TEACHERS OBJECT TO BOOK SHOWING JEWISH CHILDREN

Teachers object to book showing Jewish children
By Mohsen Rashid
Khaleej Times
March 29, 2005

www.khaleejtimes.com/Displayarticle.asp?section=theuae&xfile=data/theuae/2005/march/theuae_march896.xml

Education authorities here have promised to review a book taught in an international private school that features a photograph of two Jewish children sporting plaited hair and yarmulke.

Dr Obaid Butti Al Mohiri, the Director of Curriculums Centre at the Ministry of Education, said he would order the withdrawal of the book for primary Class I of the Dubai International School if the complaints raised were found genuine.

Several teachers of the school telephoned Khaleej Times, complaining against the picture, captioned "We play together; we stick together", featured in the book Friends Forever. The teachers said that of all the pictures in the book, the students reacted sharply to only this picture.

When approached, the Educational Zone took the stand that its role was only mediating between private schools and the Curriculum Centre. The zone receives textbooks from the schools and sends them to the centre for scrutiny.

A source in the school said that these books were imported from outside the country and had not been reviewed.

When contacted, Dr Mohiri expressed anger that the matter was brought to him. "What should we do when we do not have enough staff to review textbooks in more than 400 schools countrywide?"

Dr Mohiri said he had been suggesting for two years to hire adequate staff, but his plea has remained unanswered. "We lack staff to follow up these books at schools as well as compel schools to send these books before distributing them to students," he said.

"What we could only do a year ago was to ask all school managements to review and check these books and submit a written undertaking along with copies of these books to the ministry that they had done so," he recalled.

Dr Mohiri said the ministry had set standards and rule to be adhered to when checking the books. In the event of sighting any violation, the school would be held responsible and the books withdrawn, he said. "Most such violations were discovered by parents, who in turn, notify us."

 

STAFF ACCUSE SAUDI HOSPITAL OF MALTREATING AIDS PATIENTS

Staff accuse Saudi hospial of maltreating AIDS patients
By Essam Al-Ghalib
The Media Line
March 28, 2005

www.themedialine.org/news/news_detail.asp?NewsID=9530

An investigation into King Saud Hospital for Contagious Diseases here has revealed that non-Saudi HIV and AIDS patients are being treated in a manner that, according to hospital staff, worsens their condition and contributes to their death.

According to medical staff at the hospital, life-prolonging anti-viral medication is withheld from non-Saudi patients there, a practice that one doctor says allows the HIV virus to spread unchallenged. According to sources at the hospital, only Saudis are given these medicines because of their high cost, over SR5,000 (approx. $1,330) for one month’s supply.

"We have all sat and watched patients die a slow death. That is the nature of the disease. The length of our lives is of course pre-ordained by Allah, but we can improve the quality of our patients' lives if we had the proper funding for the medication they desperately need. When it is time for them to expire, they are left to die. In other hospitals they have intensive care units, they have EKG machines, resuscitation paddles, they have proper facilities. Here we have nothing. There is nothing more we can do for a person other than CPR in the event that their heart stops," said one doctor.

"There are no heart monitors here, nor any kidney dialysis machines. There is no 'Code Blue' protocol, which is a special alert to hospital emergency response teams that a patient has gone into cardiac arrest. In fact there are no emergency response teams here at all," he added.

A walk through the male deportation ward revealed that patients are either locked in their rooms or chained to their beds. The doctor described how patients would have to relieve themselves in bed when their calls for help went unanswered throughout the night. "I would come in for the morning shift and find patients lying in their own urine. They said they called out for the nurses for several hours overnight but no one came. After a while some of them started sleeping with empty plastic bottles by their bedside so that they can urinate," he said.

According to the doctor, the Saudi patients that are chained to their bed are under criminal indictment or serving out part of their sentence at the hospital. "This is a government hospital that deals with several Interior Ministry branches such as the police, and the Department of Passports and Immigration," he said.

There is a manned police substation on the property. One policeman could be seen seated on the lawn watching the entrance to the building. The hospital recently hired private security guards after a Pakistani man infected with tuberculosis and HIV escaped. The police arrested him four days later. The doctor said, "He left because he wanted to be with his family."

The male ward at King Saud Hospital is in a single story building where patients are under constant lock and key. There were 14 patients in the ward on this particular day, two Saudis and 12 expatriates. In room 712, six men are housed. Isma'il is the youngest one there. He is a 20-year-old man who hails from Myanmar. He has been dreading his deportation for over a year. He said: "It's very cramped here and we don’t get out much, but what can I do? I can't leave. All I can do is sit here and hope I don't get deported. In my country I may be killed, so I consider this a blessing."

When asked if this young man was given any anti-viral medication during his time at King Saud, the doctor said, "No. He will have to wait until he gets to his own country. It could be a very long time though, but I don't see him staying here for more than three years. A solution has to be found.

"His case is a special case because it doesn't seem like anyone will be coming for him. He will probably be here indefinitely because Myanmar doesn’t have an embassy or consulate here in Saudi," the doctor added.

According to medical staff at the hospital, the Philippines Consulate is the quickest to act when its citizens are diagnosed with HIV or AIDS. Deportation of their subjects does not normally take longer than a month, but in the case of Yemen, it often takes longer than a year.

Agnes Gaffud, an assistant to nationals officer with the Philippines Consulate in Jedda said: "Saudi Arabia wants foreigners, including Filipinos, to be treated in their own countries. We are required to arrange for the deportation of our citizens who are HIV positive as soon as possible so that their treatment can begin in the Philippines. Unfortunately, here the anti-viral medicines are reserved only for Saudi citizens."

A doctor at the hospital confirmed what Gaffud said. "Saudis are the only ones who receive the anti-virals. The cost is over SR5,000 a month and the Ministry of Health has dictated that these medicines only be provided for Saudis. Of course we give the expatriates simple, sometimes over-the-counter medicines to help them cope with some of the symptoms. If they have a headache for example, we give them a paracetamol. We just try to make them as comfortable as possible," he said.

"I don't know if an actual study has been done, but in my estimate I would say a three-month course can increase a patient's life by three to five years, because the anti-virals help stop the HIV virus from multiplying in the patient and becoming full-blown AIDS," he explained.

Dr. Sanaa Felimban is the medical director of King Saud Hospital, the first woman to hold such a position in Saudi Arabia. Dr. 'Abd Al-'Aziz Abalsaud, a doctor at the hospital explained that in his opinion, the problem is not with the hospital director or the medical staff.

He said: "Dr. Sanaa inherited a problem when she was assigned to this hospital. Things have improved over the past six months, but there is only so much she can do. In the past, the solution has been to fire a doctor or two, but that doesn't change anything, in fact it impacts the patients negatively."

Dr. Abalsaud described how patients come to view certain members of the medical staff as family. "When a patient is here for a prolonged period of time, he builds a relationship with the medical staff. When they get reassigned for whatever reason, it serves as a blow to the patients' morale," he explained.

Saudi health authorities last November reported an increase in the kingdom's AIDS cases from 6,787 to 7,808 during the prior twelve-month period. Na'sir Bin 'Salih Al-Khuzeim, head of the state-run Health Control Center, said at the time that 1,743 of those suffering from AIDS were Saudis, 588 of whom have since died as a result of the virus. There are no statistics available on the number of expatriates that have succumbed to the disease prior to deportation.

FULL ARTICLES

YASSIN HOME TO BE TURNED INTO A MUSEUM

Yassin home to be turned into museum
By Khaled Abu Toameh
The Jerusalem Post
March 27, 2005

www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1111893690968

Hamas has decided to turn the home of its slain leader, Ahmed Yassin, in Gaza City's Sabra neighborhood into a museum.

The decision comes on the first anniversary of the assassination of Yassin, who was killed by missiles fired by an IAF helicopter as he was returning home from dawn prayers at a nearby mosque.

Hamas marked the occasion last week by holding a series of rallies throughout the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Thousands of Hamas supporters participated in the rallies, organized under the slogan "Week of the Martyrs" Hamas officials said the museum in the five-room house will be open to the public in the next few weeks. On display will be parts of Yassin's wheelchair, his blood-stained clothes and his private computer, as well as other personal items, including books and newspaper clippings.

A top Hamas official in the Gaza Strip said the new museum is aimed at "acquainting the Palestinians with Yassin's legacy and reminding them of Israeli atrocities."

