#palestine

États-Unis. Les étudiants bousculent la complicité des universités avec Israël - Sylvain Cypel
▻https://orientxxi.info/magazine/etats-unis-les-etudiants-bousculent-la-complicite-des-universites-avec-i

#SciencesPo #palestine #gaza

Marcel sur X : « Sciences Po a un partenariat avec une université israélienne qui occupe illégalement des terres palestiniennes et ce sont les étudiants qui le dénoncent qu’on diabolise. On marche sur la tête… ▻https://t.co/o4CI4kFUyC » / X
▻https://twitter.com/realmarcel1/status/1789589805459718373

#SciencesPo #palestine #gaza

Du fleuve à la mer, toutes et tous les êtres humains seront libres

Norman Finkelstein : En soutien aux manifestations étudiantes (États-Unis) : Construire une majorité pour la Palestine
Nous soutenons le mouvement pour la Palestine dans les universités et les grandes écoles
Yorgos Mitralias : Qu’attendent les étudiants grecs pour se mobiliser ?
Stop à la répression des étudiant·es dans nos universités !
Philippe Marlière : À propos des soutiens étudiants aux Palestiniens
Alyssa Mcmurtry : Les universités espagnoles brisent les liens avec les institutions israéliennes « non engagées pour la paix »
Communiqué du Conseil d’Administration de la Conférence des Recteurs et Rectrices des Universités Espagnoles (CRUE) sur la situation dans la Bande de Gaza
Liens vers d’autres textes

▻https://entreleslignesentrelesmots.wordpress.com/2024/05/13/du-fleuve-a-la-mer-toutes-et-tous-les-etres-hu

#nternational #palestine #étudiant·es

Israel and the German Raison D’Etat
▻https://www.rosalux.de/en/news/id/51786

Voici la position la plus à gauche qu’on peut prononcer en Allemagne sans ce faire lyncher par les medias et les partis parlamentaires. Ce problème explique l’opinion de l’auteur à la fin de l’article par rapport au génocide à Gaza. D’après lui deux forces génocidaires s’y opposent, le Hamas et l’armée d’Israël sous commande du gouvernement d’extrême droite.

L’auteur se rapproche ainsi de la position absurde allemande qu’il explique dans son texte autrement indispensable pour comprendre le soutien inconditionnel et sans réserve d’Israël par l’état allemand.

19.3.2024 by Daniel Marwecki - The Federal Republic has long been one of the Jewish state’s most loyal allies — but why exactly?

“At a moment like this, there is only one place for Germany: by Israel’s side,” German Chancellor Olaf Scholz declared after Hamas’s terror attack on 7 October 2023. His words were followed by deeds. Since then, the number of German weapons exported to Israel has increased tenfold.

Daniel Marwecki is a lecturer in the Department of Politics and Public Administration at the University of Hong Kong and the author of Germany and Israel: Whitewashing and Statebuilding (Hurst, 2020).

Although Germany abstained rather than voted against a ceasefire at the UN General Assembly, its diplomatic support for Israel is unmistakable. For instance, the German government has suspended further payments to UNRWA, the relief agency for Palestinian refugees, while also declaring its willingness to defend Israel against the South African lawsuit alleging genocide at the International Court of Justice. Top German politicians travel to the region on what seems like a weekly basis — Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock alone has already been there five times to emphasize Israel’s right to self-defence and pledge German support.

Anyone who has taken the time to compare the predominant media narratives in English- and German-language news in recent months will find that criticism of Israel’s actions is more subdued in Germany, and Palestinian voices are less present in the public sphere. However, the rift between how the conflict is viewed in the West and how it is viewed by large parts of the post-colonial world, in which the Israel-Palestine conflict is conventionally perceived through a completely different historical framework, is much greater than the differences within the West. For example, it is almost impossible to compare Arabic- and German-language media — instead, they constitute parallel worlds telling two different stories about one and the same war.

After the United States, Germany is Israel’s most significant supporter in terms of military and diplomatic affairs. Yet it would be mistaken to consider Germany as completely isolated due to its comparatively staunch pro-Israeli position, or to believe that the “Global South” with its 6 billion people is united behind Gaza. The diplomatic position of India under Narendra Modi, for example, the most populous country in the world, is much closer to that of Germany than that of Brazil or South Africa. Moreover, even if the populations of Arab states, from the Gulf to North Africa, show solidarity with Gaza, their governments do not. There are no reports, at least, of boycott measures such as those implemented during the 1973 Arab–Israeli war.

The complexity and historical significance of German policy towards Israel is far greater than is often assumed.

Nevertheless, German support for Israel is not only based on geopolitics and cynicism, the bread and butter of international relations, but is also expressly understood as a moral imperative emerging from German history. As such, this support is more susceptible to criticism — and the longer the deaths in Gaza continue, the more this criticism will increase. In the London Review of Books, Pankaj Mishra writes that the German culture of remembrance has failed. Writing in TIME Magazine, Bruno Maçães, a geopolitical commentator who became famous for his coverage of the war in Ukraine, claims that the German government has been living in a segregated and racist fantasy world in which there is evidently no space for Palestinian victims.

This article is less about the horror of 7 October, the gruesome war in Gaza, or the toxic German debates about Israel and antisemitism. I instead attempt to provide historical contextualization to Germany’s stance. After all, the history of German policy towards Israel is relatively unknown in Germany, which is mainly due to the narcissistic nature of German discourse on the Middle East: when Germans talk about Israel, they are usually talking about themselves. That means that the more discourse there is, the more ignorance is produced.

The complexity and historical significance of German policy towards Israel is far greater than is often assumed. Because it is not possible to deal with this policy in a short text — I have already done so in my book — in what follows, I will instead put forward three theses in order to shed light on its most important historical aspects.
Germany Gives Much More Support to Israel than Is Commonly Assumed

In 2008, Angela Merkel gave a speech in the Knesset, the Israeli parliament, in which she described Israel’s security as “part of the German raison d’état”. This begs the question as to how far this promise of aid would go in the event of an existential crisis. The war in Gaza, which Germany supports both militarily and diplomatically, provides an answer to this question: quite far indeed.

Since Merkel’s speech, the discussion about German solidarity with Israel has taken place with explicit reference to Germany’s raison d’état. As has often been pointed out (and ironically, as stated even in the Federal Agency for Civic Education’s “Political Lexicon for Young People”), the term dates back to the Age of Absolutism. German support for Israel’s security is thus raised to a cornerstone of German statehood, by and large precluding any democratic discourse.

