Ban on plastic bags makes HP clean
Shimla, Jan 19: The hills are looking clean again. Once an eyesore, littering the verdant mountain slopes, choking drains and scarring the environment, plastic pollution has come down dramatically in Shimla and other parts of Himachal Pradesh, four years after this north Indian state banned the use of small polythene bags.
"Before the implementation of the ban, polythene pollution was a major problem in the state," R.K. Sood, joint member- secretary of the Himachal State Council for Science, Technology and Environment, told.
Describing the scene before the ban was imposed, he said: "Plastic bags littered the hillsides. During the monsoon, the rain water brought along heaps of polythene bags and other non-biodegradable material that choked most of the municipal drains. Now, the problem has been solved to a great extent."
Himachal Pradesh was the first state in India to ban the production, storage, use, sale and distribution of small polythene bags in June 2004.
Under the Himachal Pradesh Non-Biodegradable Garbage (Control) Act of 1995, any violator trespassing faced a fine up to Rs.25,000. The minimum fine was fixed at Rs.500.
"The ban on use of coloured polythene bags manufactured from recycled plastic was initially imposed on Jan 1, 1999. Later in 2004, the ban was imposed under Section 7(h) of the State Non-Biodegradable Garbage (Control) Rules on the use of polythene bags having thickness less than 70 microns and size less than 18"x12"," Sood said. As a result, paper and jute bags are now back in the state.
Sanjay Verma, project officer with the state Department of Environment Science and Technology, said: "Initially, it was a herculean task to enforce the ban. Special sensitisation drives were launched across the state to educate the common man about the ecological hazards and about which type of bags were exempted from the ban and which were not."
About 20 government officials were empowered at the district and sub-divisional level to ensure effective implementation of the ban."Still, 25 to 30 people are fined on an average every month in the state," Verma said. He said the problem is still acute in areas located along neighbouring Punjab and Haryana.
"The use of polythene continues in the border areas of the state. The problem can be checked when the neighbouring states enforce the ban too. Moreover, tourists generate more plastic during the peak season than the locals during the entire year," he said.
To dispose of Shimla's polythene waste, private firm Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd(GACL) joined hands with the city's municipal corporation in July last year as part of corporate social responsibility.
"As part of the understanding, we (GACL) are regularly getting truckloads of polythene waste that is scientifically burnt at our Darlaghat unit in Solan district," GACL official Sandeep Kapoor said.Around 1.5 to 2 quintals of polythene waste is collected daily in Shimla alone.
State Forest Minister J.P. Nadda said the state would soon have its environmental master plan to tackle critical areas of environmental degradation. "The master plan will include a baseline study of the environmental vulnerabilities and details of measures to tackle problems mainly related to urban solid waste, industrial pollution and ecological degradation caused by hydropower projects," he said.
IANS
resource: http://www.zeenews.com/sci-tech/eco-news/2009-01-19/499827news.html
HOT ISSUES OF the DAY:
Dear RS members:
For those who havent receive any membership's notification, please contact the membership officer AUDREY LIM or any of the committee members.
Contact:
Audrey_leewen@hotmail.com
rainbow.society@hotmail.com
Thank You.
Elly see (president of RS)
For those who havent receive any membership's notification, please contact the membership officer AUDREY LIM or any of the committee members.
Contact:
Audrey_leewen@hotmail.com
rainbow.society@hotmail.com
Thank You.
Elly see (president of RS)
Want to join us?
If you feel like to join Rainbow society, application form could be get by accessing the link below:
After you have finished filling the application form, please email it back to :
1. rainbow.society@hotmail.com
or
2.crazy_elly@hotmail.com (for further information).
After you have finished filling the application form, please email it back to :
1. rainbow.society@hotmail.com
or
2.crazy_elly@hotmail.com (for further information).
JOIN US:
Thursday, January 22, 2009
still want to use plastic?
SANGAM (ALLAHABAD): If you are still carrying foodstuff or essential commodities in polythene bags on the bank of the Ganga or the Yamuna during
Magh Mela, you run the risk of being penalised.
In fact, vigilant mela officials are on prowl on the entire campus to catch defaulters and initiate strict measures against them accordingly. Perhaps, this would be the first time in the history of Magh Mela in last one decade when usage of polythene or polybags was completely banned on the mela campus. Even the owners of shops of essential commodities and grocery, who have set up their business establishments in and around the campus, were not allowed to keep polythene bags with them to serve the customers.
The mela administration has assigned the special task to administrative teams of carrying out frequent raids at shops and punish the errant shop owners or carriers. The motive of banning polythene bags, according to insiders, could be an effective tool in reducing pollution in river Ganga and the Mela administration has been urging visitors to discard the use of polythene bags.
Till date, preventive action was initiated against 200 persons who had carried away polythene bags into mela campus due to ignorance or being of neighbouring district\state visitors.
District magistrate Rajeev Aggarwal said that the ban was put in place since the first day and would be effective till February 23. He added the orders covers all market areas, eating joints and hospitals.
He further stressed that there was an urgent need to educate and aware people about the disadvantages of using polythene bags. He, however, admitted that the usage of polythene bags has certainly declined in mela campus this year as the administrative teams had already seized polythene bags and related materials in the same regard.
Aggarwal also maintained that the mela administration has also sought the support of pilgrims and visitors, apprising them about the disadvantage of polythene made material and visitors have also assured them to keep them away from its usage. He added that preventive actions were being initiated against the defaulters and they were also given oral warnings.
Recently, a group of 15 visitors from Madhya Pradesh became so much impressed over the mela administration approach of banning polythene usage, claiming that it could reduce the pollution level of river ganga little a bit that they promised the concerned authorities to minimise its usage in their routine life too.