The decision to turn Yassin's home into a museum comes in the wake of a similar move by the Palestinian Authority to commemorate Yasser Arafat. PA officials announced earlier this year that one of the rooms inside the Mukata "presidential" compound in Ramallah would be turned into a small museum in honor of Arafat.

According to the officials, the museum will offer a rare glimpse into Arafat's private life by putting on display his personal belongings, including his military outfit, ranks, badges and private handgun, as well as various documents and pictures.

Meanwhile, Hamas said on Sunday that it had chosen its candidates for the next round of municipal elections, due to be held in the Gaza Strip on May 5.

"We have chosen our lists of candidates for the local elections," Sami Abu Zuhari, a spokesman for Hamas, said. He added that the Hamas candidates were chosen on the basis of their integrity and professional and academic qualifications, and not according to family connections.

Jamal Shobaki, chairman of the PA's local elections committee, said the elections in the Gaza Strip would be held in eight areas: Rafah, Beit Lahiya, Abbasan Al-Kabirah, Abbasan Al-Saghirah, Al-Bureij, Mughraka, Wad Al-Salaka and Wad Gaza. Altogether, these councils have 94 seats.

Shobaki said a total 796 candidates had registered to run in the election, which would also be held in 78 West Bank municipalities and village councils.

Amid fears that Hamas might win the vote, Fatah leaders began two days of discussions in Gaza City on Sunday to discuss preparations for the elections.

PA chairman Mahmoud Abbas is attending the talks, which will also focus on July's legislative vote and primary elections in Fatah.

 

CANADIAN TEACHERS PRAISE TERROR

Islamic school suspends teachers over student's hate-filled tale
'God bless you, your efforts are good,' instructor wrote on Ottawa boy's story celebrating violence, hatred against Jews

Juliet O'Neill
The Ottawa Citizen
March 24, 2005

www.canada.com/components/printstory/printstory4.aspx?id=00033b4e-c48e-455e-8a3c-80cd07777fa5

[Picture caption: The cover page of the boy's story is illustrated with a burning Star of David beside a machine-gun and a Palestinian flag atop the Dome of the Rock, an ancient Muslim shrine in Jerusalem. The text next to the shrine reads: 'With the call of God is the Greatest, the flag of Zionism will fall and will be destroyed.']

Two teachers at the Abraar Islamic school in Ottawa were suspended yesterday pending an investigation into the encouragement or incitement of hatred against Jews expressed in a young student's violence-laden writing project.

Principal Aisha Sherazi said the seven-member school board and administration were "shocked" by teacher involvement in the project that was brought to her attention by the Citizen yesterday morning, and decided at an emergency meeting to suspend the instructors.

One teacher was apparently involved in the artistic production of the eight-page story of killing and martyrdom. Handwritten in Arabic and titled The Long Road, the cover page was illustrated by a drawing of a burning Star of David beside a machine-gun and Palestinian flag atop the Dome of the Rock, an ancient Muslim shrine in Jerusalem.

The other teacher had written comments on the student's paper, praising the boy's story of revenge for the assassination by Israeli forces a year ago of Sheik Ahmed Yassin, a co-founder of Hamas, in retaliation for suicide bombings against Israeli civilians.

"God bless you, your efforts are good," the teacher wrote on the title page. "The story of the hero Ahmed and the hero Salah is still alive. The end will be soon when God unites us all in Jerusalem to pray there."

On the margins inside the story, the teacher had written a note endorsing the boy's fantasy of a young Ahmed Yassin and his friend, Salah El-Dine, ambushing Israeli soldiers.

"Without thinking, Ahmed took his M16 machine-gun and threw the bombs, and he showered the Jews; this resulted in the killing of the soldiers," the boy's text reads. "Salah said: 'You killed them all.' Ahmed answered: 'Praise be to God.'"

The fantasy heroes are quoted at the end of the story saying: "We promise God and the heroes of Al-Aksa that we will continue the path, we will continue in spite of the difficulties and the hardships until the victory or the martyrdom, we will not surrender; we will fight for the sake of God until the end."

Mrs. Sherazi declined to name the student, for privacy reasons, or the teachers until the investigation is complete. "Then we'll see what action we decide we want to take," she said.

Mrs. Sherazi, a 32-year-old teacher who took over as principal in recent months, does not speak or read Arabic. She expressed surprise about the drawing and the story, even though it had reportedly been displayed in a glass case at the school.

The Citizen obtained two translations of the story before asking the principal about it. She said such a subject was not on the curriculum, but it may have been a submission in a creative writing contest for the Arabic studies class, where students could choose their own topics.

"Upon the issue being brought to the attention of the school principal, an emergency meeting was held today by the board and administration," Mrs. Sherazi said in a prepared statement.

"The individuals involved were immediately suspended pending an internal investigation. Encouraging or inciting hatred is strictly prohibited at our school. We will take all measures to investigate this matter and ensure that it does not reoccur."

Mrs. Sherazi said in an interview that the situation is "very, very shocking for everybody involved. Emotions run high so it's a difficult issue in general, very upsetting to all concerned."

The Abraar school, established in 2000, teaches students full time from junior kindergarten up to Grade 8. About 260 students are enrolled at the school, which is located on Grenon Avenue, near Bayshore. The school web page says it is designed to provide "a proper Islamic environment for growing and learning" and to help preserve Islamic culture in Ottawa.

"A lot of hard work is being done and where kids are involved it's just a great shame when things like this happen," Mrs. Sherazi added.

Mary Schoones, an educational consultant who has worked part-time at the school on professional development for more than a year and teaches education at the University of Ottawa, said it would be a shame if the staff at the school was tarnished by the incident.

"During my tenure at the Abraar school I have had the privilege to work with all the Abraar teaching staff and found them to be warm, caring and professional," Ms. Schoones said.

"As a teacher who has dealt with equity issues in the past, I have found the staff to have accepted and welcomed my presence. At no time during my tenure at the school have I seen any racial comments towards any culture. In fact I have found the staff to be interested in learning about all aspects of Canadian culture. I would consider it a shame if all the hard work put in by staff at the school was tarnished by this incident."

 

THE PUPIL'S STORY

The Story (As translated from Arabic for the Ottawa Citizen)

www.canada.com/components/printstory/printstory4.aspx?id=00033b4e-c48e-455e-8a3c-80cd07777fa5

Introduction

A tragedy. It seems that nothing can be worse than what happened today. I think that you know what happened. It is the imam Sheikh Ahmed Yassine the martyr. Two weeks after the martyrization of the sheikh, our hero Ahmed Yassine was born in Gaza ...

My hope is for God to be pleased with me.

- - -

Ahmed grew up and was educated in the mosque where he had a religious education. He grew up with his friend Salah El-Dine knowing that Palestine should become free. They were always fighting, with the rest of the children, until Ahmed and Salah grew up and went to university. When Ahmed reached 33 years of age, a tragedy occurred ...

Ahmed entered his house and greeted his mother. He heard the broadcaster say: "Killing of 10 Zionist soldiers in fierce clashes in Gaza." Ahmed said: "This is a lie. Myself, Salah and the rest of the fighters, we killed 30 of them." His mother told him: "God bless you my dear."

One day, when Ahmed was returning home with his father from the Friday prayers, the soldiers killed him before his eyes. In the latter's house ... Om Ayman, the neighbour, said: "There is no power or strength except in God, God be with you Om Ahmed. I wish we can take revenge from them who killed Ayman while fighting and now it is Salah El-Dine who is fighting."

Om Ahmed said: "Do they have to fight? Salah and my son killed 10 Jews last week."

Om Ayman said: "We hope for God to protect them."

Om Ahmed: "Amen."

During the night ...

Om Ayman told her husband all of what happened. When she fell asleep, he got in touch with his officer: "I think that you have learned that it is an ambush!"

The same night, Ahmed was unable to sleep, he felt an imminent danger. Ten minutes later, the Israeli bulldozers came; he quickly woke up Salah then they ran away ...

The soldiers destroyed the two houses and searched in the rubble; they did not find Ahmed and Salah. The officer ordered to search for them.

The army searched but did not find them. After a short while, two soldiers astray from the rest of the troop passed by; Ahmed killed them both and took their weapons and after the two soldiers were killed, the two friends escaped to the mountains.

One day ...