German solidarity with Israel is not simply a foreign policy interest, subject to the ever-changing international situation; rather, it is integral to the very essence of German democracy. When the Bundestag celebrated the seventieth anniversary of the founding of the Israeli state in 2018, Green party politician Katrin Göring-Eckhardt summed up this self-image by saying, “Israel’s right to exist is our own.”[1] What this perspective ignores is the fact that the founding of the Israeli state de facto resulted in the statelessness of the Palestinian people.

However, the recent shift in Germany’s policy towards Israel, which is rooted in identity politics, obscures the historical roots of the relationship between the two states. In fact, the Federal Republic of Germany was important for Israel’s security at a time when the past was concealed rather than remembered.
German Aid to Israel

As mentioned above, Germany is regaded as Israel’s “second-best friend” after the US. Yet the current American–Israeli alliance began not with the founding of the state of Israel, but only after the 1967 Arab–Israeli War. One important reason for this was that the US did not want to drive the nationalist regimes in the Arab world, above all Egypt under Gamal Abdel Nasser, into the Soviet sphere of influence during the Cold War. Only after Israel inflicted its greatest defeat on Arab nationalism with its 1967 victory did the US become a fundamental military supporter of Israel.

The almost 20 years that passed between the founding of the state and the Six-Day War were absolutely critical for Israel. During this period, the Jewish state was an experiment with an uncertain outcome: immigrants who had fled from Europe or the Arab states had to be integrated, the country had to be industrialized and made fit for war. These were huge tasks, and the Federal Republic of Germany, founded in 1949 as the successor state to the Nazi regime, provided indispensable assistance along the way.

Thanks in no small part to German aid, Israel was not only able to stabilize itself in the Middle East after winning the Six-Day War, it was also able to radically expand its territory.

Between 1953, the year the reparations stipulated by the 1952 Israeli–West-German Reparations Agreement came into effect, and 1965, when Germany and Israel formally established diplomatic relations, West Germany was the only country to provide Israel with all three common forms of intergovernmental support: economic aid via the Reparations Agreement, secret military aid for war efforts, and a generous financial grant agreed upon in 1960.

If one adds up the German aid to Israel and compare it with that provided by the US, England, and France, it becomes clear that Germany, of all countries, was Israel’s most important supporter during its precarious early days.

Israel’s main negotiator, Nahum Goldmann, called the agreement “a downright salvation” for Israel. David Horowitz, director general of the Israeli Ministry of Finance, argued against individual indemnification and in favour of state reparations because “only reparations to Israel would make the difference between economic survival or collapse” — the reason being that the aid issued as part of the reparations included steel, equipment for industrial plants and factories, ships, machinery, and much more.

For West Germany, which had been reconstructed and became wealthy immediately after World War II, the cost of all of this was negligible. For Israel, on the other hand, still a poor country made up of survivors and refugees, the reparations provided an extremely helpful boost to industrialization. More aid for economic reconstruction was soon to follow.
Military Relations

In December 1957, Shimon Peres, then Deputy Minister of Defence, visited the West German Minister of Defence, Franz Josef Strauss, in his snow-covered residence in Rott am Inn, Bavaria. Peres wrote about this meeting, which marked the starting point of military relations between Germany and Israel:

Within only a few months of our first meeting, very valuable equipment began to reach the Israeli army. It consisted of German army surplus and equipment manufactured in Germany … We obtained ammunition, training devices, helicopters, spare parts and many other items. The quality was excellent and the quantities were considerable — compared with what we had been used to, though they were still far short of what the Egyptians were receiving. For the first time the impoverished Israeli army, which had had to skimp and scrape and stretch its thin resources to the utmost, felt almost pampered.

What began in Bavaria would expand in the following years into an extensive, covert military cooperation, the exact content of which cannot be fully researched to this day. What is certain is that in 1962, another large aid package was put together, which provided all kinds of equipment essential to Israel’s ongoing war effort, from howitzers to helicopters and airplanes. Later, tanks manufactured in the US were added via a three-way trade.

After taking office in 1965, Israel’s first ambassador to Germany, Asher Ben-Natan, told German Chancellor Ludwig Erhard in a confidential conversation that a war in the Middle East would “only last a few days”. Israel, said the ambassador, “must therefore always be ready. German aid had made a major contribution to the country’s development, and German military aid had also played a very important role in Israel’s security.”

Thanks in no small part to German aid, Israel was not only able to stabilize itself in the Middle East after winning the Six-Day War, it was also able to radically expand its territory.
Support for Israel Sought to Facilitate West Germany’s Rehabilitation on the Cheap

Why do contemporary German politicians make so little mention of this early history of Germany’s Israel policy — especially in light of the fact that the Federal Republic was so much more important for Israel’s existence back then than it is today?

The reason for this is not simply ignorance of Germany’s own history, but rather the fact that the early support for the Jewish state was obviously part of a larger rehabilitation effort that was intended to facilitate Germany’s integration into the Western bloc. For this reason, the early West German policy towards Israel does not lend itself to the self-congratulatory moral tales that Germans like to tell about their relationship with Israel today.

At the beginning of 1966, West German public broadcaster ZDF aired an interview by Günter Gaus with Konrad Adenauer, who shaped the West German government more than almost any other person during his 14-year chancellorship. Asked about his reparations policy, Adenauer said:

We had done the Jews so much wrong — the atrocities we committed against them had to be atoned for somehow or rectified if we were to regain any respectability at all among the peoples of the world … Even today, the power of the Jews, especially in America, should not be underestimated.

This connection between the idea of rehabilitating Germany and the anti-Semitic prejudice of Jewish influence, tellingly appended with the phrase “even today”, was certainly not the only reason why the early Federal Republic turned to Israel, but it was the dominant one.

Anyone today who finds themselves in disbelief about the histrionic and toxic nature of the debate on Israel in Germany would do well to recall the origins of Germany’s policy towards Israel.

There is plenty of evidence to support this. Another example is that the German journalist Rolf Vogel, a confidant of Konrad Adenauer, was involved in a scandalous deal at the end of the 1950s in which the Federal Republic bought a large number of Uzi submachine guns from Israel. Vogel is credited with a sentence that sums up German policy towards Israel at the time: “The Uzi in the hands of German soldiers is certainly worth more than all the brochures against anti-Semitism.”