Resource: News
In fact, vigilant mela officials are on prowl on the entire campus to catch defaulters and initiate strict measures against them accordingly. Perhaps, this would be the first time in the history of Magh Mela in last one decade when usage of polythene or polybags was completely banned on the mela campus. Even the owners of shops of essential commodities and grocery, who have set up their business establishments in and around the campus, were not allowed to keep polythene bags with them to serve the customers.
The mela administration has assigned the special task to administrative teams of carrying out frequent raids at shops and punish the errant shop owners or carriers. The motive of banning polythene bags, according to insiders, could be an effective tool in reducing pollution in river Ganga and the Mela administration has been urging visitors to discard the use of polythene bags.
Till date, preventive action was initiated against 200 persons who had carried away polythene bags into mela campus due to ignorance or being of neighbouring district\state visitors.
District magistrate Rajeev Aggarwal said that the ban was put in place since the first day and would be effective till February 23. He added the orders covers all market areas, eating joints and hospitals.
He further stressed that there was an urgent need to educate and aware people about the disadvantages of using polythene bags. He, however, admitted that the usage of polythene bags has certainly declined in mela campus this year as the administrative teams had already seized polythene bags and related materials in the same regard.
Aggarwal also maintained that the mela administration has also sought the support of pilgrims and visitors, apprising them about the disadvantage of polythene made material and visitors have also assured them to keep them away from its usage. He added that preventive actions were being initiated against the defaulters and they were also given oral warnings.
Recently, a group of 15 visitors from Madhya Pradesh became so much impressed over the mela administration approach of banning polythene usage, claiming that it could reduce the pollution level of river ganga little a bit that they promised the concerned authorities to minimise its usage in their routine life too.
Resource: News
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
War of Choice: How Israel Manufactured the Gaza Escalation
War of Choice: How Israel Manufactured the Gaza Escalation
Steve Niva | January 7, 2009
Editor: Erik Leaver
Email this page to a friend
Comment on this article
Foreign Policy In Focus
www.fpif.org
Israel has repeatedly claimed that it had "no choice" but to wage war on Gaza on December 27 because Hamas had broken a ceasefire, was firing rockets at Israeli civilians, and had "tried everything in order to avoid this military operation," as Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni put it.
This claim, however, is widely at odds with the fact that Israel's military and political leadership took many aggressive steps during the ceasefire that escalated a crisis with Hamas, and possibly even provoked Hamas to create a pretext for the assault. This wasn't a war of "no choice," but rather a very avoidable war in which Israeli actions played the major role in instigating.
Israel has a long history of deliberately using violence and other provocative measures to trigger reactions in order to create a pretext for military action, and to portray its opponents as the aggressors and Israel as the victim. According to the respected Israeli military historian Zeev Maoz in his recent book, Defending the Holy Land, Israel most notably used this policy of "strategic escalation" in 1955-1956, when it launched deadly raids on Egyptian army positions to provoke Egypt's President Nasser into violent reprisals preceding its ill-fated invasion of Egypt; in 1981-1982, when it launched violent raids on Lebanon in order to provoke Palestinian escalation preceding the Israeli invasion of Lebanon; and between 2001-2004, when Prime Minister Ariel Sharon repeatedly ordered assassinations of high-level Palestinian militants during declared ceasefires, provoking violent attacks that enabled Israel's virtual reoccupation of the West Bank.
Israel's current assault on Gaza bears many trademark elements of Israel's long history of employing "strategic escalation" to manufacture a major crisis, if not a war.
Making War 'Inevitable'
The countdown to a war began, according to a detailed report by Barak Raviv in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, when Israel's Defense Minister Ehud Barak started planning the current attack on Gaza with his chiefs of staff at least six months ago — even as Israel was negotiating the Egyptian brokered ceasefire with Hamas that went into effect on June 19. During the subsequent ceasefire, the report contends, the Israeli security establishment carefully gathered intelligence to map out Hamas' security infrastructure, engaged in operational deception, and spread disinformation to mislead the public about its intentions.
This revelation doesn't confirm that Israel intended to start a war with Hamas in December, but it does shed some light on why Israel continuously took steps that undermined the terms of the fragile ceasefire with Hamas, even though Hamas respected their side of the agreement.
Indeed, there was a genuine lull in rocket and mortar fire between June 19 and November 4, due to Hamas compliance and only sporadically violated by a small number of launchings carried out by rival Fatah and Islamic Jihad militants, largely in defiance of Hamas. According to the conservative Israeli-based Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center's analysis of rocket and missile attacks in 2008, there were only three rockets fired at Israel in July, September, and October combined. Israeli civilians living near Gaza experienced an almost unprecedented degree of security during this period, with no Israeli casualties.
Yet despite the major lull, Israel continually raided the West Bank, arresting and frequently killing "wanted" Palestinians from June to October, which had the inevitable effect of ratcheting up pressure on Hamas to respond. Moreover, while the central expectation of Hamas going into the ceasefire was that Israel would lift the siege on Gaza, Israel only took the barest steps to ease the siege, which kept the people at a bare survival level. This policy was a clear affront to Hamas, and had the inescapable effect of undermining both Hamas and popular Palestinian support for the ceasefire.
But Israel's most provocative action, acknowledged by many now as the critical turning point that undermined the ceasefire, took place on November 4, when Israeli forces auspiciously violated the truce by crossing into the Gaza Strip to destroy what the army said was a tunnel dug by Hamas, killing six Hamas militants. Sara Roy, writing in the London Review of Books, contends this attack was "no doubt designed finally to undermine the truce between Israel and Hamas established last June."