"I will go and find out what happened to our homes?" Ahmed said: "Good Salah, but be careful." An hour later, Salah came back and said in pain: "The commandos killed our families; we will take vengeance."

Ahmed said: "That is fine, the retaliation is coming and they will not escape us harming them."

Salah said: "God willing."

The cave in which Ahmed Yassine and Salah El-Dine lived was far from sight, but one day ...

"The place is besieged, they surrendered."

The voice of the officer.

Without thinking, Ahmed took his M16 machine gun and threw the bombs, and he showered the Jews; this resulted in the killing of the soldiers.

Salah said: "You killed them all."

Ahmed answered: "Praise be to God."

They immediately collected the ammunition and they moved from one cave to another.

A few days later ...

Ahmed said: "I learned that Shalom will pass through here; the street is 500 meters away from us, and I will kill him."

A week later ...

Ahmed armed himself with a machine gun and bombs and hid in the long grass and waited for the victim.

One hour later ...

Shalom's car passed by and Ahmed threw all the hand bombs he had, which resulted in the killing of Shalom. Following his killing, Ahmed fought a fierce fight with the guards, which resulted in Ahmed being wounded by the bullets of the occupation and which led to the killing of them all.

Following the killing of the soldiers, Ahmed saw a poster on which was written:

Wanted by Israel:

Ahmed Yassine - Salah El-Dine

In Gaza only

Call: 555-6710

The award: US $1.000.000.000.000

Ahmed realized that, somehow, the Israeli learned of their presence. He hurried and told Salah about what happened.

After a long discussion, the two heroes decided to escape.

It was dawn. Ahmed quickly visited Ahmed Yassine's tomb (illegible) along with Salah. They said at the same time:

"We promise God and the heroes of Al-Aksa that we will continue the path, we will continue in spite of the difficulties and the hardships until the victory or the martyrdom, we will not surrender; we will fight for the sake of God until the end."

[Pupil's signature here]

Done with our thanks to God.

Ran with fact box "The story", which has been appended to the story.

FULL ARTICLES

ARAB NEWS: AL-JAZEERA TO BE LAUNCHED IN ENGLISH IN AMERICA

Al-Jazeera to be launched in English in America
By Barbara Ferguson
U.S. correspondent, Arab News
March 22, 2005

arabnews.com/?page=4§ion=0&article=60858&d=22&m=3&y=2005&pix=world.jpg&category=World

Al-Jazeera news channel, the bete noire of both the Bush administration and many Arab governments, is shown on a daily basis to 35 to 50 million Arab households throughout the world.

Soon Americans will be viewing it in their homes – in English.

Since it began broadcasting in 1996, al-Jazeera has made a name for itself by annoying both the U.S. government and Arab regimes for its controversial coverage. Love it or hate it, it has revolutionized reporting in the Middle East.

Now its executives say they want to launch an English-language news channel from the U.S., to provide English speakers in the U.S. and elsewhere with more accurate and informed reporting about the world’s most turbulent region.

This may not be such a bad thing, said experts during a recent briefing, who say the U.S. should not vilify Al-Jazeera, but rather work to help it succeed.

"The U.S. needs to find a way to engage the Arab media, rather than shut down, marginalize, and ostracize news mediums such as al-Jazeera," said Rajiv Chandrasekaran, the Washington Post’s former Baghdad bureau chief.

Speaking during a panel discussion organized by the John Hopkins University School of Advance International Studies, SAIS, Chandrasekaran, said: “The U.S. needs to find a more constructive way to deal with al-Jazeera, which is key to further the U.S. agenda of democracy in the region."

His comments came following the viewing of "Control Room," a documentary about al-Jazeera during the 2003 launch of the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

SAIS assembled a strong lineup of panelists: Chandrasekaran; Josh Rushing, the former Marine Corps captain and Central Command spokesman who is prominently featured in the film; Mohamed Alami, a Washington-based reporter for al-Jazeera; and Ambassador Patrick Theros, former U.S. ambassador to Qatar, al-Jazeera's home base.

Alami echoed Chandrasekaran's remarks, accusing the U.S. of "behaving like an Arab regime by insisting the problem is not the message, but the messenger."

"The Arab world is suffering from a great deficiency of freedom, and many of our bureaus have been shut down in Arab countries."

Al-Jazeera has changed the Arab media and the Arab people's perspective of what they can expect from their media forever, he said. Patrick Theros, U.S. ambassador to Qatar when the al-Jazeera was launched, agreed: "It is in the interest of the U.S. government to encourage new Arabic channels to be as free as al-Jazeera."

 

ISLAM ONLINE: LLOYDS TSB BANK LAUNCHES ISLAMIC MORTGAGE

British Bank launches Islamic mortgage
Islam Online
March 22, 2005

(IslamOnline.net & News Agencies)

www.islam-online.net/English/News/2005-03/22/article03.shtml

Lloyds TSB, Britain's fifth-largest bank, has become the third bank in the country to offer mortgage services compatible with Sharia (Muslim law).

Lloyds TSB said Monday, March 21, it would cater to the needs of Britain's approximately 1.8 million Muslims, reported Agence France-Presse (AFP).

The service differed from conventional British mortgages because it was "based on completely different principles," said bank official Emile Abu-Shakra.

"What we are doing is buying the property on behalf of the customer and then leasing it back to them in a way which allows them to legally own it at the same time, to get ownership."

Crucially, no interest would be payable. Under Sharia, interest on bank accounts is haram (unlawful) because such interest is an increase of money made without effort or trade.

Islam prohibits depositing one's wealth and taking specified increase without the risk of either loss or profit making.

Therefore, the type of investment allowed is where a person deposits money in an account and shares both the risk of making profit or losing.

Sharia further forbids Muslims from receiving or paying interest on loans.

Under the new mortgage, the amount paid over the 25-year term would be broadly similar to a conventional mortgage.

The British bank would fund up to 90 percent of a house purchase and the customer would then repay that sum over a fixed period, alongside a rent payment for use of the property.

"It's a form of rental, but it’s completely compliant with Islamic law and avoids the interest system so it looks the same," Abu-Shakra added.

The mortgage offered a solution to Muslim customers who wanted to buy a property but would not enter into a traditional mortgage agreement.

"Finding the money for a new home can be tough at the best of times, but Britain’s Muslims face an even more difficult dilemma," said Mark Austin, of Lloyds TSB Islamic Financial Services.

"With traditional, interest-based mortgages out of the question for many, the choice has tended to be between going against the faith or avoiding a mortgage altogether."

The mortgage and current account were being piloted in branches across heavily-Muslim populated areas of Britain, including Edgware Road in central London, Luton, north of the capital and the country's second city Birmingham.

Both services can be operated through any of the bank’s 2000 branches across Britain.

The bank said that it will derive much benefit from the market for Muslim-orientated financial products.

"The Muslim population in the UK is one of the fastest growing communities," Abu-Shakra said.

"There are around two million Muslims in the UK at the moment, they haven't had access to this type of product in this way before so, it's going to be attractive to them. There is definitely a market for it."

The move follows Lloyds TSB's recently-launched Islamic bank account, which also offers no interest or overdraft facilities to comply with Sharia.

In 2003, HSBC banking group became the fist high street bank in Britain to offer mortgages and current accounts in accordance with Sharia.

A year later, the Islamic Bank of Britain (IBB) became the first Islamic bank to open its doors in the country.

FULL ARTICLES

PUTIN TO VISIT ISRAEL

Putin to Visit Israel - a First for Russia
By Gavin Rabinowitz
The Associated Press
March 22, 2005

www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-israel-russia,0,2175924,print.story?coll=sns-ap-nationworld-headlines

Russian President Vladimir Putin will visit Israel at the end of April, the first visit ever by a Russian leader to the Jewish state, Israeli officials said Tuesday.

Israeli-Russian relations have improved greatly in the past 15 years since the fall of the Soviet Union, which supported Israel's Arab enemies. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who is of Russian descent, has visited Moscow three times since taking office in 2001. Sharon, who learned Russian from his parents, has spoken with Putin on the phone.

Putin will arrive in Israel on April 27 for a two-day visit, officially as a guest of President Moshe Katsav, said Ron Ben-Yishai, an aide to Katsav.

Kremlin officials could not confirm the plan.

Katsav invited Putin during a meeting in Poland earlier in the year at commemorations to mark the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz Nazi death camp, and Putin has now formally accepted, Ben-Yishai said.