Yigal Allon, a member of parliament from the left-wing Ahdut HaAvodah party who would later become defence minister, opposed the arms sales. He considered such sales to be degrading and had no illusions about the Federal Republic: “The Germans have purchased these weapons not because the weapons are good, but because they are Jewish. The Germans desperately need rehabilitation.”

It was obvious why the Germans needed rehabilitation, seeing as the Nazi dictatorship was only a few years past. The German population was heavily implicated in this process, while the perpetrators and silent profiteers lived largely undisturbed in the Federal Republic.

The rehabilitation thesis is logically derived from the historical situation of the post-war period: as has now been extensively documented in research, the denazification of West Germany was discontinued with the founding of the Federal Republic. A close relationship with the newly founded Jewish state was the cheapest possible way of signalling a reformed democracy when no such thing yet existed.

It is crucial to bear in mind that at the time, hardly anything was further from the minds of Israel’s population than establishing relations with Germany. In fact, the prospect of negotiating reparations with West Germany plunged the nascent state into its most severe crisis. This also demonstrates just how precarious Israel’s predicament was at the time. In other words: the price Israel had to pay to secure its existence was the absolution of (West) Germany.

After Germany and Israel exchanged ambassadors in 1965, West Germany was determined to “normalize” relations with Israel, with the latter insisting that Germany’s immediate past meant that it had special obligations towards Israel. Just how “normal” Germany had become, however, was ironically demonstrated by the figure of Rolf Pauls, the first West German ambassador to Israel, who was emblematic of German rehabilitation policy. Pauls, a former Wehrmacht officer on the Eastern Front, spoke of “world Jewry” and accused the Israelis of expecting benefits without giving anything in return, but also felt that Israel had to be accommodated to some extent, because otherwise, “from Jerusalem to London to New York, the Jews would let the dogs loose”.

Anyone today who finds themselves in disbelief about the histrionic and toxic nature of the debate on Israel in Germany would do well to recall the origins of Germany’s policy towards Israel. Relations have always been shaped by Germany’s past, albeit in a different way than some people imagine today.
Germany’s Balancing Act Has Failed

After the dissolution of the pro-Arab and pro-Palestinian German Democratic Republic and its annexation to the Federal Republic, Germany regained its former dominant position in a no longer divided Europe. Not least in order to assuage Western allies’ fears that Germany was once again striving to become a superpower, the Federal Republic continued its transatlantic policy after the Cold War, collected the “peace dividend”, and remained an economic power that knew how to assert its economic interests while embellishing them in the vocabulary of human rights.

The discourse surrounding the politics of Germany’s history in Germany also shifted away from forgetting and prioritized “redemption through remembrance,” a phrase formulated by German President Richard von Weizsäcker in 1985. This was also linked to a shift in Germany’s Israel policy away from “normalization”, which always had Arab oil interests in mind, and towards what is now considered the German “raison d’état”.

Parallel to the changes in Germany’s policy towards its past and towards Israel (which are inherently intertwined), the Oslo Accords were established in the 1990s with the aim of finding a peaceful solution to the Israel–Palestine situation. The mutual recognition between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization — the first treaty signed in 1993 hardly went beyond this point — brought a sigh of relief to the German Bundestag. As Christian Democratic parliamentarian Karl Lamers put it at the time, Germany’s “special relations with Israel” had on occasion led to a “painful discrepancy” because “it seemed as if the wellbeing of Israel was connected to the continued homelessness of the Palestinians.”

Despite the fact that the Oslo Accords have been considered a failure for over two decades, Germany remains to this day a principal financial backer of the Palestinian Authority.

Germany invested not only hope but also money in the Oslo Accords. Yet the process broke down in 2000, when negotiations between Ehud Barak and Yassir Arafat came to an inconclusive end at Camp David.

That Israel’s security is the cornerstone of Germany’s raison d’état did not originate with Merkel, but rather with the Second Intifada, which began after the Oslo Accords’ failure. Three years before Merkel’s aforementioned speech in 2008, Rudolf Dressler, Germany’s ambassador to Israel at the time, wrote that from a German perspective, a solution to the conflict could only be achieved if Israel’s security against terror was guaranteed — Israel’s security, Dressler said, had to become central to Germany’s “raison d’état”.

Despite the fact that the Oslo Accords have been considered a failure for over two decades, Germany remains to this day a principal financial backer of the Palestinian Authority, which was established as a result of the process, and never tires of emphasizing the need for negotiations over a two-state solution, despite there being no viable path to such a solution, even prior 7 October. The dichotomy that Karl Lamers spoke of in 1993 remains in effect more than 30 years later.
The Impossibility of the German Position

At the Munich Security Conference in February of this year, a moderator asked German Chancellor Olaf Scholz whether he had any proof to support his claim that Israel was respecting international law in its actions in Gaza. The chancellor responded not with a yes or no, but with an incomprehensible word salad.

This illustrates the dilemma that has engulfed Germany since the terrorist attack on 7 October and Israel’s subsequent war against Hamas: on the one hand, Germany shows solidarity with Israel, both in the objectives it has formulated for the war and — as far as possible — in helping carry them out. On the other hand, it wants to remain poised as a guardian of international law and a “rules-based world order”. But these two ends are mutually exclusive. Olaf Scholz knows this as well.

Israel’s military objective of destroying Hamas cannot be achieved in compliance with international law. This is due to the sheer nature of urban counter-insurgency as well as the fact that Hamas, which has woven itself into the fabric of Gaza’s civilian population, has explicitly designed it that way. However, this does not mean, as some Germans claim, that Hamas bears sole responsibility for the destruction of Gaza. The statements made by some top Israeli politicians and the country’s conduct throughout the war do not in any way indicate that the response to the cruel terrorist attack on 7 October is in accordance with international law.

The current war is an existential war between Israel and Hamas in which the boundary between military and civilian targets seems to have been erased. Hamas made its intentions clear on 7 October 2023: the annihilation of Israel. It was a crime of a genocidal nature. For its part, Israel, led by a bipartisan war cabinet, will not rest until Hamas is destroyed or lays down its arms. This means mass civilian deaths the likes of which this conflict has never before seen.

German foreign policy not only lacks the means to do its part to end this war. Even the language is lacking: Israel and Gaza can hardly be discussed with undivided empathy in Germany at the moment.