The Israeli breach into Gaza was immediately followed by a further provocation by Israel on November 5, when the Israeli government hermetically sealed off all ways into and out of Gaza. As a result, the UN reports that the amount of imports entering Gaza has been "severely reduced to an average of 16 truckloads per day — down from 123 truckloads per day in October and 475 trucks per day in May 2007 — before the Hamas takeover." These limited shipments provide only a fraction of the supplies needed to sustain 1.5 million starving Palestinians.
In response, Hamas predictably claimed that Israel had violated the truce and allowed Islamic Jihad to launch a round of rocket attacks on Israel. Only after lethal Israeli reprisals killed over 10 Hamas gunmen in the following days did Hamas militants finally respond with volleys of mortars and rockets of their own. In two short weeks, Israel killed over 15 Palestinian militants, while about 120 rockets and mortars were fired at Israel, and although there were no Israeli casualties the calm had been shattered.
It was at this time that Israeli officials launched what appears to have been a coordinated media blitz to cultivate public reception for an impending conflict, stressing the theme of the "inevitability" of a coming war with Hamas in Gaza. On November 12, senior IDF officials announced that war with Hamas was likely in the two months after the six-month ceasefire, baldly stating it would occur even if Hamas wasn't interested in confrontation. A few days later, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert publicly ordered his military commanders to draw up plans for a war in Gaza, which were already well developed at the time. On November 19, according to Raviv's report in Haaretz, the Gaza war plan was brought before Barak for final approval.
While the rhetoric of an "inevitable" war with Hamas may have only been Israeli bluster to compel Hamas into line, its actions on the ground in the critical month leading up to the official expiration of the ceasefire on December 19 only heightened the cycle of violence, leaving a distinct impression Israel had cast the die for war.
Finally, Hamas then walked right into the "inevitable war" that Israel had been preparing since the ceasefire had gone into effect in June. With many Palestinians believing the ceasefire to be meaningless, Hamas announced it wouldn't renew the ceasefire after it expired on December 19. Hamas then stood back for two days while Islamic Jihad and Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades militants fired volleys of mortars and rockets into Israel, in the context of mutually escalating attacks. Yet even then, with Israeli threats of war mounting, Hamas imposed a 24-hour ceasefire on all missile attacks on December 21, announcing it would consider renewing the lapsed truce with Israel in the Gaza Strip if Israel would halt its raids in both Gaza and the West Bank, and keep Gaza border crossings open for supplies of aid and fuel. Israel immediately rejected its offer.
But when the Israel Defence Forces killed three Hamas militants laying explosives near the security fence between Israel and Gaza on the evening of December 23, the Hamas military wing lashed out by launching a barrage of over 80 missiles into Israel the following day, claiming it was Israel, and not Hamas, that was responsible for the escalation.
Little did they know that, according to Raviv, Prime Minister Olmert, and Defense Minister Barak had already met on December 18 to approve the impending war plan, but put the mission off waiting for a better pretext. By launching more than 170 rockets and mortars at Israeli civilians in the days following December 23, killing one Israeli civilian, Hamas had provided reason enough for Israel to unleash its long-planned attack on Gaza on December 27.
The Rationale for War
If Israel's goal were simply to end rocket attacks on its civilians, it would have solidified and extended the ceasefire, which was working well, until November. Even after November, it could have addressed Hamas' longstanding ceasefire proposals for a complete end to rocket-fire on Israel, in exchange for Israel lifting its crippling 18-month siege on Gaza.
Instead, the actual targets of its assault on Gaza after December 27, which included police stations, mosques, universities, and Hamas government institutions, clearly reveal that Israel's primary goals go far beyond providing immediate security for its citizens. Israeli spokespersons repeatedly claim that Israel's assault isn't about seeking to effect regime change with Hamas, but rather about creating a "new security reality" in Gaza. But that "new reality" requires Israel to use massive violence to degrade the political and military capacity of Hamas, to a point where it agrees to a ceasefire with conditions more congenial to Israel. Short of a complete reoccupation of Gaza, no amount of violence will erase Hamas from the scene.
Confirming the steps needed to create the "new reality," the broader reasons why Israel chose a major confrontation with Hamas at this time appear to be the cause of several other factors unrelated to providing immediate security for its citizens.
First, many senior Israeli political and military leaders strongly opposed the June 19 ceasefire with Hamas, and looked for opportunities to reestablish Israel's fabled "deterrent capability" of instilling fear into its enemies. These leaders felt Israel's deterrent capability was badly damaged as a result of their withdrawal from Gaza in 2005, and especially after the widely criticized failures in the 2006 Israeli war with Hezbollah. For this powerful group a ceasefire was at best a tactical pause before the inevitable renewal of conflict, when conditions were more favorable. Immediately following Israel's aerial assault, a New York Times article noted that Israel had been eager "to remind its foes that it has teeth" and to erase the ghost of Lebanon that has haunted it over the past two years.
A second factor was pressure surrounding the impending elections set to take place in early February. The ruling coalition, led by Barak and Livni, have been repeatedly criticized by the Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu, the former prime minister, who is leading in the polls, for not being tough enough on Hamas and rocket-fire from Gaza. This gave the ruling coalition a strong incentive to demonstrate to the Israeli people their security credentials in order to bolster their chances against the more hawkish Likud.
Third, Hamas repeatedly said it wouldn't recognize Mahmud Abbas as president of the Palestinian Authority after his term runs out on January 9. The looming political standoff on the Palestinian side threatens to boost Hamas and undermine Abbas, who had underseen closer security coordination with Israel and was congenial to Israeli demands for concessions on future peace proposals. One possible outcome of this assault is that Abbas will remain in power for a while longer, since Hamas will be unable to mobilise its supporters in order to force him to resign.