Former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev and Russian chief of state Boris Yeltsin visited Israel after they left office.

During the historic trip Putin will meet with Sharon and other senior Israeli officials for talks on advancing Middle East peace talks, Ben-Yishai said. Katsav, who holds a largely ceremonial position, will host a state banquet for Putin.

Russia is a member of the so-called Quartet of international mediators for the Middle East peacemaking, along with the United States, the United Nations and the European Union.

The Quartet sponsored the 2003 "road map" peace plan, a three-stage program for creating a Palestinian state. Neither Israel nor the Palestinians carried out the initial requirements, and the plan has stalled.

It was not clear if Putin would also meet with Palestinian officials.

Ties between the two countries have been strained in recent months over a Russian decision to supply Israel's arch-foe, Syria, with advanced missiles.

Katsav extended the invitation to Putin during a meeting in Poland earlier in the year at commemorations to mark the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz Nazi death camp, and Putin has now formally accepted, Ben-Yishai said.

Katsav will travel in turn to Moscow in May to attend Russian ceremonies marking the 60th anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany in World War II, Ben-Yishai said.

 

PUTIN'S PRO-ISRAEL POLICY

Putin's Pro-Israel Policy
By Mark N. Katz
Middle East Quarterly
Winter 2004

The Russian government remains the greatest facilitator for Iranian nuclear ambitions. It has had close ties to terror-sponsoring regimes such as Syria and Saddam's Iraq. Russian president Vladimir Putin has not hesitated to oppose U.S. foreign policy. Washington and Moscow have clashed frequently over the Iraq war and its aftermath. But, mostly unnoticed by foreign policy pundits and Middle East watchers, Russia's policy toward Israel has undergone a steady shift.

Under Putin, Russia has not only declined to adopt Western Europe's increasingly shrill anti-Israel posture, but in many ways he has actually tilted Russian policy in Israel's favor, at least with respect to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It would be a mistake, however, to interpret recent Russian shifts as due to a fundamental ideological shift. Putin neither seeks to please Washington nor to accommodate any domestic political imperative. Rather, Moscow's new Middle East policy results from Putin's personal calculation of Russian interests, one that does not find many other takers in his own government.

The Broader Russian-Israeli Relationship

While the Soviet Union was among the first states to recognize Israel in 1948, Moscow quickly changed course and aligned itself with Arab nationalist regimes. The USSR severed diplomatic relations with Israel following the 1967 Six-Day War and subsequently supported Palestinian nationalist and terrorist movements in the West Bank and Gaza.[1] Only in October 1991, shortly before the collapse of the Soviet Union, did Moscow and Jerusalem again exchange ambassadors. During the Yeltsin years (1991-99), Russian-Israeli relations were relatively good, especially in terms of trade. But they again cooled during Yevgeny Primakov's tenure as foreign minister (1996-98) and prime minister (1998-99). Strongly pro-Arab, Primakov sought to shift Moscow's policy once more into the Palestinian camp.[2]

During his five years in power, Putin has worked to upgrade Russia's relations with Israel. Nevertheless, many differences remain. Jerusalem remains upset with Moscow's continuing support for Iran's nuclear program. Russian companies remain the main contractors behind the Iranian nuclear reactor at Bushehr. In 1995, Tehran and Moscow signed a US$800 million deal in which the Iranian government purchased a reactor and 2,000 tons of uranium.[3] In March 2001, Iranian president Muhammad Khatami traveled to Moscow where he finalized a $7 billion deal to purchase Russian military equipment. His defense minister, the force behind the agreement, returned to Moscow seven months later to seal the deal.[4]

Israeli policymakers view the Iranian nuclear program as posing a grave threat to Israeli security. When Ariel Sharon traveled to Moscow in October 2002, he raised the issue of Russian nuclear assistance to Iran.[5] Putin again rebuffed Sharon's concerns about Russian support for Iran's nuclear program during Sharon's November 2003 visit to Moscow.[6] In September 2004, the Israeli prime minister said, "there is no doubt" that Tehran is trying to acquire nuclear weapons and "that is a very big danger, especially since they succeeded in developing a rocket, the Shihab-3 that … puts Israel in its range."[7]

Similarly, the Putin administration has refused to end Russian support for the Iranian atomic energy program despite U.S., Israeli, and even European expressions of concern that Russian support is facilitating the Islamic Republic's drive to acquire nuclear weapons. Russian commentators have argued that the sale of nuclear reactors to Iran is vital to the survival of the Russian atomic energy industry, which has few other domestic or foreign customers.[8] The Russian government's reluctance to react to Israel's security concerns is no surprise. After all, the threat posed by a nuclear-armed Iran to Russia itself is not sufficient to affect a change in Russian policy.

As with Iran, economic considerations guided Russian policy toward Saddam Hussein's Iraq. In return for Moscow's political support, Saddam's regime rewarded Russian firms with oil development and U.N.-sponsored Oil-for-Food program contracts. Bolstered economically, Saddam sheltered terrorists like Abu Abbas, mastermind of the 1985 Achille Lauro hijacking, sponsored the Arab Liberation Front, and spent millions of dollars to reward family members of suicide bombers and other terrorists. Saddam threatened to attack Israel on several occasions and did, indeed, launch Scud missiles at Tel Aviv in 1991.[9] U.S.-led military action, rather than Russian or Israeli diplomacy, eliminated Iraq's threat to Israel.

The Putin administration has continued Russia's traditionally warm relationship with Syria. The Russian government continues to sell Syria arms. The Israeli security establishment fears that any weapons sold to Syria might fall into the hands of Hezbollah. During his October 2002 trip to Moscow, Sharon raised the issue with Putin but failed to get Moscow's commitment to halt these activities.[10] Indeed, when Syrian vice president Abdel Halim Khaddam met Putin three months later, among the projects they discussed was Russian assistance in upgrading Syria's Soviet-era weaponry as well as construction of both a nuclear power plant and a nuclear-powered desalination plant for Syria.[11] While the Putin administration has emphasized the similarities in Russian and U.S. approaches to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Moscow has distanced itself from the Bush administration's policy toward Syria.[12]

The Putin Doctrine

The last of former Russian president Boris Yeltsin's six prime ministers, Putin assumed the presidency upon Yeltsin's 1999 resignation. Soon after he became prime minister, Putin moved to crush Chechen separatism, sending the full force of the Russian military into the renegade province. Natan Sharansky, the former Soviet dissident turned Israeli politician, visited Moscow shortly after Putin became president. While the United States and other Western governments criticized Russian operations in Chechnya, the Israeli government did not. Rather, Sharansky offered strong support for Putin's hard-line policy of not negotiating with terrorists but defeating them militarily instead.[13] Parallels between Russia's conflict with the Chechens and Israel's struggle with the Palestinians have resonated strongly with the Putin administration.

A year after the Russian army reentered Chechnya, peace talks aimed at settling the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian dispute collapsed. Active conflict was renewed as Yasir Arafat launched a new intifada. With the collapse of the Camp David II talks, the Russian Foreign Ministry appeared set to take on a major role as a mediator between Israel and the Palestinians. During Arafat's August 2000 visit to Moscow, Putin declared Russia's support for "the Palestinian people's right to self determination."[14] Moscow, though, reacted coolly to Arafat's declaration that he would soon make a unilateral declaration of Palestinian independence. Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov indicated that making such a declaration was the prerogative of the Palestinians but that Russian recognition might not be forthcoming, especially if a Palestinian declaration of independence would lead to more violence. "All circumstances and time frame must be weighed carefully," he said.[15]

Putin's decision not to attend or send Russian representatives to the October 2000 Sharm el-Sheikh summit had less to do with Russian disengagement than with a desire to avoid any process which the United States dominated. The center-right business daily Kommersant suggested that Putin did not want to be sidelined at the summit.[16] At the same time, Ivanov made clear that the Russian government would oppose any U.N. Security Council resolution authorizing a U.N. peacekeeping force for the West Bank and Gaza so long as Israel opposed it.[17] In March 2001, Russia, nevertheless, voted in favor of a resolution to dispatch international observers to Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza. Kommersant expressed surprise, noting that the Russian foreign ministry had rejected this proposal, apparently out of fear that if accepted here, it might also be applied to Chechnya. There was speculation that the Russian ministry of foreign affairs anticipated a U.S. veto and thus voted in favor in order to score points with the Arabs "without risking anything."[18] Russia repeated the pattern in September 2003 when the Security Council considered a resolution demanding that Israel not expel Arafat from the West Bank and Gaza. The United States vetoed the resolution while Russia voted in favor. However, Russia mitigated its traditional pro-Arab position with subsequent statements complaining that the Security Council vote had been "rushed."[19]

