Page 1,646«..1020..1,6451,6461,6471,648..1,6601,670..»

Syrian Civil War – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Posted By on August 18, 2015

Protests, civil uprising, and defections (January July 2011)Edit

The protests started in 15 March 2011, when protesters marched in the capital of Damascus, demanding democratic reforms and the release of political prisoners. The security forces retaliated by opening fire on the protesters,[129] and according to witnesses who spoke to the BBC, the government forces detained six of them.[130]The protest was trigerred by the arrest of a boy and his friends by the government for writing the graffiti, "The people want the fall of the regime", in the city of Daraa.[129][131] Louai al-Hussein, an analyst and writer wrote that "Syria is now on the map of countries in the region with an uprising".[131] On 20th, the protesters burned down a Ba'ath Party headquarters and "other buildings". Security forces again responded by shooting, which led to the death of 15 protesters.[132] Ten days later in a speech, President Bashar al-Assad blamed "foreign conspirators" pushing Israeli propaganda for the protests.[133]

The protesters' demands until 7 April were predominantly democratic reforms, release of political prisoners, more freedom, abolition of the emergency law and an end to corruption. After 8 April, the emphasis in demonstration slogans gradually shifted towards the call for overthrowing the Assad government. Protests spread: on Friday 8 April, they occurred simultaneously in ten cities. By Friday 22 April protests occurred in twenty cities. On 25 April, the Syrian Army started a series of large-scale deadly military attacks on towns, using tanks, infantry carriers, and artillery, leading to hundreds of civilian deaths. By the end of May 2011, 1,000 civilians[134] and 150 soldiers and policemen[135] had been killed and thousands detained;[136] among the arrested were many students, liberal activists and human rights advocates.[137]

Significant armed rebellion against the state began on 4 June in Jisr al-Shugur, a city in Idlib Governorate near the Turkish border, after security forces on a post office roof had fired at a funeral demonstration. Protesting mourners set fire to the building, killing eight security officers, and then overran a police station, seizing weapons from it. Violence continued and escalated over the following days. Unverified reports claim that a portion of the security forces in Jisr defected after secret police and intelligence officers executed soldiers who had refused to fire on civilians.[138] Later, more protesters in Syria took up arms, and more soldiers defected to protect protesters.

Both sides in the conflict use propaganda to promote their side and denigrate their opponents (see Reporting, censoring and propaganda in the Syrian Civil War). By the end of July 2011, around 1,600 civilians and 500 security forces had been killed and 13,000 arrested.

On 29 July 2011, seven defecting Syrian officers formed the Free Syrian Army (FSA), composed of defected Syrian Armed Forces officers and soldiers, aiming "to bring this regime (the Assad government) down" with united opposition forces.[139][140] On 31 July, a nationwide crackdown nicknamed the "Ramadan Massacre" resulted in the death of at least 142 people and hundreds of injuries.[141]

On 23 August, a coalition of anti-government groups was formed, the Syrian National Council. The group, based in Turkey, attempted to organize the opposition. However, the opposition, including the FSA, remained a fractious collection of political groups, longtime exiles, grass-roots organizers and armed militants, divided along ideological, ethnic and/or sectarian lines.[142]

Throughout August, Syrian forces stormed major urban centres and outlying regions, and continued to attack protests. On 14 August, the Siege of Latakia continued as the Syrian Navy became involved in the military crackdown for the first time. Gunboats fired heavy machine guns at waterfront districts in Latakia, as ground troops and security agents backed by armour stormed several neighbourhoods.[143] The Eid ul-Fitr celebrations, started in near the end of August, were muted after security forces fired on protesters gathered in Homs, Daraa, and the suburbs of Damascus.[144]

By September 2011, organized units of Syrian rebels were engaged in an active insurgency campaign in many different parts of Syria. A major confrontation between the FSA and the Syrian armed forces occurred in Rastan. From 27 September to 1 October, Syrian government forces, backed by tanks and helicopters, led a major offensive on the town of Al-Rastan in Homs Governorate, in order to drive out army defectors.[145] The 2011 battle of Rastan between the government forces and the FSA was the longest and most intense action up until that time. After a week of fighting, the FSA was forced to retreat from Rastan.[146] To avoid government forces, the leader of the FSA, Colonel Riad Asaad, retreated to Turkey.[147] Many of the rebels fled to the nearby city of Homs.[111]

By October, the FSA started to receive active support from Turkey, who allowed the rebel army to operate its command and headquarters from the country's southern Hatay Province close to the Syrian border, and its field command from inside Syria.[148] The FSA would often launch attacks into Syria's northern towns and cities, while using the Turkish side of the border as a safe zone and supply route. A year after its formation, the FSA gained control over many towns close to the Turkish border.[citation needed]

In October 2011, clashes between government and defected army units were being reported fairly regularly. During the first week of the month, sustained clashes were reported in Jabal al-Zawiya in the mountainous regions of Idlib Governorate. Syrian rebels captured most of Idlib city as well.[149] In mid-October, clashes in Idlib Governorate included the city of Binnish and the town of Hass in the governorate near the mountain range of Jabal al-Zawiya.[150][151] In late October, clashes occurred in the northwestern town of Maarrat al-Nu'man between government forces and defected soldiers at a roadblock on the edge of the town, and near the Turkish border, where 10 security agents and a deserter were killed in a bus ambush.[152] It was not clear if the defectors linked to these incidents were connected to the FSA.[153]

According to defectors, in 2011 the Syrian government intentionally released imprisoned Islamist militants and provided them with arms "in order to make itself the least bad choice for the international community."[154][155]

In early November, clashes between the FSA and security forces in Homs escalated as the siege continued. After six days of bombardment, the Syrian Army stormed the city on 8 November, leading to heavy street fighting in several neighborhoods. Resistance in Homs was significantly greater than that seen in other towns and cities, and some in opposition have referred to the city as the "Capital of the Revolution". Unlike events in Deraa and Hama, operations in Homs have thus far failed to quell the unrest.[111]