Translated by Gegensatz Translation Collective.

[1] This and the following quotes can be found in my book, Germany and Israel: Whitewashing and Statebuilding (Hurst, 2020).

#Israël #Allemagne #Palestine #nazis #génocide

#Nations_unies : l’Assemblée générale se prononce en faveur de l’adhésion de la #Palestine

https://mf.b37mrtl.ru/french/images/2024.05/thumbnail/663e57cc6f7ccc3cf53c5fc5.jpg

#politique #international #monde #vangauguin

▻https://francais.rt.com/international/111064-nations-unies-assemblee-generale-prononce-adh%C3%A9sion-palestin

Déclaration de membres palestiniens de la direction nationale de Standing Together – 30/1/2024 (+ autre texte)

En tant que citoyens palestiniens d’Israël, notre existence quotidienne est marquée par la discrimination systémique, la persécution, la négligence et la violence. Nous vivons dans un état de tension constante, sans reconnaissance de notre histoire, de notre identité et de notre culture palestiniennes. Depuis l’attaque du Hamas le 7 octobre, nous sommes confrontés à une société israélienne profondément traumatisée et à des dirigeants politiques qui ont capitalisé sur ces atrocités pour inciter encore plus à la violence contre nous. Notre situation est devenue encore plus intenable, car nous sommes confrontés à un traumatisme collectif et à la crainte d’une seconde Nakba, ainsi qu’à un profond chagrin et à l’oppression au sein de notre société.

+ Josh Yunis : La nouvelle assimilation. Réflexions sur les manifestations sur les campus (mai 2024)

▻https://entreleslignesentrelesmots.wordpress.com/2024/05/10/declaration-de-membres-palestiniens-de-la-dire

#international #palestine #israel #usa

9 mai 2024. 181 campus soutiennent Gaza de par le monde
▻https://academia.hypotheses.org/56355

https://academia.hypotheses.org/files/2024/05/students_support_Gaza.jpg

Il y a désormais 181 campus qui soutiennent Gaza dans le monde,, sur chacun des continents, à l’exception de l’Antartique, où la station scientifique de McMurdo a rejoint le mouvement néanmoins).▻https://students4gaza.directory

Rafah – Gaza – Palestine : Jusque quand laissera-t-on Netanyahou massacrer les Palestiniens en toute impunité ?

▻https://www.france-palestine.org/Rafah-Gaza-Palestine-Jusque-quand-laissera-t-on-Netanyahou-massacr
▻https://entreleslignesentrelesmots.wordpress.com/2024/05/08/gaza-les-autorites-israeliennes-continuent-de-refuser-lacces-humanitaire-aux-nations-unies-et-autres-textes/#comment-60876

#international #palestine

#Gaza : les autorités israéliennes continuent de refuser l’accès humanitaire aux Nations Unies (et autres textes)

Amira Hass : Cisjordanie. L’armée des colons pousse à l’expulsion massive des Palestiniens
Une action immédiate est nécessaire pour garantir un contrôle international indépendant dans les prisons et les centres de détention israéliens
Mohammed R. Mahawish : Cela fait plus de 200 jours que nous montrons les souffrances de Gaza. Ne détournez pas le regard maintenant
#Gaza : les autorités israéliennes continuent de refuser l’accès humanitaire aux Nations Unies
ONU. Le Secrétaire général s’adresse à la presse - sur le Moyen-orient
Des groupes politiques en Israël demandent une enquête sur les charniers de Gaza
Adam Keller : En tout cas, l’atmosphère publique en Israël a beaucoup changé au cours des six derniers mois.
Netanyahou gâche notre seule chance !
LeeAnn Hall : UCLA : 2 100 manifestant·es anti-guerre arrêté·es. Zéro contre-manifestant
André Frappier & Andrea Levy : L’Intifada étudiante s’intensifie dans les universités montréalaises
Gaza : les étudiant·es refusent l’indifférence
Rozana Ryan : Un mouvement étudiant mondial contre le capital pro-Israël
76 ans de la Nakba : manifestation du Québec à Montréal
Liens vers d’autres textes

▻https://entreleslignesentrelesmots.wordpress.com/2024/05/08/gaza-les-autorites-israeliennes-continuent-de-

#international #palestine #israel

Collectif Roja : Pour la libération de la Palestine et de tous les peuples du Moyen-Orient

Le 14 avril au matin, l’attaque sans précédent de la République islamique d’Iran (RII) contre Israël n’échappait à la couverture d’aucun média à travers le monde. Après que les grandes puissances, main dans la main, aient dressé le Dôme de fer impérialiste pour protéger l’Etat d’Israël, certains, espérant venger les Palestinien.nes, se sont extasiés devant le « courage » de la RII et n’ont cessé d’exprimer leur admiration pour la seule puissance de la région qui se serait dressée, seule, face aux puissances impérialistes.

Dans cette guerre où Israël et Iran se montrent réciproquement les dents, certains ont sans la moindre honte pris le parti de l’Etat d’Israël ; d’autres, en Iran ou ailleurs, nettoient les crimes de la République islamique. Nous ne nous adressons pas à ces fascistes, mais plutôt à ceux qui suivent la logique selon laquelle « les ennemis de nos ennemis seraient nos amis ». Un raisonnement qui réduit les rapports complexes entre la RII et Israël à une lutte sans fin entre un bien et un mal et qui place dans un camp respectable, quiconque s’oppose à l’Etat d’Israël. Pour nous, défendre la cause palestinienne ne peut connaître d’autre voie que celle de l’opposition à la RII. Car celle-ci ne s’oppose pas à l’Etat d’Israël. Elle s’oppose aux peuples d’Iran et de toute la région. Car la libération des peuples n’est pas l’affaire des Etats. Car défendre la cause palestinienne, c’est se distancier de tout ce qui contribue à renforcer la domination israélienne sur les terres palestiniennes. Et depuis sa création et malgré tout le bruit qu’elle produit, la RII n’a fait que verser de l’eau au moulin de l’Etat d’Israël.