In January 2001, Putin received Israel's ceremonial president, Moshe Katzav. The two emphasized that "there can be no negotiations with terrorists." According to the daily Vremya MN,[20] "This was essentially the first time that Putin, who has said on numerous occasions that there can be no dialogue with the Chechen rebels, expressed support for this basic Israeli principle as a whole."[21]

Soon thereafter, Israeli voters gave Ehud Barak's Labor Party a resounding defeat, and Sharon became the new prime minister. Vilified by many European governments, Sharon, nevertheless, enjoyed good relations not only with U.S. president George W. Bush but also with Putin. According to Sevodnya, "Sharon is impressed with Vladimir Putin and has spoken approvingly of Moscow's Chechnya policy, saying that it is what the Israelis should have done in Lebanon."[22]

In the spring, when the new Bush administration indicated that it did not want to take as active a role as had the Clinton administration in negotiation of an Israeli-Palestinian peace, Moscow made clear that it would not seek to replace Washington in this role.[23] Putin expressed sympathy for Israel's position, even telling Secretary of State Colin Powell that "there is absolutely no logic" to Arafat's actions.[24] When Arafat again visited Moscow in May 2001, both Putin and Ivanov reiterated that "there were no differences between the Russian and the U.S. approaches" to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.[25] Arafat could not hope to exploit differences between former Cold War rivals. The following month, the Kremlin made clear its displeasure with former prime minister Primakov's statement to a Jordanian paper in which he blamed Israel for the violence.[26] Ivanov reiterated that "Russia had no disagreements with the U.S. regarding the Palestinian-Israeli settlement process."[27]

In September, Sharon traveled to Moscow and met Putin. Putin referred to the fact that many Israelis originally came from Russia and other ex-Soviet republics, stating that he wanted them to "live in peace and security," and denounced terrorism, even as he also referred to Russia's "traditionally good" relations with the Arab world and the Palestinian Authority.[28]

As the Palestinian intifada continued, the White House and international community moved to reinvigorate diplomacy. The United States joined with Russia, the European Union, and the United Nations to form the Quartet. In January 2002, Andrei Vdovin, the Russian foreign ministry's special representative for Middle East peace, told the Russian government-owned daily Rossiiskaya gazeta that "there aren't any significant differences" between the approach taken by Russia and the three other cosponsors of the Middle East peace process.[29]

When Arafat, confined to his headquarters in Ramallah, appealed to Russia for assistance in pressuring Sharon to back off his hard-line policies, Putin told Arafat that "combating terrorism and extremism is the most urgent task facing the world community today."[30] Izvestia observed that, "The Kremlin's assessment of the situation could hardly have encouraged Arafat."[31]

During a March 2002 visit to Israel, Sergei Mironov, the speaker of Russia's Federation Council, the Russian parliament's upper house, canceled a meeting with his Palestinian counterpart as a result of "a ‘personal decision' not to ‘show politeness' to the Palestinians and not to visit the Palestinian Authority because ‘the terrorist acts in Afghanistan, Chechnya, and Israel have the same roots, mainly financial ones.'"[32] While the Russian foreign minister disavowed Mironov's remarks, the sentiment reflected Putin's thinking on Israel. In a statement suggesting that the Palestinian leadership knew this, Palestinian spokeswoman Hanan Ashrawi told Vremya novostei that, "We became disillusioned with Russia's position a long time ago … Russia is following the U.S. lead more and more."[33]

The Putin administration may have become disillusioned with Arafat's leadership, but it was not willing to follow the Bush administration's position blindly. When Bush argued that Arafat was no longer a legitimate partner and needed to be replaced as Palestinian leader, Putin emphasized that Arafat was the elected Palestinian leader, and therefore talks must be held with him.[34] Nevertheless, Moscow played down its differences with Washington. In response to Bush's statement calling for the replacement of the Palestinian leadership, Aleksandr Yakovenko, official spokesman of the Russian foreign ministry, stated that, "[W]e read the president's speech carefully, and I want to point out that it makes no mention of Yasir Arafat personally."[35]

In December 2002, Israeli foreign minister Benjamin Netanyahu received a much friendlier reception in Moscow than he had in London or Paris. When Netanyahu raised the issue of Russia supporting pro-Arab resolutions at the U.N., Ivanov was conciliatory, even suggesting the time was near for Russia to "reassess its position and perhaps revise it."[36] While a brief diplomatic spat erupted between Jerusalem and Moscow in July 2003 over Ivanov's decision to meet with Arafat, the dispute did not last long. The Israeli government wanted to marginalize Arafat in order to bolster the position of the newly appointed Palestinian Authority prime minister, Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen). His resignation in September 2003 in the face of Arafat's obstructionism made moot the dispute.

In November 2003, Sharon and Putin once again met in the Kremlin. While Sharon expressed dislike for the Russian-drafted U.N. Security Council Resolution 1515 endorsing the U.S.-sponsored "road map,"[37] he called Putin "a true friend of Israel." For his part, Putin reiterated his concern about the impact of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on migrants from Russia to Israel and proposed that Russia open an exhibit "devoted to the tragedy of the Holocaust."[38]

In January 2004, Russia, along with seventy-three other countries (including all those from the European Union), abstained from a U.N. General Assembly resolution asking the International Court of Justice to rule on the legality of the security barrier that the Israeli government was constructing to protect Israeli communities from Palestinian terrorism. Russian diplomats had tried to persuade the Palestinians and others not to put this resolution to a vote. Again, Russian concerns about its own Chechnya problem mitigated its historically pro-Palestinian position. This was because, as two Kommersant journalists noted, the resolution "sets a precedent in which an international organization … is asking the court to provide an expert assessment of the legality of actions by a country that is not prepared to accept its verdict. If the hearings go forward and the court decides in favor of the Palestinians, in the future nothing will prevent the European Union or the [Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe] from asking The Hague to assess, for example, the actions of the Russian authorities in Chechnya."[39] Nevertheless, after the International Court of Justice ruling, Russia voted in July 2004 to condemn the wall's construction.[40]

Also in January 2004, the Palestinians witnessed eroding Russian support when Nabil Shaath, the Palestinian Authority's chief foreign representative, met with Ivanov in Moscow to discuss the impasse in road map talks. Shaath blamed the Israelis, but Ivanov would have none of that. Ivanov reportedly told Shaath that, "the only person who can take the terrorist groups in hand is Yasir Arafat. But the Palestinian leader, who remains firmly in control of the situation … doesn't want to lift a finger to rein in the terror." The clear implication was that Russia considered Arafat the main obstacle and might even withdraw their diplomatic support for Arafat's continued leadership. Ivanov further chided Shaath for the claim that the Palestinian Authority's and Russia's positions coincided, insisting that the Palestinian Authority not seek to use Shaath's visit to Moscow for propaganda purposes. [41]

In April 2004, the Russian foreign ministry condemned the Israeli killing of Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. But according to Vremya novostei, it only did so "cautiously."[42] By contrast, Mikhail Margelov, chairman of the Federation Council's international affairs committee, spoke positively of Israeli actions: "The killing of Yassin by the Israeli military means that Israeli special forces are essentially doing the job of eliminating terrorist groups for the Palestinian security organs."[43]

Later that month, Kommersant reported on the Bush administration's support for and EU opposition to Sharon's plan to unilaterally withdraw from Gaza and build a fence inside the West Bank. Shaath called on Russia and others to persuade Washington to abandon its support for this plan. But as Kommersant noted, the Palestinians should not pin their hopes on Russia: "As Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov said yesterday, ‘A withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza is a step in the direction indicated in the road map.' True, he qualified his statement by saying that such a step could be useful ‘provided that it is not the last.'"[44] In a subsequent meeting with Shaath at the Russian foreign ministry, Lavrov offered Shaath no recourse as he repeated almost verbatim the words of George Bush. [45]

Where Goes Russia's Middle East Policy?