And finally, Israel was pressed to take action now due to its sense of the American political timeline. The Bush administration rarely exerted constraint on Israel and would certainly stand by in its waning days, while Barack Obama would not likely want to begin his presidency with a major confrontation with Israel. The Washington Post quoted a Bush administration official saying that Israel struck in Gaza "because they want it to be over before the next administration comes in. They can't predict how the next administration will handle it. And this is not the way they want to start with the new administration."
An Uncertain Ending
As the conflict rages to an uncertain end, it's important to consider Israeli military historian Zeev Maoz's contention that Israel's history of manufacturing wars through "strategic escalation" and using overwhelming force to achieve "deterrence" has never been successful. In fact, it's the primary cause of Israel's insecurity because it deepens hatred and a desire for revenge rather than fear.
At the same time, there's no question Hamas continues to callously sacrifice its fellow Palestinian citizens, as well as Israeli civilians, on the altar of maintaining its pyrrhic resistance credentials and its myopic preoccupation with revenge, and fell into many self-made traps of its own. There had been growing international pressure on Israel to ease its siege and a major increase in creative and nonviolent strategies drawing attention to the plight of Palestinians such as the arrival of humanitarian relief convoys off of Gaza's coast in the past months, but now Gaza lies in ruins.
But as the vastly more powerful actor holding nearly all the cards in this conflict, the war in Gaza was ultimately Israel's choice. And for all this bloodshed and violence, Israel must be held accountable.
With the American political establishment firmly behind Israel's attack, and Obama's foreign policy team heavily weighted with pro-Israel insiders like Dennis Ross and Hillary Clinton, any efforts to hold Israel accountable in the United States will depend upon American citizens mobilizing a major grassroots effort behind a new foreign policy that will not tolerate any violations of international law, including those by Israel, and will immediately work towards ending Israel's siege of Gaza and ending Israel's occupation.
Beyond that, the most promising prospect for holding Israel accountable is through the increasing use of universal jurisdiction for prosecuting war crimes, along with the growing transnational movement calling for sanctions on Israel until it ends its violations of international law. In what would be truly be a new style of foreign policy, a transnational network that focuses on Israeli violations of international law, rather than the state itself, could become a counterweight that forces policymakers in the United States, Europe, and Israel to reconsider their political and moral complicity in the current war, in favor of taking real steps towards peace and security in the region for all peoples.
Steve Niva, a professor of International Politics and Middle East Studies at The Evergreen State College, is a contributor to Foreign Policy In Focus. He is currently writing a book on the relationship between Israel's military violence and Palestinian suicide bombings.
source :http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/5776
Steve Niva | January 7, 2009
Editor: Erik Leaver
Email this page to a friend
Comment on this article
Foreign Policy In Focus
www.fpif.org
Israel has repeatedly claimed that it had "no choice" but to wage war on Gaza on December 27 because Hamas had broken a ceasefire, was firing rockets at Israeli civilians, and had "tried everything in order to avoid this military operation," as Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni put it.
This claim, however, is widely at odds with the fact that Israel's military and political leadership took many aggressive steps during the ceasefire that escalated a crisis with Hamas, and possibly even provoked Hamas to create a pretext for the assault. This wasn't a war of "no choice," but rather a very avoidable war in which Israeli actions played the major role in instigating.
Israel has a long history of deliberately using violence and other provocative measures to trigger reactions in order to create a pretext for military action, and to portray its opponents as the aggressors and Israel as the victim. According to the respected Israeli military historian Zeev Maoz in his recent book, Defending the Holy Land, Israel most notably used this policy of "strategic escalation" in 1955-1956, when it launched deadly raids on Egyptian army positions to provoke Egypt's President Nasser into violent reprisals preceding its ill-fated invasion of Egypt; in 1981-1982, when it launched violent raids on Lebanon in order to provoke Palestinian escalation preceding the Israeli invasion of Lebanon; and between 2001-2004, when Prime Minister Ariel Sharon repeatedly ordered assassinations of high-level Palestinian militants during declared ceasefires, provoking violent attacks that enabled Israel's virtual reoccupation of the West Bank.
Israel's current assault on Gaza bears many trademark elements of Israel's long history of employing "strategic escalation" to manufacture a major crisis, if not a war.
Making War 'Inevitable'
The countdown to a war began, according to a detailed report by Barak Raviv in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, when Israel's Defense Minister Ehud Barak started planning the current attack on Gaza with his chiefs of staff at least six months ago — even as Israel was negotiating the Egyptian brokered ceasefire with Hamas that went into effect on June 19. During the subsequent ceasefire, the report contends, the Israeli security establishment carefully gathered intelligence to map out Hamas' security infrastructure, engaged in operational deception, and spread disinformation to mislead the public about its intentions.
This revelation doesn't confirm that Israel intended to start a war with Hamas in December, but it does shed some light on why Israel continuously took steps that undermined the terms of the fragile ceasefire with Hamas, even though Hamas respected their side of the agreement.
Indeed, there was a genuine lull in rocket and mortar fire between June 19 and November 4, due to Hamas compliance and only sporadically violated by a small number of launchings carried out by rival Fatah and Islamic Jihad militants, largely in defiance of Hamas. According to the conservative Israeli-based Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center's analysis of rocket and missile attacks in 2008, there were only three rockets fired at Israel in July, September, and October combined. Israeli civilians living near Gaza experienced an almost unprecedented degree of security during this period, with no Israeli casualties.
Yet despite the major lull, Israel continually raided the West Bank, arresting and frequently killing "wanted" Palestinians from June to October, which had the inevitable effect of ratcheting up pressure on Hamas to respond. Moreover, while the central expectation of Hamas going into the ceasefire was that Israel would lift the siege on Gaza, Israel only took the barest steps to ease the siege, which kept the people at a bare survival level. This policy was a clear affront to Hamas, and had the inescapable effect of undermining both Hamas and popular Palestinian support for the ceasefire.