November and December 2011 saw increasing rebel attacks, as opposition forces grew in number. In the two months, the FSA launched deadly attacks on an air force intelligence complex in the Damascus suburb of Harasta, the Ba'ath Syrian Regional Branch youth headquarters in Idlib Governorate, Syrian Regional Branch offices in Damascus, an airbase in Homs Governorate, and an intelligence building in Idlib.[156] On 15 December, opposition fighters ambushed checkpoints and military bases around Daraa, killing 27 soldiers, in one of the largest attacks yet on security forces.[157] The opposition suffered a major setback on 19 December, when a failed defection in Idlib governorate lead to 72 defectors killed.[158]

In January 2012, Assad began using large-scale artillery operations against the insurgency, which led to the destruction of many civilian homes due to indiscriminate shelling.[159][160] By this time, daily protests had dwindled, eclipsed by the spread of armed conflict.[161] January saw intensified clashes around the suburbs of Damascus, with the Syrian Army use of tanks and artillery becoming common. Fighting in Zabadani began on 7 January when the Syrian Army stormed the town in an attempt to rout out FSA presence. After the first phase of the battle ended with a ceasefire on 18 January, leaving the FSA in control of the town,[162] the FSA launched an offensive into nearby Douma. Fighting in the town lasted from 21 to 30 January, before the rebels were forced to retreat as result of a government counteroffensive. Although, the Syrian Army managed to retake most of the suburbs, sporadic fighting continued.[163]Fighting erupted in Rastan again on 29 January, when dozens of soldiers manning the town's checkpoints defected and began opening fire on troops loyal to the government. Opposition forces gained complete control of the town and surrounding suburbs on 5 February.[164]

On 3 February, the Syrian army launched a major offensive to retake rebel-held neighborhoods. In early March, after weeks of artillery bombardments and heavy street fighting, the Syrian army eventually captured the district of Baba Amr, a major rebel stronghold. The Syrian Army also captured the district of Karm al-Zeitoun by 9 March, where activists said that government forces killed 47 women and children. By the end of March, the Syrian army retook control of half a dozen districts, leaving them in control of 70 percent of the city.[165] By 14 March, Syrian troops successfully ousted insurgents from the city of Idlib after days of fighting.[166] By early April, the estimated death toll of the conflict, according to activists, reached 10,000.[167]

Kofi Annan was acting as UNArab League Joint Special Representative for Syria. His peace plan provided for a ceasefire, but even as the negotiations for it were being conducted, Syrian armed forces attacked a number of towns and villages, and summarily executed scores of people.[168]:11 Incommunicado detention, including of children, also continued.[169] In April, Assad began employing attack helicopters against rebel forces.[159]

On 12 April, both sides, the Syrian Government and rebels of the FSA entered a UN mediated ceasefire period. It was a failure, with infractions of the ceasefire by both sides resulting in several dozen casualties. Acknowledging its failure, Annan called for Iran to be "part of the solution", though the country has been excluded from the Friends of Syria initiative.[170] The peace plan practically collapsed by early June and the UN mission was withdrawn from Syria. Annan officially resigned in frustration on 2 August 2012.[171]

Following the Houla massacre of 25 May 2012, in which 108 people were summarily executed and the consequent FSA ultimatum to the Syrian government, the ceasefire practically collapsed, as the FSA began nationwide offensives against government troops. On 1 June, President Assad vowed to crush the anti-government uprising.[172]

On 5 June, fighting broke out in Haffa and nearby villages in the coastal governorate of Latakia Governorate. Government forces were backed by helicopter gunships in the heaviest clashes in the governorate since the revolt began. Syrian forces seized the territory following days of fighting and shelling.[173] On 6 June 78 civilians were killed in the Al-Qubeir massacre. According to activist sources, government forces started by shelling the village before the Shabiha militia moved in.[174] The UN observers headed to Al-Qubeir in the hope of investigating the alleged massacre, but they were met with a roadblock and small arms fire and were forced to retreat.[175]

On 12 June 2012, the UN for the first time officially proclaimed Syria to be in a state of civil war.[176] The conflict began moving into the two largest cities, Damascus and Aleppo. In both cities, peaceful protests including a general strike by Damascus shopkeepers and a small strike in Aleppo were interpreted as indicating that the historical alliance between the government and the business establishment in the large cities had become weak.[177]

On 22 June, a Turkish F-4 fighter jet was shot down by Syrian government forces, killing both pilots. Syria and Turkey disputed whether the jet had been flying in Syrian or international airspace when it was shot down. Despite Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoan's vows to retaliate harshly against Assad's government, no such intervention materialised. Bashar al-Assad publicly apologised for the incident. By 10 July, rebel forces had captured most of the city of Al-Qusayr, in Homs Governorate, after weeks of fighting.[178] By mid-July, rebels had captured the town of Saraqeb, in Idlib Governorate.[179]

By mid-July 2012, with fighting spread across the country and 16,000 people killed, the International Committee of the Red Cross declared the conflict a civil war.[180] Fighting in Damascus intensified, with a major rebel push to take the city.[181] On 18 July, Syrian Defense Minister Dawoud Rajiha, former defense minister Hasan Turkmani, and the president's brother-in-law General Assef Shawkat were killed by a suicide bomb attack in Damascus.[182] The Syrian intelligence chief Hisham Ikhtiyar, who was injured in the same explosion, later succumbed to his wounds.[183] Both the FSA and Liwa al-Islam claimed responsibility for the assassination.[184]

In late July, government forces managed to break the rebel offensive on Damascus, although fighting still continued in the outskirts. After this, the focus shifted to the battle for control of Aleppo.[185] On 25 July, multiple sources reported that the Assad government was using fighter jets to attack rebel positions in Aleppo and Damascus,[186] and on 1 August, UN observers in Syria witnessed government fighter jets firing on rebels in Aleppo.[187] In early August, the Syrian Army recaptured Salaheddin district, an important rebel stronghold in Aleppo. In August, the government began using fixed-wing warplanes against the rebels.[159][160]

On 19 July, Iraqi officials reported that the FSA had gained control of all four border checkpoints between Syria and Iraq, increasing concerns for the safety of Iraqis trying to escape the violence in Syria.[188] On 19 September, rebel forces seized a border crossing between Syria and Turkey in Ar-Raqqah Governorate. It was speculated that this crossing could provide opposition forces with strategic and logistical advantages.[189]

