrary, we struggle for them. We don’t contest the right of Israel to exist in security and prosperity; nor do we contest the right of the Palestinians to resist the occupation and achieve their own state. We question only the methods that have been employed to achieve these goals in the past. These methods were not only ineffective, they were wrong.. Israel is not safe, Palestine is not free, and only the cemeteries are flourishing. Let us try another way.

It is very easy not to believe in peace. The chances of reaching an Israeli-Palestinian agreement in the near future seem slimmer than ever. The mistaken perception that Israel has “no partner” and that “we gave everything and got nothing” is still widely held. The radical elements currently in play in both political systems, Hamas on one hand and right-wing Israeli politician Avigdor Lieberman on the other, combined with the violence between Israel and the Palestinians, between the Palestinian factions, and between Israel and its neighbors can make the search for peace seem at the very least misguided.

Elik Elhanan
Combatants for Peace

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off