But Israel's most provocative action, acknowledged by many now as the critical turning point that undermined the ceasefire, took place on November 4, when Israeli forces auspiciously violated the truce by crossing into the Gaza Strip to destroy what the army said was a tunnel dug by Hamas, killing six Hamas militants. Sara Roy, writing in the London Review of Books, contends this attack was "no doubt designed finally to undermine the truce between Israel and Hamas established last June."
The Israeli breach into Gaza was immediately followed by a further provocation by Israel on November 5, when the Israeli government hermetically sealed off all ways into and out of Gaza. As a result, the UN reports that the amount of imports entering Gaza has been "severely reduced to an average of 16 truckloads per day — down from 123 truckloads per day in October and 475 trucks per day in May 2007 — before the Hamas takeover." These limited shipments provide only a fraction of the supplies needed to sustain 1.5 million starving Palestinians.
In response, Hamas predictably claimed that Israel had violated the truce and allowed Islamic Jihad to launch a round of rocket attacks on Israel. Only after lethal Israeli reprisals killed over 10 Hamas gunmen in the following days did Hamas militants finally respond with volleys of mortars and rockets of their own. In two short weeks, Israel killed over 15 Palestinian militants, while about 120 rockets and mortars were fired at Israel, and although there were no Israeli casualties the calm had been shattered.
It was at this time that Israeli officials launched what appears to have been a coordinated media blitz to cultivate public reception for an impending conflict, stressing the theme of the "inevitability" of a coming war with Hamas in Gaza. On November 12, senior IDF officials announced that war with Hamas was likely in the two months after the six-month ceasefire, baldly stating it would occur even if Hamas wasn't interested in confrontation. A few days later, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert publicly ordered his military commanders to draw up plans for a war in Gaza, which were already well developed at the time. On November 19, according to Raviv's report in Haaretz, the Gaza war plan was brought before Barak for final approval.
While the rhetoric of an "inevitable" war with Hamas may have only been Israeli bluster to compel Hamas into line, its actions on the ground in the critical month leading up to the official expiration of the ceasefire on December 19 only heightened the cycle of violence, leaving a distinct impression Israel had cast the die for war.
Finally, Hamas then walked right into the "inevitable war" that Israel had been preparing since the ceasefire had gone into effect in June. With many Palestinians believing the ceasefire to be meaningless, Hamas announced it wouldn't renew the ceasefire after it expired on December 19. Hamas then stood back for two days while Islamic Jihad and Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades militants fired volleys of mortars and rockets into Israel, in the context of mutually escalating attacks. Yet even then, with Israeli threats of war mounting, Hamas imposed a 24-hour ceasefire on all missile attacks on December 21, announcing it would consider renewing the lapsed truce with Israel in the Gaza Strip if Israel would halt its raids in both Gaza and the West Bank, and keep Gaza border crossings open for supplies of aid and fuel. Israel immediately rejected its offer.
But when the Israel Defence Forces killed three Hamas militants laying explosives near the security fence between Israel and Gaza on the evening of December 23, the Hamas military wing lashed out by launching a barrage of over 80 missiles into Israel the following day, claiming it was Israel, and not Hamas, that was responsible for the escalation.
Little did they know that, according to Raviv, Prime Minister Olmert, and Defense Minister Barak had already met on December 18 to approve the impending war plan, but put the mission off waiting for a better pretext. By launching more than 170 rockets and mortars at Israeli civilians in the days following December 23, killing one Israeli civilian, Hamas had provided reason enough for Israel to unleash its long-planned attack on Gaza on December 27.
The Rationale for War
If Israel's goal were simply to end rocket attacks on its civilians, it would have solidified and extended the ceasefire, which was working well, until November. Even after November, it could have addressed Hamas' longstanding ceasefire proposals for a complete end to rocket-fire on Israel, in exchange for Israel lifting its crippling 18-month siege on Gaza.
Instead, the actual targets of its assault on Gaza after December 27, which included police stations, mosques, universities, and Hamas government institutions, clearly reveal that Israel's primary goals go far beyond providing immediate security for its citizens. Israeli spokespersons repeatedly claim that Israel's assault isn't about seeking to effect regime change with Hamas, but rather about creating a "new security reality" in Gaza. But that "new reality" requires Israel to use massive violence to degrade the political and military capacity of Hamas, to a point where it agrees to a ceasefire with conditions more congenial to Israel. Short of a complete reoccupation of Gaza, no amount of violence will erase Hamas from the scene.
Confirming the steps needed to create the "new reality," the broader reasons why Israel chose a major confrontation with Hamas at this time appear to be the cause of several other factors unrelated to providing immediate security for its citizens.
First, many senior Israeli political and military leaders strongly opposed the June 19 ceasefire with Hamas, and looked for opportunities to reestablish Israel's fabled "deterrent capability" of instilling fear into its enemies. These leaders felt Israel's deterrent capability was badly damaged as a result of their withdrawal from Gaza in 2005, and especially after the widely criticized failures in the 2006 Israeli war with Hezbollah. For this powerful group a ceasefire was at best a tactical pause before the inevitable renewal of conflict, when conditions were more favorable. Immediately following Israel's aerial assault, a New York Times article noted that Israel had been eager "to remind its foes that it has teeth" and to erase the ghost of Lebanon that has haunted it over the past two years.