Under Putin, concern over Chechnya and renewed anxiety about terrorism has led Russian policy to tilt toward Israel in the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. Still, although Russian-Israeli relations have become close under Putin, he is not willing to forego for the sake of Russian-Israeli friendship strong ties with Middle Eastern regimes that Jerusalem considers threatening. But at the same time, Putin has not been willing to forego strong ties to Israel—now worth more than $1 billion annually—for the sake of friendship with Iran and rejectionist Arab regimes. In this sense, Putin has pursued an "evenhanded" policy toward Israel on the one hand and radical regimes in Iraq, Iran, and Syria on the other. This makes Putin's "tilt" toward Israel vis-à-vis the Palestinians all the more remarkable. What explains it?

One possible explanation is that Putin does not want, as Ashrawi suggested, to oppose U.S. foreign policy on an issue that is so important to Washington.[46] The fact that Moscow has opposed the United States on so many other issues may make Putin's support for Washington on this one issue more important. This is unlikely, though. Putin, after all, has opposed the United States on issues of key importance for Washington, such as both the U.S.-led intervention in Iraq and Russian support for the Iranian nuclear program. Despite this, Russian-U.S. relations remain relatively good. It is difficult to imagine, then, that the prospect of annoying Washington is preventing Moscow from pursuing a more pro-Palestinian policy. Russian foreign policy observers acknowledge that much of Russian foreign policy is actually predicated on a desire to spite the Americans.[47] The Putin administration has clearly not feared negative U.S. reaction to Russian votes for pro-Palestinian U.N. resolutions.[48] Pleasing the United States, then, cannot explain Putin's pro-Israeli tilt.

Russian domestic politics—specifically, concern over Chechnya—may play an important role in shaping Putin's policy toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Officials and commentators in both Russia and Israel have frequently pointed out the similarities of the fight against the Chechens and the Palestinians. Like Palestinian terrorists, Chechen rebels have launched a number of attacks on civilian targets in Russia, including attacks on hospitals in southern Russia during the first Chechen war (1994-96), the seizure of a Moscow theater in 2002, and a series of attacks in the summer of 2004 that culminated in the death of hundreds of school children in Beslan.[49] This similarity in predicament seems to have increased sympathy for Israel in Russia. But the translation of domestic concern about Chechnya on Russian policy toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is complicated. A succinct description of the contradictory Russian domestic political factors affecting this appeared in the liberal daily Sevodnya, which, under Kremlin pressure, ceased publication in 2001:

"Russia is on very delicate ground. On the one hand, our people account for one-quarter of Israel's population, and the violence in the Middle East is being incited by the same people who are inciting it in the North Caucasus … On the other hand, Moscow would offend Russia's millions of Muslims and the numerous "friends of the Palestinians" among the political elite if it took an openly pro-Israeli position.[50]"

Indeed, as Konstantin Kosachov, vice-chairman of the Duma's International Affairs Committee, pointed out, the Duma has no shortage of either pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian deputies.[51]

There are limits to how the Russian public's increasing awareness of terrorism and sympathy toward its victims can translate into support for Israel. According to the 2002 Russian census, there are 14.5 million Muslims in Russia, or about 10 percent of the population, compared to just 230,000 Jews.[52] Anti-Semitism still persists. The combination of a large Muslim population, a small Jewish one, and the persistence of anti-Semitism among ethnic Russians would seem to militate in favor of a pro-Palestinian foreign policy instead of a pro-Israeli one. Being similarly besieged in the war on terrorism, then, is not the only factor driving the Russian tilt toward Israel.

Economic concerns, of course, are among Putin's priorities. It is not clear, however, whether a pro-Palestinian tilt in Russian foreign policy would harm the Russian-Israeli economic relationship. The relatively pro-Palestinian tilt in Russian foreign policy during Primakov's tenure as foreign and prime minister did not prevent growth in the Russian-Israeli economic relationship.

What, then, explains Putin's pro-Israeli tilt vis-à-vis the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? In a Russia where Putin increasingly dominates domestic and foreign policies, the pro-Israel tilt must be a result of Putin's personal choice. Sympathy for Israel's position is something Putin maintains despite the traditional preference of the Russian foreign ministry and most of the foreign policy elite. It is true that other Russian politicians have voiced pro-Israeli sentiments. Many of these, however, may simply be parroting Putin's position instead of actually agreeing with it. If Putin is followed by a pro-Palestinian president, they would probably change their tune accordingly.

But what has motivated Putin to make this choice? Putin's history indicates a deep, emotional commitment to defeating the Chechen rebellion. He denies that the Chechen rebels have any legitimate basis for complaint against Moscow and refuses to negotiate with them. Putin does not appear to doubt the rightness of his hard-line policy toward Chechnya, even in the face of international outrage. Sunni Islamists see Russia as being as much of an enemy as the United States and Israel. European leaders criticize Russian human rights abuses in Chechnya. Even at the height of Russian collaboration with "Old Europe" to block United Nations approval for the U.S-led intervention in Iraq, French president Jacques Chirac raised the issue of Russian human rights violations in Chechnya while hosting Putin at a Paris banquet.[53] After the September 2004 Beslan tragedy, the Russian foreign ministry "reacted with outrage" at the implied criticism of Moscow's policy in an EU statement asking "the Russian authorities how this tragedy could have happened."[54] Very few have given the unequivocal support for Putin's Chechnya policy that Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon has.

Sharon, who is fluent in Russian, has established a genuine bond with Putin. Both share a similar mindset about their Muslim opponents: they are terrorists with whom there can be no negotiation. Both Putin and Sharon use force against opponents they believe undeserving of sympathy, and both share a bond formed by their resulting vilification in the West.

While Sharon is not the first or only Israeli official to express sympathy for Russia's Chechnya policy, Sharon's key role in the improvement of bilateral relations is suggested by the improvement under his watch. Prior to Sharon's accession, Putin was content to leave the Israeli-Palestinian issue in the hands of the strongly pro-Palestinian Russian foreign ministry. Only after his first meeting with Sharon in September 2001 did Putin's pro-Israel tilt emerge.

Could this change? A more leftist government in Israel would probably be less sympathetic toward Putin's hard-line policy in Chechnya. By the same token, a Russian government willing to negotiate with the Chechens would probably not be as sympathetic as Putin now is to the current hard-line Israeli approach toward the Palestinians. Sharon would have had less reason to value relations with a Moscow willing to accommodate the Chechens. But so long as Putin remains Russia's president and Sharon (or someone like him) Israel's prime minister, the close Israeli-Russian relationship will probably continue to develop, especially if Sharon's successor is also a Russian-speaker. The strong Russian-Israeli trade relationship alone provides an incentive for Moscow and Jerusalem to maintain good working relations to some degree. The Russian foreign policy elite's pro-Palestinian sympathies might emerge again, though, with Putin's successor.

Mark N. Katz is a professor of government and politics at George Mason University.