In late September, the FSA moved its command headquarters from southern Turkey into northern Syria.[190] On 9 October, rebel forces seized control of Maarat al-Numan, a town in Idlib governorate on the highway linking Damascus with Aleppo.[191] By 18 October, the FSA had captured Douma, the biggest suburb of Damascus.[192] Lakhdar Brahimi arranged for a ceasefire during Eid al-Adha in late October, but it quickly collapsed.[193]

On September 6, 2012 Kurdish activists reported that 21 civilians were killed in the Kurdish neighborhood of Sheikh Maqsud in Aleppo, when the Syrian army shelled the local mosque and its surroundings. Despite the district being neutral during the Battle of Aleppo and free of government and FSA clashes, local residents believed that the district was shelled as retaliation for sheltering anti-government civilians from other parts of the city. In a statement released shortly after the deaths, the Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG) vowed to retaliate.[194] A few days later, Kurdish forces killed 3 soldiers in Afrin (Kurdish: Efrn) and captured a number of other government soldiers in Ayn al-Arab (Kurdish: Koban) and Al-Malikiyah (Kurdish: Drika Hemko) from where they drove the remaining government security forces. It was also reported that the government had begun to arm Arab tribes around Qamishli in preparation for a possible confrontation with Kurdish forces, who still did not completely control the city.[195]

At least 8 government soldiers were killed and 15 wounded by a car bomb in the al-Gharibi district of Qamishli on 30 September 2012. The explosion targeted the Political Security branch.[196]

After Brahimi's ceasefire agreement ended on 30 October, the Syrian military expanded its aerial bombing campaign in Damascus. A bombing of the Damascus district of Jobar was the first instance of a fighter jet being used to bomb Damascus. The following day, Gen. Abdullah Mahmud al-Khalidi, a Syrian Air Force commander, was assassinated by opposition gunmen in the Damascus district of Rukn al-Din.[197] In early November 2012, rebels made significant gains in northern Syria. The rebel capture of Saraqib in Idlib governorate, which lies on the M5 highway, further isolated Aleppo.[198] Due to insufficient anti-aircraft weapons, rebel units attempted to nullify the government's air power by destroying landed helicopters and aircraft on air bases.[199] On 3 November, rebels launched an attack on the Taftanaz air base.[200]

On 18 November, rebels took control of Base 46 in the Aleppo Governorate, one of the Syrian Army's largest bases in northern Syria, after weeks of intense fighting. Defected General Mohammed Ahmed al-Faj, who commanded the assault, stated that nearly 300 Syrian troops had been killed and 60 had been captured, with rebels seizing large amounts of heavy weapons, including tanks.[201] On 22 November, rebels captured the Mayadeen military base in the country's eastern Deir ez-Zor Governorate. Activists said this gave the rebels control of a large amount of territory east of the base, stretching to the Iraqi border.[202] On 29 November, at approximately 10:26 UTC, the Syrian Internet and phone service was shut off for a two-day period.[203] Syrian government sources denied responsibility and blamed the blackout on fiber optic lines near Damascus becoming exposed and damaged;[204]Edward Snowden in August 2014 claimed that this Internet breakdown had been caused, though unintendedly, by hackers of the NSA during an operation to intercept Internet communication in Syria.[205]

In mid-December 2012, American officials said that the Syrian military had fired Scud ballistic missiles at rebel fighters inside Syria. Reportedly, six Scud missiles were fired at the Sheikh Suleiman base north of Aleppo, which rebel forces had occupied. It is unclear whether the Scuds hit the intended target.[206] The government denied this claim.[207] Later that month, a further Scud attack took place near Marea, a town north of Aleppo near the Turkish border. The missile appeared to have missed its target.[206] That same month, the British Daily Telegraph reported that the FSA had now penetrated into Latakia Governorate's coast through Turkey.[208] In late December, rebel forces pushed further into Damascus, taking control of the adjoining Yarmouk and Palestine refugee camps, pushing out pro-government Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command fighters with the help of other factions.[209] Rebel forces launched an offensive in Hama governorate, later claiming to have forced army regulars to evacuate several towns and bases,[210] and stating that "three-quarters of western rural Hama is under our control."[211] Rebels also captured the town of Harem near the Turkish border in Idlib governorate, after weeks of heavy fighting.[212]

On 11 January 2013, Islamist groups, including al-Nusra Front, took full control of the Taftanaz air base in the Idlib governorate, after weeks of fighting. The air base was often used by the Syrian military to carry out helicopter raids and deliver supplies. The rebels claimed to have seized helicopters, tanks and multiple rocket launchers, before being forced to withdraw by a government counter-attack. The leader of the al-Nusra Front said the amount of weapons they took was a "game changer".[213] On 11 February, Islamist rebels captured the town of Al-Thawrah in Ar-Raqqah Governorate and the nearby Tabqa Dam, Syria's largest dam and a key source of hydroelectricity.[214][215] The next day, rebel forces took control of Jarrah air base, located 60 kilometres (37mi) east of Aleppo.[216] On 14 February, fighters from al-Nusra Front took control of Shadadeh, a town in Al-Hasakah Governorate near the Iraqi border.[217]

On 20 February, a car bomb exploded in Damascus near the Ba'ath Syrian Regional Branch headquarters, killing at least 53 people and injuring more than 235.[218] None of the groups claimed responsibility.[219] On 21 February, the FSA in Quasar began shelling Hezbollah positions in Lebanon. Prior to this, Hezbollah had been shelling villages near Quasar from within Lebanon. A 48-hour ultimatum was issued by a FSA commander on 20 February, warning the militant group to stop the attacks.[220]

On 2 March, intense clashes between rebels and the Syrian Army erupted in the city of Raqqa, with many reportedly killed on both sides.[221] On the same day, Syrian troops regained several villages near Aleppo.[222] By 3 March, rebels had overrun Raqqa's central prison, allowing them to free hundreds of prisoners, according to the SOHR.[223] The SOHR also stated that rebel fighters were now in control of most of an Aleppo police academy in Khan al-Asal, and that over 200 rebels and government troops had been killed fighting for control of it.[224]