A second factor was pressure surrounding the impending elections set to take place in early February. The ruling coalition, led by Barak and Livni, have been repeatedly criticized by the Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu, the former prime minister, who is leading in the polls, for not being tough enough on Hamas and rocket-fire from Gaza. This gave the ruling coalition a strong incentive to demonstrate to the Israeli people their security credentials in order to bolster their chances against the more hawkish Likud.
Third, Hamas repeatedly said it wouldn't recognize Mahmud Abbas as president of the Palestinian Authority after his term runs out on January 9. The looming political standoff on the Palestinian side threatens to boost Hamas and undermine Abbas, who had underseen closer security coordination with Israel and was congenial to Israeli demands for concessions on future peace proposals. One possible outcome of this assault is that Abbas will remain in power for a while longer, since Hamas will be unable to mobilise its supporters in order to force him to resign.
And finally, Israel was pressed to take action now due to its sense of the American political timeline. The Bush administration rarely exerted constraint on Israel and would certainly stand by in its waning days, while Barack Obama would not likely want to begin his presidency with a major confrontation with Israel. The Washington Post quoted a Bush administration official saying that Israel struck in Gaza "because they want it to be over before the next administration comes in. They can't predict how the next administration will handle it. And this is not the way they want to start with the new administration."
An Uncertain Ending
As the conflict rages to an uncertain end, it's important to consider Israeli military historian Zeev Maoz's contention that Israel's history of manufacturing wars through "strategic escalation" and using overwhelming force to achieve "deterrence" has never been successful. In fact, it's the primary cause of Israel's insecurity because it deepens hatred and a desire for revenge rather than fear.
At the same time, there's no question Hamas continues to callously sacrifice its fellow Palestinian citizens, as well as Israeli civilians, on the altar of maintaining its pyrrhic resistance credentials and its myopic preoccupation with revenge, and fell into many self-made traps of its own. There had been growing international pressure on Israel to ease its siege and a major increase in creative and nonviolent strategies drawing attention to the plight of Palestinians such as the arrival of humanitarian relief convoys off of Gaza's coast in the past months, but now Gaza lies in ruins.
But as the vastly more powerful actor holding nearly all the cards in this conflict, the war in Gaza was ultimately Israel's choice. And for all this bloodshed and violence, Israel must be held accountable.
With the American political establishment firmly behind Israel's attack, and Obama's foreign policy team heavily weighted with pro-Israel insiders like Dennis Ross and Hillary Clinton, any efforts to hold Israel accountable in the United States will depend upon American citizens mobilizing a major grassroots effort behind a new foreign policy that will not tolerate any violations of international law, including those by Israel, and will immediately work towards ending Israel's siege of Gaza and ending Israel's occupation.
Beyond that, the most promising prospect for holding Israel accountable is through the increasing use of universal jurisdiction for prosecuting war crimes, along with the growing transnational movement calling for sanctions on Israel until it ends its violations of international law. In what would be truly be a new style of foreign policy, a transnational network that focuses on Israeli violations of international law, rather than the state itself, could become a counterweight that forces policymakers in the United States, Europe, and Israel to reconsider their political and moral complicity in the current war, in favor of taking real steps towards peace and security in the region for all peoples.
Steve Niva, a professor of International Politics and Middle East Studies at The Evergreen State College, is a contributor to Foreign Policy In Focus. He is currently writing a book on the relationship between Israel's military violence and Palestinian suicide bombings.
source :http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/5776
Monday, January 5, 2009
Small Tsunami Waves
Twin Papua Quakes Collapse Hotel; Trigger Small Tsunami Waves
Japan coast braces after twin quakes in Indonesia
TOKYO, Jan 4, 2009 (AFP) - Japan's Pacific coast could see some minor tsunami waves on Sunday after two powerful earthquakes off Indonesia, but nothing big enough to cause damage, the country's meteorological agency said. Waves up to 50 centimetres (1.5 feet) could reach the Pacific sides of islands from the Okinawan chain to the main island of Honshu, it said in an advisory -- which is less significant than an urgent warning. The agency advised people from going near beaches and estuaries. A 7.6-magnitude quake and 7.5-magnitude aftershock hit Sunday morning off.
by Staff Writers
Manokwari, Indonesia (AFP) Jan 4, 2009
Two powerful earthquakes rattled Indonesia's West Papua province early Sunday, triggering panic among residents but there were no immediate reports of any casualties or heavy damage.
The first 7.6-magnitude quake struck at 4:43 am (1943 GMT Saturday), about 150 kilometres northwest of the city of Manokwari, the US Geological Survey said, triggering a tsunami alert that was later withdrawn.
It was followed almost three hours later at 2233 GMT by a 7.5-magnitude aftershock, the US agency said.
Both quakes were fairly shallow, with the first hitting at a depth of 35 kilometres (22 miles) and the second at 45 kilometres.
Distressed residents ran out of their homes as the quake rattled Manokwari, the seaside capital of the province, but there were no immediate signs of heavy damage or injuries, an AFP correspondent in the town said.
Thousands of residents including children and the elderly could be seen thronging the roads of the town in the darkness of a blackout and heading away from the sea despite the tsunami warning being lifted.
Little damage could be seen initially in the town apart from cracked walls.
"The quake was quite strong and we felt it for about three minutes. The electricity blacked out after the quake," a policeman who identified himself as Ketut said.
"The police and military are working right now to help people get to higher ground due to the tsunami alert and the fact that we're on the coast," he said.
Several smaller aftershocks were also reported in the hours following the first quake, Indonesian seismologists said.
Indonesia, which sits at the meeting of continental plates, is frequently hit by earthquakes and tsunamis.
The Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004, which was triggered by a massive quake off the coast of Indonesia, killed at least 168,000 people in the country's Aceh province and Nias island.