[1] Galia Golan, The Soviet Union and National Liberation Movements in the Third World (Boston: Unwin Hyman, 1988), pp. 288-9; idem, Soviet Policies in the Middle East from World War Two to Gorbachev (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), pp. 110-23.
[2] Robert O. Freedman, "Russia and Israel under Yeltsin," Israel Studies, Mar. 1998, pp. 140-69; Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Sept. 16, 1998; Talal Nizameddin, Russia and the Middle East: Towards a New Foreign Policy (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1999), pp. 122-41.
[3] Michael Eisenstadt, "Russian Arms and Technology Transfers to Iran: Policy Challenges to the United States," Arms Control Today, Mar. 2001; idem, Iranian Military Power: Capabilities and Intentions (Washington: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 1996), p. 11; The Washington Post, May 4, 1995.
[4] Islamic Republic News Agency, Oct. 1, 2001.
[5] Vremya novostei, Oct. 1, 2002, English translation in Current Digest of the Post-Soviet Press (hereinafter, CDPSP), Oct. 30, 2002.
[6] Ibid., Nov. 4, 2003, in CDPSP, Dec. 3, 2003.
[7] Jerusalem Post (Internet version), Sept. 8, 2004.
[8] Ekho Moskvy Radio, Dec. 27, 2002, in BBC Monitoring International Reports, Dec. 29, 2002.
[9] Robert O. Freedman, "Moscow and the Gulf War," Problems of Communism, July-Aug. 1991, pp. 1-17; The Moscow Times, Oct. 25, 2004.
[10] Rossiiskaya gazeta, Oct. 2, 2002, in CDPSP, Oct. 30, 2002.
[11] Trud, Jan. 17, 2003, in CDPSP, Feb. 5-12, 2003.
[12] Kommersant, May 13, 2004, in CDPSP, June 2-9, 2004.
[13] Izvestia, Jan. 29, 2000, in CDPSP, Mar. 1, 2000.
[14] Nezavisimaya gazeta, Aug. 12, 2000, in CDPSP, Sept. 13, 2000.
[15] Ibid.
[16] Kommersant, Oct. 21, 2000, in CDPSP, Nov. 15, 2000.
[17] Nezavisimaya gazeta, Nov. 17, 2000, in CDPSP, Dec. 13, 2000.
[18] Kommersant, Mar. 29, 2001, in CDPSP, Apr. 25, 2001.
[19] Ibid., Sept. 18, 2003, in CDPSP, Oct. 15, 2003.
[20] MN is an abbreviation for Moskovskiye novosti.
[21] Vremya MN, Jan. 24, 2001, in CDPSP, Feb. 21, 2001.
[22] Sevodnya, Feb. 8, 2001, in CDPSP, Mar. 7, 2001.
[23] Noviye Izvestia, Apr. 18, 2001, in CDPSP, May 16, 2001; idem, May 23, 2001, in CDPSP, June 20, 2001.
[24] Ibid., Apr. 18, 2001, in CDPSP, May 16, 2001.
[25] Izvestia, May 30, 2001, in CDPSP, June 27, 2001.
[26] Kommersant, May 30, 2001, in CDPSP, June 27, 2001; idem, June 20, 2001, in CDPSP, July 18, 2001.
[27] Izvestia, June 29, 2001, in CDPSP, July 25, 2001.
[28] Kommersant, Sept. 5, 2001, in CDPSP, Oct. 3, 2001.
[29] Rossiiskaya gazeta, Jan. 22, 2002, in CDPSP, Feb. 20, 2002.
[30] Izvestia, Jan. 23, 2002, in CDPSP, Feb. 20, 2002.
[31] Ibid.
[32] Vremya novostei, Mar. 13, 2002, in CDPSP, Apr. 10, 2002.
[33] Ibid.
[34] Vremya MN, Mar. 30, 2002, in CDPSP, Apr. 24, 2002; idem, June 26, 2002, in CDPSP, July 24, 2002; idem, July 18, 2002, in CDPSP, Aug. 14, 2002.
[35] Izvestia, June 27, 2002, in CDPSP, July 24, 2002.
[36] Kommersant, Dec. 24, 2002, in CDPSP, Jan. 22, 2003.
[37] "Security Council Adopts Resolution Endorsing Road Map Leading towards Two-state Resolution of Israeli-Palestinian Conflict," U.N. news release, Nov. 19, 2003.
[38] Vremya novostei, Nov. 4, 2003, in CDPSP, Dec. 3, 2003.
[39] Kommersant, Jan. 20, 2004, in CDPSP, Feb. 18, 2004.
[40] Vremya novostei, July 22, 2004, in CDPSP, Aug. 18, 2004.
[41] Kommersant, Jan. 22, 2004, in CDPSP, Feb. 18, 2004.
[42] Vremya novostei, Mar. 23, 2004, in CDPSP, Apr. 21, 2004.
[43] Ibid.
[44] Kommersant, Apr. 16, 2004, in CDPSP, May 19, 2004.
[45] Ibid., Apr. 17, 2004, in CDPSP, May 19, 2004.
[46] Vremya novostei, Mar. 13, 2002, in CDPSP, Apr. 10, 2002.
[47] Kommersant, Mar. 29, 2001, in CDPSP, Apr. 25, 2001.
[48] Ibid.
[49] Nabi Abdullaev, "Chechnya Ten Years Later," Current History, Oct. 2004, pp. 332-6.
[50] Valerya Sychova, "Who Are You for, the Israelis or the Palestinians?" Sevodnya, Oct. 14, 2000, in CDPSP, Nov. 15, 2000.
[51] Ibid.
[52] Nezavisimaya gazeta, Nov. 11, 2003, in CDPSP, Dec. 10, 2003.
[53] Izvestia, Feb. 12, 2003, in CDPSP, Mar. 12, 2003.
[54] The Moscow Times, Sept. 6, 2004.

FULL ARTICLES

BBC: HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL DAY RAISES AWARENESS AMONG BRITONS

Holocaust Memorial Day raises awareness among Britons: BBC
AFP (Agence France Presse)
March 17, 2005

story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/britainhistorywwii

Britons who stunned observers with widespread ignorance of the Holocaust are now much more aware of the World War II atrocities against Jews following a major memorial day staged in January, a poll showed.

The BBC conducted a survey last year showing that only 55 percent of the population in Britain had even heard of Auschwitz, the most notorious Nazi death camp where at least 1.1 million people, mostly Jews, were killed.

For women and people aged under 35, that figure dropped to about 40 percent.

But the BBC said its new survey shows a radical change, following a series of major events marking the horror of the Holocaust -- notably television documentaries and media coverage in Britain, as well as the 60th anniversary commemoration of the liberation of Auschwitz in January.

Now fully 94 percent of people in Britain have heard of Auschwitz, with 86 percent of under-35s and 92 percent of women aware of the extermination camp.

On January 27, as many world leaders marked Auschwitz's liberation at the camp in southern Poland, Britain also staged its biggest-ever assembly of survivors of the Nazi camps and ghettos, at an event at Westminster Hall attended by Queen Elizabeth II and political leaders.

 

PRINCE HARRY GAFFE BOOSTS AUSCHWITZ AWARENESS

Harry gaffe boosts Auschwitz awareness
By Jeremy Laurence
Reuters
March 17, 2005

reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=691839

Awareness of the Auschwitz concentration camp has soared, a survey shows, thanks in part to a royal scandal involving Prince Harry wearing Nazi regalia at a costume party.

A year ago, nearly half of all Britons said they had never heard of the camp that became a symbol of the Holocaust and the attempted genocide of the Jews, a BBC poll showed.

But asked the same question in January, all but six percent of respondents said they knew of it, Britain's public broadcaster said on Thursday.

A prominent Jewish group said the sharp rise in awareness about Auschwitz was largely due to the controversy in January surrounding Princes Harry and William, sons of heir to the throne Charles.

Photos of Harry, 20, wearing a swastika at a party were splashed across newspapers around the world, prompting calls for the two princes to visit the ruins of the camp in southern Poland. A royal family spokesman said on Thursday they had not done so.

William, 22 and second in line to the throne, was at the same party and had helped choose his brother's outfit.

"Obviously the prince's choice of costume raised the issue of Holocaust education prior to Holocaust Memorial Day," said a spokesman for the Board of Deputies of British Jews, Jason Pearlman, referring to the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz on January 27.

"At the end of the day, the Jewish community was satisfied in general that he realised the error in his ways. It was a very unfortunate incident."

Harry, younger son of Charles and the late Princess Diana, apologised for the gaffe.

The scandal erupted just two weeks before world leaders gathered in Poland to mark the liberation anniversary of the camp in which were murdered around one fifth of the six million Jews killed in the World War Two Holocaust.

It even drew in British Prime Minister Tony Blair and Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom.

The BBC poll, conducted two days after the anniversary and involving 4,000 people, showed Auschwitz awareness levels among women and those aged under 35 had more than doubled to 92 percent and 86 percent respectively since the 2004 survey.

"Holocaust survivors were distressed by the original BBC survey results before the 60th anniversary," said chairman of the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust, Stephen Smith.

"The vast improvement in awareness levels of Auschwitz and the atrocities of the Holocaust after Holocaust Memorial Day 2005 will do much to alleviate that."

 

UK: AUSCHWITZ AWARENESS JUMPS SHARPLY

[Douglas Davis is one of several senior Jerusalem Post staff who are longtime subscribers to this email list.]

UK: Auschwitz awareness jumps sharply
By Douglas Davis
The Jerusalem Post
March 17, 2005

www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1111030176210

Virtually everyone in Britain – 94 percent of respondents in a new BBC poll – has now heard of Auschwitz.

A similar poll by the BBC last year revealed that just 55% of the population had heard of the camp, with the number dropping to 40% among women and those under 35.