By 6 March, the rebels had captured the city of Raqqa, effectively making it the first provincial capital to be lost by the Assad government. Residents of Raqqa toppled a bronze statue of his late father Hafez Assad in the centre of the city. The rebels also seized two top government officials.[225] On 18 March, the Syrian Air Force attacked rebel positions in Lebanon for the first time. The attack occurred at the Wadi al-Khayl Valley area, near the town of Arsal.[226] On 21 March, a suspected suicide bombing in the Iman Mosque in Mazraa district killed as many as 41 people, including the pro-Assad Sunni cleric, Sheikh Mohammed al-Buti.[227] On 23 March, several rebel groups seized the 38th division air defense base in southern Daraa governorate near a highway linking Damascus to Jordan.[228] On the next day, rebels captured a 25km strip of land near the Jordanian border, which included the towns of Muzrib, Abdin, and the al-Rai military checkpoint.[229]

On 25 March, rebels launched one of their heaviest bombardments of Central Damascus since the revolt began. Mortars reached Umayyad Square, where the Ba'ath Party headquarters, Air Force Intelligence and state television are located.[230] On 26 March, near the Syrian town of al-Qusayr, rebel commander Khaled al Hamad, who commands the Al Farooq al-Mustakilla Brigade and is also known by his nom de guerre Abu Sakkar, ate the heart and liver of a dead soldier and said "I swear to God, you soldiers of Bashar, you dogs, we will eat from your hearts and livers! O heroes of Bab Amr, you slaughter the Alawites and take out their hearts to eat them!" in an apparent attempt to increase sectarianism.[231][232] Video of the event emerged two months later and resulted in considerable outrage, especially from Human Rights Watch which classified the incident as a war crime. According to the BBC, it was one of the most gruesome videos to emerge from the conflict to-date.[233] On 29 March, rebels captured the town of Da'el after fierce fighting. The town is located in Daraa Governorate, along the highway connecting Damascus to Jordan.[234] On 3 April, rebels captured a military base near the city of Daraa.[235]

On 2 January 2013, a bomb was detonated by unknown assailants in front of a Syrian government security office in Qamishli, wounding four members of the local security forces.[236]

In mid-January, as clashes re-erupted between rebels and Kurdish separatists in Ras al-Ayn, YPG forces moved to expel government forces from oil-rich areas in Hassakeh Province.[237] Clashes broke out from 14 to 19 January[238] between the army and YPG fighters in the Kurdish village of Gir Zro (Tall Adas), near al-Maabadah (Kurdish: Girk Leg), where an army battalion of around 200 soldiers had been blockaded[239] since 9 January.[238] YPG forces claimed to have expelled government after the clashes.[237] One soldier was reportedly killed and another eight injured, while seven were captured (later released[238]) and 27 defected.[239] Fighting at the oil field near Gir Zro ended on 21 January, when government forces withdrew after receiving no assistance from Damascus.[240] In Rumeilan, directly west of al-Maabadah, another 200 soldiers had been surrounded by YPG forces, and 10 soldiers were reported to have defected.[237]

From 8 to 11 February,[241] heavy clashes broke out between the YPG and government troops in the PYD/YPG-held district Ashrafiyah where, according to SOHR, at least 3 soldiers and 5 pro-government militiamen were killed. The fighting followed deadly shelling on 31 January on Ashrafiyah, in which 23[242] civilians were killed after FSA units moved into the Kurdish sector of Aleppo.[243] According to its own reports, the YPG lost 7 of its members the fighting, while also claiming that 48 soldiers were killed and 22 captured,[242] and a further 70[244] injured.

On 26 February, the Syrian army once again shelled the PYD-held Kurdish sector of Aleppo, causing extensive damage to civilian areas. Five people were killed in the bombardment, and eleven moreincluding four childrenwere injured.[242]

In the beginning of March, YPG forces took complete control of oil fields and installations in north-east Syria after government forces in it surrendered. During the same time YPG assaulted government forces and took control of town Tall Adas, which is adjacent to Rumeilan oil fields, and also took control of Al-Qahtaniya (Kurdish: Tirbesp).[245]

On 14 April 2013, government warplanes bombed the predominantly Kurdish village of Hadad, in Hasakah Governorate. 16 people were reported killed.[246]

On 17 April, government forces breached a six-month rebel blockade in Wadi al-Deif, near Idlib. Heavy fighting was reported around the town of Babuleen after government troops attempt to secure control of a main highway leading to Aleppo. The break in the siege also allowed government forces to resupply two major military bases in the region which had been relying on sporadic airdrops.[247] On 18 April, the FSA took control of Al-Dab'a Air Base near the city of al-Qusayr.[248] The base was being used primarily to garrison ground troops. Meanwhile, the Syrian Army re-captured the town of Abel. The SOHR said the loss of the town will hamper rebel movements between al-Qusayr and Homs city. The capture of the airport would have relieved the pressure on the rebels in the area, but their loss of Abel made the situation more complicated.[249] The same day, rebels reportedly assassinated Ali Ballan, who was a government employee, in the Mazzeh district of Damascus.[250] On 21 April, government forces captured the town of Jdaidet al-Fadl, near Damascus.[251]

In April, government and Hezbollah forces launched an offensive to capture areas near al-Qusayr. On 21 April, pro-Assad forces captured the towns of Burhaniya, Saqraja and al-Radwaniya near the Lebanese border.[252][253] By this point, eight villages had fallen to the government offensive in the area.[254] On 24 April, after five weeks of fighting, government troops re-took control of the town of Otaiba, east of Damascus, which had been serving as the main arms supply route from Jordan.[255] Meanwhile, in the north of the country, rebels took control of a position on the edge of the strategic Mennagh Military airbase, on the outskirts of Aleppo. This allowed them to enter the airbase after months of besieging it.[256]