Hotel collapses after powerful Indonesian quakes
A hotel in Indonesia's West Papua province collapsed when the second of two powerful earthquakes hit the region Sunday and three people were pulled alive from the rubble, officials said.
The three guests who had been staying at the Mutiara hotel in the city of Manokwari were taken to hospital, but their condition was not immediately clear. No other hotel staff or guests were believed to be trapped or missing.
"Those three hotel guests returned to their room after the first big quake. They failed to evacuate after the second powerful quake struck and got trapped in the hotel rubble," a hotel staffer identified as Harun told AFP.
"The three have been brought to a nearby hospital. But it's not clear what injuries they suffered," he added.
He said that the hotel had failed to withstand the quake as it was old but that other buildings in the neighbourhood had received only minor damage such as cracks to the walls.
The first 7.6-magnitude quake struck at 4:43 am (1943 GMT Saturday), about 150 kilometres northwest of Manokwari and was followed almost three hours later by a 7.5 magnitude aftershocks, the US Geological Survey said.
resource : http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Twin_Papua_Quakes_Collapse_Hotel_Trigger_Small_Tsunami_Waves_999.html
Japan coast braces after twin quakes in Indonesia
TOKYO, Jan 4, 2009 (AFP) - Japan's Pacific coast could see some minor tsunami waves on Sunday after two powerful earthquakes off Indonesia, but nothing big enough to cause damage, the country's meteorological agency said. Waves up to 50 centimetres (1.5 feet) could reach the Pacific sides of islands from the Okinawan chain to the main island of Honshu, it said in an advisory -- which is less significant than an urgent warning. The agency advised people from going near beaches and estuaries. A 7.6-magnitude quake and 7.5-magnitude aftershock hit Sunday morning off.
by Staff Writers
Manokwari, Indonesia (AFP) Jan 4, 2009
Two powerful earthquakes rattled Indonesia's West Papua province early Sunday, triggering panic among residents but there were no immediate reports of any casualties or heavy damage.
The first 7.6-magnitude quake struck at 4:43 am (1943 GMT Saturday), about 150 kilometres northwest of the city of Manokwari, the US Geological Survey said, triggering a tsunami alert that was later withdrawn.
It was followed almost three hours later at 2233 GMT by a 7.5-magnitude aftershock, the US agency said.
Both quakes were fairly shallow, with the first hitting at a depth of 35 kilometres (22 miles) and the second at 45 kilometres.
Distressed residents ran out of their homes as the quake rattled Manokwari, the seaside capital of the province, but there were no immediate signs of heavy damage or injuries, an AFP correspondent in the town said.
Thousands of residents including children and the elderly could be seen thronging the roads of the town in the darkness of a blackout and heading away from the sea despite the tsunami warning being lifted.
Little damage could be seen initially in the town apart from cracked walls.
"The quake was quite strong and we felt it for about three minutes. The electricity blacked out after the quake," a policeman who identified himself as Ketut said.
"The police and military are working right now to help people get to higher ground due to the tsunami alert and the fact that we're on the coast," he said.
Several smaller aftershocks were also reported in the hours following the first quake, Indonesian seismologists said.
Indonesia, which sits at the meeting of continental plates, is frequently hit by earthquakes and tsunamis.
The Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004, which was triggered by a massive quake off the coast of Indonesia, killed at least 168,000 people in the country's Aceh province and Nias island.
Hotel collapses after powerful Indonesian quakes
A hotel in Indonesia's West Papua province collapsed when the second of two powerful earthquakes hit the region Sunday and three people were pulled alive from the rubble, officials said.
The three guests who had been staying at the Mutiara hotel in the city of Manokwari were taken to hospital, but their condition was not immediately clear. No other hotel staff or guests were believed to be trapped or missing.
"Those three hotel guests returned to their room after the first big quake. They failed to evacuate after the second powerful quake struck and got trapped in the hotel rubble," a hotel staffer identified as Harun told AFP.
"The three have been brought to a nearby hospital. But it's not clear what injuries they suffered," he added.
He said that the hotel had failed to withstand the quake as it was old but that other buildings in the neighbourhood had received only minor damage such as cracks to the walls.
The first 7.6-magnitude quake struck at 4:43 am (1943 GMT Saturday), about 150 kilometres northwest of Manokwari and was followed almost three hours later by a 7.5 magnitude aftershocks, the US Geological Survey said.