According to the new poll, conducted among 4,000 British adults, awareness levels among under 35s have more than doubled to 86%, while 92% of women say they have now heard of Auschwitz.

This awareness is not just superficial, according to the BBC, with half the population saying they now know a lot about the subject, compared to 30% last year.

It is thought that this dramatic change in awareness may be due to the commemorations surrounding Holocaust Memorial Day in January, when the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz was marked by nationwide exhibitions, talks, television and radio programs and other events.

During that time, the biggest ever assembly of British-based survivors attended an event in London hosted by Queen Elizabeth and major political leaders.

The BBC broadcast a range of television and radio programs to mark the anniversary, including the series Auschwitz: The Nazis & The Final Solution, parts of which were watched by more than one-third of the population.

 

REPORTING AUSCHWITZ, THEN & NOW

Reporting Auschwitz, then & now
By Tom Gross
The Jerusalem Post
February 3, 2005

Last week's media coverage marking the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz was surprisingly comprehensive and accurate. Even many of those news outlets that have a poor record of covering Jewish issues, such as anti-Semitism and the Middle East, covered the story well.

Take the BBC, for example. As recently as January 13, 2005, the BBC posted a webpage titled "BBC Guides: The Holocaust. What was it?" Designed to explain the controversy over Prince Harry's wearing of a Nazi uniform at a fancy-dress party, that webpage neglected to mention Jews, erroneously stated that most Holocaust victims were German citizens, and encouraged the myth that other groups were persecuted by the Nazis to anything like the same extent that Jews were.

The BBC webpage blandly stated: "The Holocaust was a mass murder of millions of people... Most of the victims died because they belonged to certain racial or religious groups, which the Nazis wanted to wipe out, even though they were German citizens. This kind of killing is called genocide."

Yet last week, the BBC covered the commemoration of the liberation of Auschwitz in a serious and thorough way, both on air and on-line. That most victims were Jews was highlighted. "The Holocaust. What was it?" and other webpages were corrected. And whereas, a week earlier the BBC had referred to the "Auschwitz prison camp", it now used the infinitely more accurate term "death camp". (If BBC staff really think it was a prison camp, they don't begin to understand what Auschwitz was.)

Other media with previously poor records, such as the French newspaper Le Monde, also had generally sound coverage.

The (London) Guardian, too, had some good pieces – although at the same time, true to form, it supplemented its lead editorial, titled "Holocaust Memorial Day: Eternal memory", with an accompanying commentary by former Oxford University professor Terry Eagleton, in which he justified suicide bombing "in Israel" and likened suicide bombers to their victims. (Unsurprisingly, the piece was reprinted the following day in the Saudi paper Arab News and appeared on a half-dozen extremist Moslem websites.)

The Guardian also couldn't resist greatly exaggerating the numbers of Roma (Gypsies) who died in the camps. (Perhaps the paper isn't aware that inflating the number of Roma and homosexuals killed by the Nazis, in order to try and de-emphasize the centrality of Jews among Holocaust victims, is now a favorite trick of revisionist historians.)

In the Arab world, most media simply ignored last week's anniversary altogether. In Iran, the government-linked Tehran Times marked the occasion by explicitly denying that "the so-called Holocaust" happened and accusing "Zionist leaders" of "conjuring up images of gas chambers." (It makes one wonder all the more what the Iranian regime wants nuclear weapons for.)

Still, as far as the Western media goes, this improved coverage today contrasts sharply with the lack of proper coverage in the decades following World War II, or even as recently as 10 years ago. And it also provides a bitterly ironic reminder of just how poor coverage was during the Holocaust itself.

The omissions of the New York Times are perhaps the most disturbing. Although it was far from being the only newspaper to deliberately play down or do its best to ignore Hitler's genocide, it bears a special responsibility as having been even then the world's single most influential paper.

Such was the Times' influence as the premier American source of wartime news (particularly so in an age before television) that had it reported the Holocaust properly, other US papers would probably have followed, and US public opinion might have forced the US government to act. (European papers – outside Nazi-occupied countries – provided slightly better, though still lamentable, coverage.)

But the Times, possibly because they feared people might think of it a "Jewish" paper, made sure reports were brief and buried inside the paper.

* On June 27, 1942, for example, the Times devoted just two inches to the news that "700,000 Jews were reported slain in Poland."

* On July 2, 1942, it noted that gas chambers were being used to kill 1,000 Jews a day – but only on page 6.

* On November 25, 1942, it reported that there had been roundups, gassings, cattle cars and the disappearance of 90 percent of Warsaw's ghetto population – but only on page 10.

* On December 9, 1942, its report that two million Jews had been killed and five million more faced extermination appeared only on page 20.

* On July 2, 1944, it reported that 400,000 Hungarian Jews had been deported to their deaths so far, and 350,000 more were likely to be killed in the next weeks. Yet this news received only four column inches on page 12. (That edition's front page carried an analysis of the problem of New York holiday crowds on the move.)

During the war, no article about the Jews' plight ever qualified as the Times' leading story of the day.

The New York Times has never properly acknowledged its failings in this matter. And the fact that a comparable mindset still seems to dominate the paper today continues to have consequences – whether in the unfair coverage it gives Israel, or the relative lack of attention given to other genocides and systematic acts of inhumanity, such as those in North Korea or Burma, and in particular those for which Arabs are chiefly responsible, as in Darfur.

The tsunami tragedies can occupy the front page for days on end, but Darfur is lucky if it makes an inside page once in a week.

[Tom Gross is a former Jerusalem correspondent for the (London) Sunday Telegraph and (New York) Daily News]

[NOTE: This article has also been picked up by several other news websites, where comments can be left by readers. These include: --

web.israelinsider.com/Views/4920.htm
www.israelnationalnews.com/article.php3?id=4749
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/Printer&cid=1107314591917&p=1006953079865]

FULL ARTICLES

AP REVEALS ITS DOUBLE STANDARDS

New on the Wire: AP to Offer Two Leads for Some Stories
The Editor and Publisher
By Joe Strupp
March 16, 2005

www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000844185

Attention Associated Press members, prepare to get more for your money: Now available, two leads for the price of one.

In a break with tradition at the 156-year-old news cooperative, the AP will now offer two different leads for many of its news stories, the organization confirmed Wednesday.

"The concept is simple: On major spot stories – especially when events happen early in the day – we will provide you with two versions to choose between," the AP said in an advisory to members. "One will be the traditional 'straight lead' that leads with the main facts of what took place. The other will be the 'optional,' an alternative approach that attempts to draw in the reader through imagery, narrative devices, perspective or other creative means."

The advisory added that the change is an attempt to "enhance the value of the AP news report to your newspaper." The AP serves about 1,700 members.

AP officials said the optional leads have already begun to appear in some sports stories and on the national news wires during the past two months. The new initiative is in response to requests from many editors who want to be able to offer readers "something fresh so they will want to pick up the newspaper and read a story, even though the facts have been splashed all over the Web and widely broadcast."

"Many newspaper wire desks don't have the resources for a lot of heavy lifting on our copy," AP Managing Editor Mike Silverman said about the need for built-in options. "They would like our help in giving the reader something different from what is posted on the Web."

The AP stressed that the optional leads will not be available to the news service's Internet providers. They are designed strictly for print.

"This is not an attempt to turn a hard news story into a feature," the advisory said. "We will still present the main facts of what happened in the top few grafs of the optional. Following the alternative lead, the story will typically pick up into the body of the traditional lead."

AP officials said the optional leads will not be on every story, just those of high interest that are breaking as spot news.

"Big, big breaking spot stories," Silverman added. "We are not setting quotas or promising that it will be every story. The idea is to do it as often as we think the story warrants and if we can do it well."

An example of the differing leads:

Traditional

MOSUL, Iraq (AP) A suicide attacker set off a bomb that tore through a funeral tent jammed with Shiite mourners Thursday, splattering blood and body parts over rows of overturned white plastic chairs. The attack, which killed 47 and wounded more than 100, came as Shiite and Kurdish politicians in Baghdad said they overcame a major stumbling block to forming a new coalition government.

Optional

MOSUL, Iraq (AP) Yet again, almost as if scripted, a day of hope for a new, democratic Iraq turned into a day of tears as a bloody insurgent attack undercut a political step forward.

On Thursday, just as Shiite and Kurdish politicians in Baghdad were tell