On 2 May, government forces captured the town of Qaysa in a push north from the city's airport. Troops also retook the Wadi al-Sayeh central district of Homs, driving a wedge between two rebel strongholds.[257] SOHR reported a massacre of over 100 people by the Syrian army in the coastal town of Al Bayda, Baniyas. However, this could not be independently verified due to movement restrictions on the ground.[258] Yet the multiple video images that residents said they had recorded particularly of small children, were so shocking that even some government supporters rejected Syrian television's official version of events, that the army had simply "crushed a number of terrorists."[259] On 3 May, the Syrian army backed by the Shabiha reportedly committed a massacre of civilians near the city of Baniyas. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said that at least 50 people and possibly as many as 100 were killed and that dozens of villagers were still missing.[260]

On 8 May, government forces captured the town of Khirbet Ghazaleh, situated along the highway to the Jordanian border. Over 1,000 rebel fighters withdrew from the town due to the lack of reinforcements and ammunition. The loss of the town also resulted in the reopening of the government supply-route to the city of Daraa. The rebels continued to withdraw from other towns so as to not face the Army's advance along the highway.[261] On 11 May, the rebels managed to cut a newly build desert road used as an Army supply route between central Syria and Aleppo's airport.[262] On 12 May, government forces took control of Khirbet Ghazaleh and secured the highway near the town.[263] By mid-May, due to the recent Army gains in retaking strategically important locations, military analysts pointed out that the government would have a major advantage in any future peace talks. Analysts on both sides credited the government advances to the restructuring of their forces, which they filled with thousands of militia irregulars trained partly by Hezbollah and Iranian advisers in counter-insurgency operations.[264] The government's success was also credited to the shift by the Army from trying to recapture the whole country to holding on to strategic areas.[265]

On 13 May, government forces captured the towns of Western Dumayna, Haidariyeh, and Esh al-Warwar allowing them to block supplies to the rebels in al-Qusayr.[266][267] On 16 May, rebels stated that they recaptured the town of Al-Qisa.[268] On 17 May, rebels captured four villages in Eastern Hama, including the Alawite town of Tulaysiah. The villages were abandoned by its residents before the rebels arrived.[269] On 19 May, government forces captured the town of Halfaya in Hama governorate.[270] The Syrian army also launched its offensive against the town of Qusayr. A military source reported that the Army entered Qusayr, capturing the city center and the municipality building.[271] One opposition activist denied this,[272] but another confirmed the Army was in control of 60 percent of the city.[273] During the day's fighting, Hezbollah commander Fadi al-Jazar was killed.[274]

An opposition source said the attack was launched from the east and the south and that Hezbollah fighters took control of the town hall within a few hours. He added that the fighting was then concentrated in the northern part of the city.[275] The attack appeared to surprise the rebels, who expected the army to push by the north on several rebel-controlled villages before attacking the city. The turning point of the offensive was reached when Hezbollah fighters took control of the Al Tal area overlooking Qusayr. Several rebels fighters accused some commanders from fleeing the Al tal area at the last minute.[276] Meanwhile, SOHR reported that the Syrian army was at the area by the western neighborhood of al-Quseir in order to lay siege on the city itself.[277] On 23 May, rebels captured a military base near the town of Nairab.[278] By 29 May, government forces captured the al-Dabaa air base, north of al-Qusayr.[279] On 1 and 2 June, after heavy fighting, the Syrian Army recaptured three of the Alawite villages that had been previously captured by the rebels in Eastern Hama governorate.[280] On 5 June, rebel forces withdrew fully from al-Qusayr.[281] The following day, government forces captured the nearby village of Dabaa.

On 6 June, rebels temporarily captured the Quneitra border crossing which links the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights with Syria. However, the same day, government forces counter-attacked with tanks and armoured personnel carriers, recapturing the crossing.[282][283] On 7 June, Syrian troops backed by Hezbollah captured two villages north of al-Qusayr: Salhiyeh and Masoudiyeh.[284] The next day, they captured the village of Buwaydah, the last rebel-held village in the al-Qusayr region.[285] Between 7 and 14 June, Army troops, government militiamen, and Hezbollah fighters launched operations in Aleppo Governorate. Over a one-week period, government forces had advanced both in Aleppo city and the countryside around the city. However, on 14 June, according to an opposition activist, the tide had started reversing, after rebels managed to halt an armoured reinforcement column from Aleppo city for two government-held Shiite villages northwest of the city. Rebels claimed they destroyed one tank and killed 20 government soldiers northwest of the town of Maaret al-Arteek. Before the column was stopped, government forces had captured the high ground at Maaret al-Arteek, threatening rebel positions. Government forces also made some advances in the southern part of Aleppo governorate, capturing the village of Ain-Assan.[286][287] During the fighting in Aleppo city itself, on 13 June, government forces managed to temporarily advance into the rebel-held Sakhour district from two directions, but were soon repelled.[288] Some described it as possibly a probing attack and not a full assault.[289]

On 10 June, Shia pro-government fighters from the village of Hatla, east of Deir al-Zour, attacked a nearby rebel position, killing four rebels.[290] The next day, in retaliation for the attack, thousands of rebels attacked and captured the village, killing 60 residents, fighters and civilians, according to SOHR. 10 rebel fighters were killed during the attack.[290] At dawn on 13 June, rebels seized an Army position on the northern edge of the town of Morek, which is located on the north-south highway,[291] in fighting that killed six soldiers and two rebels. Later in the day, the Army shelled the base and sent reinforcements.[292][293] On 14 June, the Al Nusra front captured a military barracks near Idlib city.[294] On 15 June, the Syrian Army captured the Damascus suburb of Ahmadiyeh near the city's airport. Rebels said fighting began after rebels entered the town to use it as a position to launch mortars on the Damascus airport. They added that fighting was ongoing.[295][296] On 22 June, the Syrian Army captured the rebel stronghold town of Talkalakh.[297][298] Four days later, the Army captured the town of Al-Qariatayn, also in Homs governorate.[299]