▻https://entreleslignesentrelesmots.wordpress.com/2024/05/07/collectif-roja-pour-la-liberation-de-la-palest

#international #palestine #Israel #iran

Macklemore sur X : ▻https://twitter.com/macklemore/status/1787616471738368099

HIND’S HALL. Once it’s up on streaming all proceeds to #UNRWA

▻https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1787615905813499904/pu/vid/avc1/720x1280/WmvIcNsGQCycXtsZ.mp4?tag=12

Pour un cessez-le-feu immédiat et durable à Gaza (+ autres textes)

Muzna Shihabi : Une seule solution : un État tout court
Amira Hass : « Les attaques planifiées de colons en Cisjordanie visent à détruire des maisons, à terroriser les habitants et à les expulser »
OCHA : Gaza : « Un tableau qui désespère tous les qualificatifs »
Refuser Solidarity Network : Texte
La Coordination universitaire contre la colonisation en Palestine (CUCCP) appelle à une journée de mobilisation universitaire le 15 mai, jour de la commémoration de la Nakba
« Pour un cessez-le-feu immédiat et durable à Gaza » par 394 membres de l’EHESS
Non au bellicisme : Déclaration d’un groupe de militant·es iranien·nes des droits civils
Jewish Voice for Peace : Vont-ils écraser le plus grand mouvement étudiant depuis le Vietnam ?
Ghousoon Bisharat : Journée mondiale de la liberté de la presse
Liens vers d’autres textes

▻https://entreleslignesentrelesmots.wordpress.com/2024/05/06/pour-un-cessez-le-feu-immediat-et-durable-a-ga

#international #palestine #israel

Nasheed - A Hymn for Gaza
▻https://www.antiwarsongs.org/canzone.php?id=68052&lang=it

[2024]

I dedicate this sacred Arabic hymn to the people of Gaza during this holy month of Ramadan...

Politics Theory Other sur X : ▻https://twitter.com/poltheoryother/status/1786019290094678438

"Israeli archaeologists have for decades participated in an unscientific and very explicitly political project of removing and destroying evidence of not only Palestinian, but Arab and Muslim history across historic Palestine.

“Archaeological digs and research are used not only to erase Palestinians from the historical record but also to eliminate them in the present. Under the aegis of archaeological research, Palestinian lands are expropriated and Jewish settlements are expanded.”

▻https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1786017228992737280/pu/vid/avc1/720x720/bVLPlZQ41mDod4uA.mp4?tag=12

#archéologie #Palestine

Palestine : « Le jour après » est-il en train de sombrer dans l’oubli ? (+ autres textes)

Anat Saragusti : L’inévitable hystérie des médias israéliens face aux manifestations sur les campus américains
Nira Yuval Davis : Texte
Haviva Ner-David : Lettre ouverte d’une militante pro-palestinienne en Israël aux manifestant·es de l’université de Columbia contre la guerre de Gaza
Rencontrez Asna Tabassum, major de promotion de l’USC : L’école annule le discours de remise des diplômes d’une étudiante pro-palestinienne
« La jeunesse contre l’invasion » : lettre des étudiants du Freedom Théâtre du camp de réfugiés de Jénine aux étudiants de la résilience et du courage
Fédération générale palestinienne des syndicats : 1er mai : les syndicats doivent organiser la solidarité avec le peuple palestinien
Emilia G. Morales : Israël se prépare à prendre d’assaut la flottille de la liberté
Soutenons la liberté de la presse à Gaza, déclare la FIJ
Palestine : Le prix Guillermo-Cano de l’UNESCO 2024 décerné aux journalistes de Gaza
David Finkel : Palestine : « Le jour après » est-il en train de sombrer dans l’oubli ?
Sanders répond à Netanyahou qui prétend que la critique de la politique du gouvernement israélien est antisémite
Appel urgent des ONG pour l’ouverture du poste-frontière de Rafah à l’aide humanitaire
« Mémoires de Palestine », le 15/05/24 au Luxy à Vitry sur Seine
Cour Internationale de Justice. Manquements allégués à certaines obligations internationales relativement au Territoire palestinien occupé (Nicaragua c. Allemagne)
Demande en indication de mesures conservatoires
Liens vers d’autres textes

▻https://entreleslignesentrelesmots.wordpress.com/2024/05/03/palestine-le-jour-apres-est-il-en-train-de-som

#international #palestine #israel #usa

Au 23 Décembre 2024, l’armée israélienne avait déjà tué 20 des 105 soldats tués à Gaza. Tirs amis ou accidents Time of israel

Sur les 105 soldats tués dans la bande de Gaza au cours de l’offensive terrestre d’Israël contre le Hamas, qui a commencé fin octobre, 20 ont été tués par des tirs « amis » et d’autres au cours d’accidents, selon de nouvelles données publiées par l’armée israélienne mardi.

Treize des soldats ont été tués par des tirs amis dus à une erreur d’identification, y compris lors de frappes aériennes, de tirs de chars et de tirs d’armes à feu.

https://static.timesofisrael.com/fr/uploads/2023/12/4______.jpeg

Un soldat a été tué par un tir qui ne l’a pas atteint intentionnellement, et deux autres ont été tués par des tirs accidentels. Deux soldats ont été tués dans des incidents au cours desquels des véhicules blindés ont écrasé des troupes.

Enfin, deux soldats ont été tués par des éclats d’explosifs déclenchés intentionnellement par les forces israéliennes.

Selon l’armée israélienne, il y aurait une multitude de raisons à l’origine de ces accidents mortels, comme le grand nombre de forces opérant dans la bande de Gaza, les problèmes de communication entre les forces et la fatigue des soldats, qui les rend peu attentifs aux réglementations.
. . . . .

#Palestine #israel #israël #tsahal #Gaza #Hamas #armée #bavures #IA #Palestine_assassinée #guerre #intelligence_artificielle

Source : ▻https://fr.timesofisrael.com/tsahal-20-des-105-soldats-tues-a-gaza-ont-ete-victimes-de-tirs-ami

Manifestations étudiantes en soutien à Gaza : les Nations Unies s’alarment pour la liberté d’expression
▻https://academia.hypotheses.org/56100

lGuerre à Gaza : la liberté d’expression en question dans un contexte de répression sur des campus universitaires ONU Infos, 29 avril 2024 Aux États-Unis, des universités sont accusées de réprimer les étudiants qui protestent contre la guerre d’Israël à … Continuer la lecture →

Talia Jane sur X :
▻https://twitter.com/taliaotg/status/1785090324399784030

Palestinian students at Otto von Guericke University in Magdeburg, Germany received an email from the school that they’ve been recategorized as “stateless” due to governmental “changes in the statistical requirements.”