resource : http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Twin_Papua_Quakes_Collapse_Hotel_Trigger_Small_Tsunami_Waves_999.html
Series of quakes hit Indonesia
Series of quakes hit Indonesia,
killing 42009-01-05 02:26:01 -
MANOKWARI, Indonesia (AP) - A series of powerful earthquakes killed at least four people and injured dozens in remote eastern Indonesia Sunday and briefly triggered fears of another tsunami in a country still recovering from 2004's deadly waves.One of the quakes _ a 7.3-magnitude tremor _ was felt as far away as Australia and sent small tsunamis into Japan's southeastern coast.Residents near the epicenter in Papua province rushed from their homes in search of higher ground shortly after the first 7.6-magnitude quake struck at 4:43 a.m. local time (1943 GMT), afraid that huge waves might wash over the island.The epicenter was about 85 miles (135 kilometers) from Papua's main city of Manokwari and occurred at a depth of 22 miles (35 kilometers), the U.S. Geological Survey said. It was followed by dozens of aftershocks.At least four people died, dozens were injured and some 135 homes and other buildings were badly damaged or toppled in the province. Power lines fell, cutting off electricity, and the runway of Manokwari's Rendani airport was cracked, prompting the cancellation of commercial flights.The government initially issued a tsunami warning but lifted it within an hour after it was confirmed that the epicenter was on land, not water.Quakes centered onshore pose little tsunami threat to Indonesia itself, but those close to the coast can churn up large waves that sometimes reach the coastlines of other countries such as Japan.Japan reported tsunamis between 4 inches (10 centimeters) and 16 inches (40 centimeters) high hitting its shores following the temblors.A huge quake off western Indonesia caused the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami that killed about 230,000 people, more than half of them on the western Indonesian island of Sumatra. Four years on, the multibillion dollar rebuilding process is almost complete.Residents in Papua's Manokwari _ a jumble of low-lying brick and cement structures home to 167,000 people _ remained jittery late Sunday, with thousands prepared to sleep outside for fear of aftershocks.«We don't feel safe,» said Simon, 32, who like many Indonesians goes by one name. He was staying outside with his wife and three kids. «It's just in case there are strong aftershocks.Local officials drove through the streets warning people not to return to structures that might be vulnerable if an aftershock hit.The Indonesian healthy ministry was sending an aid team to Manokwari Sunday night as well as four tons of medical supplies and baby food, spokeswoman Lily Sulistyowati said.Relief agency World Vision Indonesia was flying in 2,000 emergency provision kits, including canned food, blankets and basic medical supplies, said spokeswoman Katarina Hardono. She said its team will try to reach Manokwari by plane, but if needed will make a 36-hour trip by boat.The National Disaster Coordination Agency said 135 houses and buildings were badly damaged or collapsed.Hengky Tewu, director of a local hospital, said 19 patients were being treated there for broken bones, cuts, crushed fingers and other injuries.Twenty quake patients were being treated at a navy hospital, said Ina, a nurse who also goes by a single name.Papua _ located about 1,830 miles (2,955 kilometers) east of the capital Jakarta _ is among the nation's least developed areas, and a low-level insurgency has simmered in the resource-rich region for years. It is off limits to foreign reporters.Indonesia straddles a chain of fault lines and volcanoes known as the Pacific «Ring of Fire» and is prone to seismic activity.The quake was felt 800 miles (1,300 kilometers) southwest of Papua in Australia's northern city of Darwin but no damage was reported there.
Associated Press writers Zakki Hakim and Niniek Karmini contributed to this report from Jakarta.
window.google_render_ad();
resource: http://www.pr-inside.com/print988533.htm
killing 42009-01-05 02:26:01 -
MANOKWARI, Indonesia (AP) - A series of powerful earthquakes killed at least four people and injured dozens in remote eastern Indonesia Sunday and briefly triggered fears of another tsunami in a country still recovering from 2004's deadly waves.One of the quakes _ a 7.3-magnitude tremor _ was felt as far away as Australia and sent small tsunamis into Japan's southeastern coast.Residents near the epicenter in Papua province rushed from their homes in search of higher ground shortly after the first 7.6-magnitude quake struck at 4:43 a.m. local time (1943 GMT), afraid that huge waves might wash over the island.The epicenter was about 85 miles (135 kilometers) from Papua's main city of Manokwari and occurred at a depth of 22 miles (35 kilometers), the U.S. Geological Survey said. It was followed by dozens of aftershocks.At least four people died, dozens were injured and some 135 homes and other buildings were badly damaged or toppled in the province. Power lines fell, cutting off electricity, and the runway of Manokwari's Rendani airport was cracked, prompting the cancellation of commercial flights.The government initially issued a tsunami warning but lifted it within an hour after it was confirmed that the epicenter was on land, not water.Quakes centered onshore pose little tsunami threat to Indonesia itself, but those close to the coast can churn up large waves that sometimes reach the coastlines of other countries such as Japan.Japan reported tsunamis between 4 inches (10 centimeters) and 16 inches (40 centimeters) high hitting its shores following the temblors.A huge quake off western Indonesia caused the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami that killed about 230,000 people, more than half of them on the western Indonesian island of Sumatra. Four years on, the multibillion dollar rebuilding process is almost complete.Residents in Papua's Manokwari _ a jumble of low-lying brick and cement structures home to 167,000 people _ remained jittery late Sunday, with thousands prepared to sleep outside for fear of aftershocks.«We don't feel safe,» said Simon, 32, who like many Indonesians goes by one name. He was staying outside with his wife and three kids. «It's just in case there are strong aftershocks.Local officials drove through the streets warning people not to return to structures that might be vulnerable if an aftershock hit.The Indonesian healthy ministry was sending an aid team to Manokwari Sunday night as well as four tons of medical supplies and baby food, spokeswoman Lily Sulistyowati said.Relief agency World Vision Indonesia was flying in 2,000 emergency provision kits, including canned food, blankets and basic medical supplies, said spokeswoman Katarina Hardono. She said its team will try to reach Manokwari by plane, but if needed will make a 36-hour trip by boat.The National Disaster Coordination Agency said 135 houses and buildings were badly damaged or collapsed.Hengky Tewu, director of a local hospital, said 19 patients were being treated there for broken bones, cuts, crushed fingers and other injuries.Twenty quake patients were being treated at a navy hospital, said Ina, a nurse who also goes by a single name.Papua _ located about 1,830 miles (2,955 kilometers) east of the capital Jakarta _ is among the nation's least developed areas, and a low-level insurgency has simmered in the resource-rich region for years. It is off limits to foreign reporters.Indonesia straddles a chain of fault lines and volcanoes known as the Pacific «Ring of Fire» and is prone to seismic activity.The quake was felt 800 miles (1,300 kilometers) southwest of Papua in Australia's northern city of Darwin but no damage was reported there.
Associated Press writers Zakki Hakim and Niniek Karmini contributed to this report from Jakarta.
window.google_render_ad();
resource: http://www.pr-inside.com/print988533.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)