On 28 June, rebel forces captured a major military checkpoint in the city of Daraa.[300] On 12 July FSA reported that one of its commanders, Kamal Hamami, had been killed by Islamists a day before. The rebels declared that the assassination by the Islamic State of Iraq and Levant, was tantamount to a declaration of war.[301] On 17 July, FSA forces took control of most of the southern city of Nawa after seizing up to 40 army posts stationed in the city.[302] On 18 July, Kurdish YPG forces secured control of the northern town of Ras al-Ain, after days of fighting with the al-Nusra Front.[303] In the following three months, continued fighting between Kurdish and mainly jihadist rebel forces led to the capture of two dozen towns and villages in Hasakah Governorate by Kurdish fighters,[304] while the Jihadists made limited gains in Aleppo and Raqqah governorates after they turned on the Kurdish rebel group Jabhat al-Akrad over its relationship with the YPG. In Aleppo governorate, Islamists massacred the Kurds leading to a mass migration of civilians to the town of Afrin.[305]

On 22 July, FSA fighters seized control of the western Aleppo suburb of Khan al-Asal. The town was the last government stronghold in the western portion of Aleppo governorate.[306] On 25 July, the Syrian army secured the town of al-Sukhnah, after expelling the al-Nusra Front.[307] On 27 July, after weeks of fighting and bombardment in Homs, the Syrian Army captured the historic Khalid ibn al-Walid Mosque,[308] and two days later, captured the district of Khaldiyeh.[309]

On 4 August, around 10 rebel brigades, launched a large-scale offensive on the government stronghold of Latakia Governorate. Initial attacks by 2,000 opposition members seized as many as 12 villages in the mountainous area. Between 4 and 5 August, 20 rebels and 32 government soldiers and militiamen had been killed in the clashes. Hundreds of Alawite villagers fled to Latakia. By 5 August, rebel fighters advanced to 20 kilometers from Qardaha, the home town of the Assad family.[310][311] However, in mid-August, the military counter-attacked and recaptured all of the territory previously lost to the rebels in the coastal region during the offensive.[312][313] A Syrian security force source "told AFP the army still had to recapture the Salma region, a strategic area along the border with Turkey."[314] According to a Human Rights Watch report 190 civilians were killed by rebel forces during the offensive, including at least 67 being executed. Another 200 civilians, primarily women and children, were taken hostage.[315][316]

On 6 August, rebels captured Menagh Military Airbase after a 10-month siege. The strategic airbase is located on the road between Aleppo city and the Turkish border.[317][318] On 21 August a chemical attack took place in the Ghouta region of the Damascus countryside, leading to thousands of casualties and several hundred dead in the opposition-held stronghold. The attack was followed by a military offensive by government forces into the area, which had been hotbeds of the opposition.[319] On 24 August, rebels captured the town of Ariha. However, government forces recaptured Ariha on 3 September.[320][321] On 26 August, rebel forces took over the town of Khanasir in Aleppo governorate which was the government's last supply route for the city of Aleppo.[322] On 8 September, rebels led by the al-Nusra Front captured the Christian town of Maaloula, 43km north of Damascus,[323] The Syrian Army launched a counterattack a few days later, recapturing the town.[324]

On 18 September, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) overran the FSA-held town of Azaz in the north. The fighting was the most severe since tensions rose between militant factions in Syria earlier in the year.[325][326] Soon after ISIS captured Azaz, a ceasefire was announced between the rival rebel groups. However, in early October, more fighting erupted in the town.[327] On 20 September, Alawite militias including the NDF killed 15 civilians in the Sunni village of Sheik Hadid in Hama Governorate. The massacre occurred in retaliation for a rebel capture of the village of Jalma, in Hama, which killed five soldiers, along with the seizure of a military checkpoint which killed 16 soldiers and 10 NDF militiamen.[328][329] In mid-September, the military captured the towns of Deir Salman and Shebaa on the outskirts of Damascus. The Army also captured six villages in eastern Homs.[330] Fighting broke out in those towns again in October.[331]

On 28 September, rebels seized the Ramtha border post in Daraa Governorate on the Syria Jordan crossing after fighting which left 26 soldiers dead along with 7 foreign rebel fighters.[332] On 3 October, AFP reported that Syria's army re-took the town of Khanasir, which is located on a supply route linking central Syria to the city of Aleppo.[333] On 7 October, the Syrian Army managed to reopen the supply route between Aleppo and Khanasir.[334]

On 9 October, rebels seized the Hajanar guard post on the Jordanian border after a month of fierce fighting. Rebels were now in control of a swath of territory along the border from outside of Daraa to the edge of Golan Heights.[335] The same day, Hezbollah and Iraqi Shiite fighters, backed up by artillery, air-strikes and tanks, captured the town of Sheikh Omar, on the southern outskirts of Damascus. Two days later, they also captured the towns of al-Thiabiya and Husseiniya on the southern approaches to Damascus. The capture of the three towns strengthened the government hold on major supply lines and put more pressure on rebels under siege in the Eastern Ghouta area.[336][337] On 14 October, SOHR reported that rebels captured the Resefa and Sinaa districts of Deir ez-Zor city, as well as Deir ez-Zor's military hospital.[338]

The Syrian Army along with its allies, Hezbollah and the al-Abas brigade, launched an offensive on Damascus and Aleppo.[339][340] On 16 October, AFP reported that Syrian troops recaptured the town of Bweida, south of Damascus. On 17 October, the Syrian government's head of Military Intelligence in Deir ez-Zor Governorate, Jameh Jameh, was assassinated by rebels in Deir ez-Zor city. SOHR reported that he had been shot by a rebel sniper during a battle with rebel brigades.[341] On 24 October, the Syrian army retook control of the town of Hatetat al-Turkman, located southeast of Damascus, along the Damascus International Airport road.[342]

On 26 October, Kurdish rebel fighters seized control of the strategic Yarubiya border crossing between Syria and Iraq from Al Nusra in Al Hasakah Governorate.[343] Elsewhere, in Daraa Governorate, rebel fighters captured the town of Tafas from government forces after weeks of clashes which left scores dead.[344] On 1 November, the Syrian army retook control of the key city of Al-Safira[345] and the next day, the Syrian Army and its allies recaptured the village of Aziziyeh on the northern outskirts of Al-Safira.[346] From early to mid-November, Syrian Army forces captured several towns south of Damascus, including Hejeira and Sbeineh. Government forces also recaptured the town of Tel Aran, southeast of Aleppo, and a military base near Aleppo's international airport.[347]