Germany no longer recognizes Palestinian as a nationality.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GMXqL-LXsAA_hHH?format=jpg&name=large#.jpg

#Allemagne #Palestine #génocidaires

La résistance palestinienne n’est pas un monolithe

Alors que les Palestinien·nes s’interrogent sur le génocide qui leur est infligé et sur leurs perspectives de libération nationale, c’est leur rendre un mauvais service que d’aplatir leur diversité politique et les débats complexes en cours.

Depuis le 7 octobre, toute évaluation critique de l’opération militaire du Hamas – sa méthode, sa rationalité, ses cibles ou son rôle dans la fin de l’occupation israélienne – a été difficile à exprimer au sein de la gauche. Il en est ainsi non seulement parce qu’une puissance occupante est en fin de compte responsable du statu quo destructeur, mais aussi parce que critiquer les tactiques d’un groupe agissant au nom des opprimé·es est perçu comme une atteinte à leur cause légitime.

▻https://entreleslignesentrelesmots.wordpress.com/2024/05/01/la-resistance-palestinienne-nest-pas-un-monoli

#international #palestine

Les mobilisations des étudiants pour un cessez-le-feu à Gaza se multiplient en France
▻https://archive.ph/2024.04.30-194632/https://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2024/04/30/les-mobilisations-des-etudiants-pour-un-cessez-le-feu-a-gaza-se-multiplient_

La majorité des instituts d’études politiques ont été touchés par des rassemblements et des blocages, mardi 30 avril, tandis que Sciences Po Paris prépare un grand débat, jeudi 2 mai, sur la question israélo-palestinienne. Ailleurs, quelques événements sont recensés.

[...] Pour la deuxième journée, l’université de Saint-Etienne a été bloquée, mardi, jusqu’à ce que la police intervienne. Quant au centre Tolbiac de l’université Paris-I Panthéon-Sorbonne, il a été occupé dans la matinée, avant d’être évacué « pour des raisons de sécurité », avance-t-on dans l’entourage de la présidence, ce que le syndicat L’Union étudiante considère, dans un communiqué, comme une façon d’« empêcher » la tenue d’une assemblée générale, programmée à la mi-journée.
« Embrasement »
« L’accès aux ascenseurs a été bloqué par les étudiants mobilisés. Or, dans ce cas, la réglementation en vigueur pour des bâtiments de cette hauteur implique la décision administrative de faire évacuer le bâtiment », justifie l’université. Entre 200 et 300 étudiants sont ensuite restés devant l’établissement.

#Palestine #IEP #Sciences_Po #étudiants

Israël n’a pas fourni de preuves établissant un lien entre des membres du personnel de l’UNRWA et le Hamas (et autres textes)
Le rapport Colonna révèle qu’Israël n’a pas fourni de preuves établissant un lien entre des membres du personnel de l’UNRWA et le Hamas
Gideon Levy, Alex Levac : Un Palestinien libéré d’une prison israélienne décrit les coups, les abus sexuels et la torture qu’il a subis
Mariam Farah : Les artistes palestiniens réprimés, alors qu’Israël « instrumentalise la peur et la célébrité »
Mahmoud Mushtaha : J’ai quitté Gaza. Mais je suis toujours prisonnier de la guerre
Sophia Goodfriend : Pourquoi le rôle de l’humain reste essentiel dans la guerre menée par Israël grâce à l’IA
Roser Garí Pérez : L’Allemagne est complice du génocide à Gaza, et elle le sait
Yorgos Mitralias : Le cœur de sa jeunesse bat à Gaza... et l’Amérique entre en crise !
Vicken Cheterian : Quand Netanyahou se souvient de l’« holocauste des Arméniens »
Naomi Klein : « Nous avons besoin d’un exode du sionisme »
Liens vers d’autres textes

▻https://entreleslignesentrelesmots.wordpress.com/2024/04/29/israel-na-pas-fourni-de-preuves-etablissant-un

#international #palestine #israel

“These Thankless Deserts” - Winston Churchill and the Middle East : An Introduction
▻https://winstonchurchill.org/publications/finest-hour/finest-hour-196/churchill-and-the-middle-east-an-introduction
Voici le point de vue de la société Winston Churchill. A noter : La Déclaration Balfour de 1917 était le résultat d’une intrigue de Dr. Chaim Weizmann

https://winstonchurchill.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Middle_East_in_1921_UK_Government_map_Cab24-120-cp21-2607-815x1024.jpg

Wikipedia nous informe que
▻https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A9claration_Balfour_de_1917#Contexte_strat%C3%A9gique_internation

Dès 1903 Herzl avait obtenu une lettre officielle du Foreign Office déclarant que la Grande-Bretagne acceptait un accord sur la création d’une colonie juive sous administration juive, document que Yoram Hazony juge « surpassant même la Déclaration Balfour ».
...
Hazony (2007), p. 180 : « Lord Landsdowne est prêt à envisager favorablement ... un projet dont les caractéristiques principales sont l’octroi d’un vaste territoire, la nomination d’un responsable juif à la tête de l’administration (ayant) carte blanche en matière d’administration municipale, religieuse et purement intérieure » (voir lettre de Sir Clement Hill (en) à Leopold Greenberg (en), 14 août 1903. Repris in Die Welt, 29 août 1903)..

Churchill étant proche des sionistes travaillait depuis ce moment et jusqu’à la fin de sa vie en faveur de la colonisation juive d’une partie du territoire arabe sous mandat britannique. L’article contient quelques éléments qui ont pu le motiver à prendre cette position.

10.7.2023 by David Freeman - Finest Hour 196, Second Quarter 2022

During the First World War, the United Kingdom went to war against the Ottoman Empire, which had allied itself with the Central Powers of Germany and the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The Ottoman Empire traced its origins and its name back to the thirteenth-century Turkish Sultan Osman I.

Although once a great power controlling large sections of Europe, Africa, and Asia, the Ottoman Empire by the twentieth century had become known as the “sick man of Europe” and was much reduced in size. Nevertheless, the Turks still controlled nearly all of the lands of Arabia, including the Moslem Holy Cities of Mecca and Medina. For centuries, the office of Sultan had been combined with that of the Caliph, the spiritual leader of the Moslem world.

All of this came to an end with Turkish defeat in the Great War. In 1915, the British attempted a quick thrust at the Ottoman capital of Constantinople (now known as Istanbul) with a plan strongly supported by First Lord of the Admiralty Winston Churchill. The Dardanelles (or Gallipoli) campaign ended in failure. The British then turned to attacking the Turks from further out, along the frontiers of Arabia.