On 10 November, the Syrian army had taken full control of "Base 80", near Aleppo's airport.[348] According to the SOHR, 63 rebels,[349] and 32 soldiers were killed during the battle.[349] One other report put the number of rebels killed between 60 and 80.[350] Army units were backed-up by Hezbollah fighters and pro-government militias during the assault.[349] The following day, government forces secured most of the area around the airport.[351][352] On 13 November, government forces captured most of Hejeira.[353] Rebels retreated from Hejeira to Al-Hajar al-Aswad. However, their defenses in besieged districts closer to the heart of Damascus were still reportedly solid.[354] On 15 November, the Syrian Army retook control of the city of Tell Hassel near Aleppo.[355] On 18 November, the Syrian troops stormed the town of Babbila.[356] On 19 November, government forces took full control of Qara.[357] The same day, the Syrian army captured al-Duwayrinah.[358] On 23 November, al-Nusra Front and other Islamist rebels captured the al-Omar oil field, Syria's largest oil field, in Deir al-Zor governorate causing the government to rely almost entirely on imported oil.[359][360] On 24 November, rebels captured the towns of Bahariya, Qasimiya, Abbadah, and Deir Salman in Damascus's countryside.[361] On 28 November, the Syrian army recaptured Deir Attiyeh.[362]

On 2 December, rebels led by the Free Syrian army recaptured the historic Christian town of Ma'loula. After the fighting, reports emerged that 12 nuns had been abducted by the rebels. However, the FSA disputes this and said that the nuns had been evacuated to the nearby rebel held town of Yabrud due to the Army shelling.[363][364] In early December, the Islamic Front seized control of Bab al-Hawa border crossing with Turkey, which had been in hands of FSA.[365] The groups also captured warehouses containing equipment delivered by the U.S. In response, the U.S. and Britain said they halted all non-lethal aid to the FSA, fearing that further supplies could fall in hands of al-Qaeda militants.[366] On 10 December, the Army took full control of Nabek,[367] with fighting continuing in its outskirts.[225]

Tension between moderate rebel forces and ISIS had been high since ISIS captured the border town of Azaz from FSA forces on 18 September 2013.[368] Conflict was renewed over Azaz in early October[369] and in late November ISIS captured the border town of Atme from an FSA brigade.[370] On 3 January 2014, the Army of the Mujahideen, the Free Syrian Army and the Islamic Front launched an offensive against ISIS in Aleppo and Idlib governorates. A spokesman for the rebels said that rebels attacked ISIS in up to 80% of all ISIS held villages in Idlib and 65% of those in Aleppo.[371]

By 6 January, opposition rebels managed to expel ISIS forces from the city of Raqqa, ISIS's largest stronghold and capital of the Raqqa Governorate.[372] On 8 January, opposition rebels expelled most ISIS forces from the city of Aleppo, however ISIS reinforcements from the Deir ez-Zor Governorate managed to retake several neighborhoods of the city of Raqqa.[373][374] By mid January ISIS retook the entire city of Raqqa, while rebels expelled ISIS fighters fully from Aleppo city and the villages west of it.

On 29 January, Turkish aircraft near the border fired on an ISIS convoy inside the Aleppo Provence of Syria, killing 11 ISIS fighters and 1 ISIS emir.[375][376] In late January it was confirmed that rebels had assassinated ISIS's second in command, Haji Bakr, who was al-Qaeda's military council head and a former military officer in Saddam Hussein's army.[377] By mid-February, the Al-Nusra Front joined the battle in support of rebel forces, and expelled ISIS from the Deir Ezzor Governorate.[378] By March, the ISIS forces fully retreated from the Idlib Governorate.[379][380] On 4 March, ISIS retreated from the border town of Azaz and other nearby villages, choosing instead to consolidate around Raqqa in an anticipation of an escalation of fighting with Al Nusra.[381]

On 4 March, the Syrian army took control of Sahel in the Qalamoun region.[382] On 8 March, government forces took over Zara, in Homs Governorate, further blocking rebel supply routes from Lebanon.[383] On 11 March, Government forces and Hezbollah took control of the Rima Farms region, directly facing Yabrud.[384] On 16 March, Hezbollah and government forces captured Yabrud, after Free Syrian Army fighters made an unexpected withdrawal, leaving the Al Nusra Front to fight in the city on its own.[385] On 18 March, Israel used artillery against Syrian Army base, after four of its soldiers had been wounded by a roadside bomb while patrolling Golan Heights.[386]

On 19 March, the Syrian army captured Ras al-Ain near Yabrud, after two days of fighting and al-Husn in Homs Governorate, while rebels in the Daraa Governorate captured Daraa prison, and freed hundreds of detainees.[387][388][389] On 20 March, the Syrian army took control of the Krak des Chevaliers in al-Husn.[389] On 29 March, Syrian army took control of the villages of Flitah and Ras Maara near the border with Lebanon.[390]

On 22 March, rebels took control of the Kesab border post in the Latakia Governorate.[391] By 23 March, rebels had taken most of Khan Sheikhoun in Hama.[392] During clashes near the rebel-controlled Kesab border post in Latakia, Hilal Al Assad, NDF leader in Latakia and one of Bashar Al Assad's cousins was killed by rebel fighters.[393][394] On 4 April, rebels captured the town of Babulin, Idlib.[395] On 9 April, the Syrian army took control of Rankous in the Qalamoun region.[396] On 12 April, rebels in Aleppo stormed the government-held Ramouseh industrial district in an attempt to cut the Army supply route between the airport and a large Army base. The rebels also took the Rashidin neighbourhood and parts of the Jamiat al-Zahra district.[397] On 26 April, the Syrian army took control of Al-Zabadani.[398] According to SOHR, rebels took control of Tell Ahrmar, Quneitra.[399] Rebels in Daraa also took over Brigade 61 Base and the 74th battalion.[400]