In control of Egypt since 1882, the British used the ancient land to launch an offensive against Gaza, which lay in Turkish-controlled Palestine near the Sinai border with Egypt. At the same time, the British opened talks with Emir Hussein ibn Ali Al-Hashimi, the Sharif of Mecca. The Sharifate included Mecca and Medina, both located in the western regions of Arabia known as the Hejaz. Although an Arab, Hussein served the Turks, his title of Sharif indicating descent from the Prophet Mohammad.

In 1916, the British induced Hussein to declare independence and establish himself as King of the Hejaz. In doing this, the British hoped to bring down the Ottoman Empire from within and minimize the resources they would need to commit to the region. The “Arab Revolt,” however, failed to attract the sort of support for which the British had been hoping.

Much more powerful among the Arabs than Hussein was Abdul Aziz ibn Saud, the dominant chieftain in the Nejd, the large, barren region of eastern Arabia. Ibn Saud was much more concerned with defeating his chief rival in the Nejd than making war against the Turks. And so, in the end, the British had to do most of their own fighting in the Middle East, using forces from Britain, India, South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand.

Hussein had several sons. Of these, the one who worked most closely with the British during the war was Feisal, known variously as “Emir Feisal” and, after his father proclaimed himself king, “Prince Feisal.” In return for Arab support, the British made ambiguous promises about supporting the creation after the war of independent states, including the region of Palestine, which was vaguely understood to be the land around the Jordan River.

In the search for victory, however, the British also made promises in other directions. In 1916, Britain and France entered into an agreement that became known as the Sykes-Picot Treaty. The two imperial powers decided to carve up the Arab lands once the Turks were defeated. The French would take the northern regions of Syria and Lebanon, which might include Mosul and parts of Palestine, but which would definitely include Damascus. The British would take most of Palestine and Mesopotamia.

In 1917, the British entered into yet another potentially conflicting agreement. Even before 1914, the World Zionist Congress had begun to establish new settlements in Palestine, the ancient homeland of the Jewish people. During the war, Dr. Chaim Weizmann, a naturalized British citizen and a research chemist, provided vital assistance to the war effort as Director of the British Admiralty Laboratories (see FH 195). Weizmann skillfully used his influence to induce the British government to issue the Balfour Declaration, a letter from Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour to Lord Rothschild pledging support for the establishment “in Palestine for a national home for the Jewish people.”
Churchill and the Middle East
British map appended to 1921 Cabinet Memorandum showing proposed Mandates

In the final year of the war, British forces made major progress against the Turks. Starting from Basra, at the head of the Persian Gulf, the British swept up the valley of Mesopotamia and captured Baghdad. Under the leadership of Gen. Sir Edmund Allenby, the British Army finally took Gaza and pushed through to Jerusalem. In the interior, meanwhile, Arab forces carried out a guerrilla campaign against the Turks, assisted to a degree by a young archaeologist turned intelligence officer turned commando, T. E. Lawrence (see FH 119).

In the fall of 1918, the Ottoman Empire finally collapsed. Turkish forces remaining in Arabia hastily retreated, creating a vacuum. The Allies had not anticipated this, and Feisal seized the opportunity to establish himself in Damascus with the intention of ruling a new kingdom from the world’s oldest continually inhabited city. The French, however, insisted on their “rights” under the Sykes-Picot agreement, and the British had to acquiesce on the grounds that amity with the French was more important to the United Kingdom than amity with the Arabs.

The French, however, were not to be altogether satisfied. President Wilson of the United States insisted that the Allies were to gain no territory from the defeated Central Powers. Instead the former colonies of Germany and Turkey would come under the authority of the League of Nations, which would assign the various territories to member states with a “mandate” to assist the native populations towards self-government. At least in theory, French and British authority in the Middle East was supposed to be only temporary.

For the most part, the British were anxious to exit their mandates as soon as possible. British forces in Mesopotamia were made unwelcome by the locals, who were also bitterly divided against one another. Chaos prevailed, and British troops were regularly ambushed and killed in what Churchill called “these thankless deserts.” The cost of military operations became a primary concern to Churchill after the Armistice, when he became Secretary of State for War and was told by Prime Minister David Lloyd George that his paramount responsibility had to be reduction of expenditure.

By 1920, Churchill came to believe that reducing military spending in the Middle East required the establishment of an Arab Department within the Colonial Office, which could work to settle the grievances of the Arabs and thereby reduce hostilities in the region. He lamented the price in blood and treasure that Britain was paying to be “midwife to an ungrateful volcano” (see FH 132). After Lloyd George agreed to Churchill’s proposal, the Prime Minister invited his War Secretary to move to the Colonial Office and supervise the settlement process himself.

Churchill became Secretary of State for the Colonies early in 1921 and immediately called for a conference to take place in Cairo that March. Altogether forty key people involved with Britain’s Middle Eastern affairs gathered for what Churchill jestingly called a meeting of the “forty thieves.” Out of this emerged what became known as the “Sharifian” solution.

Hussein would continue to be recognized as King of the Hejaz. His son Feisal, driven from Damascus by the French, would be set up in Baghdad as King of Iraq, as Mesopotamia was formally renamed. Palestine would be divided along the line of the Jordan. The eastern side, or “Trans-Jordania” (later shortened to Jordan), would become an Arab kingdom under Feisal’s elder brother Abdullah. Churchill argued that the advantage of this would be that pressure applied in any one of the three states would also be felt in the other two. Ibn Saud, to keep the peace, would be given a healthy subsidy by the British government.

The western side of Palestine remained under British mandate authority so as to fulfill the pledge made by the Balfour Declaration. Although the Arabs of Palestine (i.e., the Palestinians) protested against this, Churchill curtly rejected their representations during a visit to Jerusalem after the Cairo Conference ended. Churchill did not foresee Jewish immigration overtaking the Palestinian population and naively believed that the two groups, along with Arab Christians, would work together to create a peaceful, prosperous, secular Palestinian state. Churchill was not always right.

In June 1921, Churchill made a lengthy speech to the House of Commons in which he outlined his settlement and the reasons behind it (see p. 38). This would be the longest statement Churchill ever made about the Middle East and its peoples. Over the following year and a half, he supervised the implementation of the decisions made at Cairo and approved by Parliament. The process was not without incident—Feisal was in a precarious position in Baghdad and constrained to demonstrate his independence—but went generally according to plan before Churchill and his Liberal party were driven from power late in 1922.

Churchill’s most dedicated period of involvement with the Middle East ended with his tenure at the Colonial Office, but he continued to monitor events. The short-lived Kingdom of Hejaz ended when it was overrun in 1924 by the forces of ibn Saud, who unified the region with the Nejd to create the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Hussein went into exile, later to be buried in Jerusalem. After returning to Parliament as a Conservative, Churchill remained a supporter of Zionism and strongly objected when the government of Neville Chamberlain acted to restrict Jewish immigration into Palestine, even as Nazi Germany was forcing Jews in Europe to flee for their lives.

During the Second World War, the Middle East became a critical zone for the Allies. The Suez Canal linked Britain with India and the Antipodes, and Egypt was a base from which to fight the Axis powers directly when first Italy and then Germany began offensive operations in North Africa. As Prime Minister, Churchill travelled to Cairo several times during the war. In 1945 it was where he last met with President Roosevelt and first met with ibn Saud. After a cabal of pro-fascist army officers seized control of the government in Baghdad in 1941, Churchill supported a bold and successful move to reestablish an Iraqi government friendly to Britain.

Although out of office when Israel declared independence in 1948, Churchill expressed the view to his old friend and fellow Zionist Leo Amery that it was “a big event…in history” and “all to the good that the result has come about by fighting” (see FH 178). It also pleased Churchill that Weizmann became the first President of Israel and that the nation’s leading technical university chose to name its auditorium for the former British Prime Minister who had supported Zionism at a crucial moment (see FH 195).

One hundred years on, the decisions that Churchill made about the Middle East continue to affect the world today.

#Grande_Bretagne #Empire_ottoman #Palestine #histoire #impérialisme #Déclaration_Balfour #Conférence_du_Caire_1943 #Égypte #Iraq #Mésopotamie #Moyen-Orient #Lawrence_d_Arabie #Israel

De Gaza à Jérusalem, c’est la même guerre

En 2012, lors d’un entretien avec le journal économique The Marker sur l’économie israélienne, Benjamin Netanyahou s’est vanté, dans ce qui est devenu depuis une sorte d’expression idiomatique, que « si vous laissez de côté les Arabes et les ultra-orthodoxes, [Israël est] en pleine forme ». Aujourd’hui, le premier ministre semble affiner encore ce slogan : si l’on ne tient pas compte de tous les habitant·es, nous sommes en pleine forme.

M. Netanyahou n’est pas le seul à le penser. Depuis l’attaque du 7 octobre et la guerre d’anéantissement qui s’en est suivie à Gaza, la droite israélienne est euphorique. Même l’attaque des missiles iraniens il y a deux semaines a réussi à détourner notre regard de Gaza, à limiter la critique internationale des crimes d’Israël, et même à gagner un regain de sympathie pour l’État.

▻https://entreleslignesentrelesmots.wordpress.com/2024/04/27/de-gaza-a-jerusalem-cest-la-meme-guerre

#international #palestine #israel

Decolonizzare la memoria del presente
▻https://resistenzeincirenaica.com/2024/04/26/decolonizzare-la-memoria-del-presente

COMUNICATO Oggi, 25 aprile 2024, come Collettivo Kasciavìt abbiamo installato un nuovo monumento nella città di Milano. Il pilastro di una casa distrutta simboleggia il massacro e la devastazione portati avanti dall’esercito israeliano nella Striscia di Gaza, poiché non vogliamo che il dolore di un popolo e la devastazione di una terra rimangano inascoltati e... Continua a leggere

#La_Federazione

https://resistenzeincirenaicacom.files.wordpress.com/2024/04/aida-campo.jpg

https://resistenzeincirenaicacom.files.wordpress.com/2024/04/monum-1-1.jpg?w=769 https://resistenzeincirenaicacom.files.wordpress.com/2024/04/monum-2.jpg?w=767 https://resistenzeincirenaicacom.files.wordpress.com/2024/04/monum-3.jpg?w=1024 https://resistenzeincirenaicacom.files.wordpress.com/2024/04/monum-4.jpg?w=1024 https://resistenzeincirenaicacom.files.wordpress.com/2024/04/monum-5.jpg?w=766 https://resistenzeincirenaicacom.files.wordpress.com/2024/04/manif-3.jpg?w=1024 https://resistenzeincirenaicacom.files.wordpress.com/2024/04/manif-1.jpg?w=1024 https://resistenzeincirenaicacom.files.wordpress.com/2024/04/manif-2.jpg?w=1024 https://resistenzeincirenaicacom.files.wordpress.com/2024/04/costr-2.jpg?w=768 https://resistenzeincirenaicacom.files.wordpress.com/2024/04/costr-3.jpg?w=576 https://resistenzeincirenaicacom.files.wordpress.com/2024/04/costr-4.jpg?w=576 https://resistenzeincirenaicacom.files.wordpress.com/2024/04/costr-5.jpg?w=768 https://resistenzeincirenaicacom.files.wordpress.com/2024/04/costr-6.jpg?w=1024 https://resistenzeincirenaicacom.files.wordpress.com/2024/04/costr-7.jpg?w=768

Les crimes commis en Palestine et en Israël ne peuvent rester impunis (+ autres textes)

Johann Soufi : Les crimes commis en Palestine et en Israël ne peuvent rester impunis
Deiaa Haj Yahia : Opération israélienne dans le camp de réfugiés Nour Shams en Cisjordanie : « Ce qui s’est passé ici me rappelle 1948 »
L’ONU demande une enquête sur des fosses communes découvertes dans des hôpitaux de Gaza
Pas de technologie pour l’apartheid : des employés de Google arrêtés pour avoir protesté contre le contrat de 1,2 milliard de dollars de l’entreprise avec Israël
Pierre Mouterde : Quatre québecois.es sur la flottille internationale en solidarité avec Gaza
Il est urgent d’enquêter sur le rôle des entreprises de médias sociaux dans le meurtre des civils de Gaza
Carep Paris : Vivre la guerre de Gaza depuis la France. Paroles palestiniennes
Liens avec autres textes

▻https://entreleslignesentrelesmots.wordpress.com/2024/04/25/les-crimes-commis-en-palestine-et-en-israel-ne

#international #palestine #israel