On 26 April, the FSA announced they had begun an offensive against ISIS in the Raqqa Governorate, and had seized five towns west of Raqqa city.[401] On 29 April, activists said that the Syrian army captured Tal Buraq near the town of Mashara in Quneitra without any clashes.[402] On 7 May, a truce went into effect in the city of Homs, SOHR reported. The terms of the agreement include safe evacuation of Islamist fighters from the city, which would then fall under government control, in exchange for release of prisoners and safe passage of humanitarian aid for Nubul and Zahraa, two Shiite enclaves besieged by the rebels.[403] On 18 May, the head of Syria's Air Defense, General Hussein Ishaq, died of wounds sustained during a rebel attack on an air defense base near Mleiha the previous day. In Hama governorate, rebel forces took control of the town of Tel Malah, killing 34 pro-Assad fighters at an army post near the town. Its seizure marked the third time rebels have taken control of the town.[404][405]

Syria held a presidential election in government-held areas on 3 June 2014. For the first time in the history of Syria more than one person was allowed to stand as a presidential candidate.[406] More than 9,000 polling stations were set up in government-held areas.[407][408] According to the Supreme Constitutional Court of Syria, 11.63 million Syrians voted (the turnout was 73.42%).[409] President Bashar al-Assad won the election with 88.7% of the votes. As for Assad's challengers, Hassan al-Nouri received 4.3% of the votes and Maher Hajjar received 3.2%.[410] Allies of Assad from more than 30 countries were invited by the Syrian government to follow the presidential election,[411] including Bolivia, Brazil, Cuba, Ecuador, India, Iran, Iraq, Nicaragua, Russia, South Africa and Venezuela.[412][413] The Iranian official Alaeddin Boroujerdi read a statement by the group saying the election were "free, fair and transparent".[414] The Gulf Cooperation Council, the European Union and the United States all dismissed the election as illegitimate and a farce.[415][416][417][418]

State employees were told to vote or face interrogation.[419] On the ground there were no independent monitors stationed at the polling stations.[420][421][422]

It is noted by analysts that as few as 6 million eligible voters remained in Syria.[423][424] Due to rebel, Kurdish and ISIS control of Syrian territories there was no voting in roughly 60% of the country.[425][426]

Starting on 5 June, ISIL seized swathes of territory in Iraq in addition to heavy weapons and equipment from the Iraqi Army, some of which they brought into Syria. Government airstrikes targeted ISIL bases in Ar-Raqqah and Al-Hasakah in coordination with an Iraqi Army counteroffensive.[427] On 14 June, government forces retook the town of Kessab in northern Latakia Governorate, while rebels took over Tall al-Gomo near the town of Nawa in the Daraa Governorate, as well as reentering the Qalamoun area.[428][429]

According to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, on 17 July ISIL took control of the Shaar oil field, killing 90 pro-government forces while losing 21 fighters. In addition, 270 guards and government-aligned fighters were missing. About 30 government persons managed to escape to the nearby Hajjar field.[430] On 20 July, the Syrian Army secured the field, although fighting continued in its outskirts.[431] On 25 July, the Islamic State took control of the Division 17 base near Raqqah.[432]

On 7 August, ISIL took the Brigade 93 base in Raqqah using weapons captured from their offensive in Iraq. Multiple suicide bombs also went off before the base was stormed.[433] On 13 August, ISIL forces took the towns of Akhtarin and Turkmanbareh from rebels in Aleppo. ISIL forces also took a handful of nearby villages. The other towns seized include Masoudiyeh, Dabiq and Ghouz.

On 14 August, the Free Syrian Army commander Sharif As-Safouri admitted working with Israel and receiving anti-tank weapons from Israel and FSA soldiers also received medical treatment inside Israel.[434] On 14 August, the Syrian Army as well as Hezbollah militias retook the town of Mleiha in Rif Dimashq Governorate. The Supreme Military Council of the FSA denied claims of Mleiha's seizure, rather the rebels have redeployed from recent advances to other defensive lines.[435] Mleiha has been held by the Islamic Front. Rebels had used the town to fire mortars on government held areas inside Damascus.[436][437]

Meanwhile, ISIL forces in Raqqah were launching a siege on Tabqa airbase, the Syrian government's last military base in Raqqah. Kuwaires airbase in Aleppo also came under fierce attack by ISIL.[438][439] On 16 August, there were reports that 22 people were killed in the village of Daraa by a car bomb outside a mosque. The bomb was thought to be detonated by ISIS. Also on 16 August, the Islamic State seized the village of Beden in the Aleppo Governorate from rebels.[440][441]

On 17 August, SOHR said that in the past two weeks ISIL jihadists killed over 700 tribal members in oil-rich Deir ez-Zor Governorate.[442]

On 19 August, a senior figure in ISIL who had prepared planned car and suicide bombs across Syria, Lebanon and Iraq was killed. Some reports said that he was killed by Hezbollah fighters. There were also several reports that he was killed by the Syrian Army in the Qalamoun region, near the border with Lebanon.[443][444][445]

On 19 August, American journalist James Foley was executed by ISIL, who claimed it was in retaliation for the United States operations in Iraq. Foley was kidnapped in Syria in November 2012 by Shabiha militia.[446] ISIL also threatened to execute Steven Sotloff, who was kidnapped at the Syrian-Turkish border in August 2013.[447] There are reports ISIS captured a Japanese national, two Italian nationals, and a Danish national as well.[448] At least 70 journalists have been killed covering the Syrian war, and more than 80 kidnapped, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists.[449]

On 22 August, the al-Nusra Front released a video of captured Lebanese soldiers and demanded that Hezbollah withdraw from Syria under threat of their execution.[450]

On 23 August, the Tabqa airbase was no longer encircled by ISIL fighters and the Syrian Army had taken back the M-42 Highway from ISIL fighters, which leads to the city of Salamiyah in the Hama Governorate.[451] Also in Raqqah, the Syrian Army took control of the town of Al-Ejeil.[452][453] ISIL reportedly sent reinforcements from Iraq to the governorate of Raqqah. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said at least 400 ISIL fighters had also been wounded in the previous five days in clashes with the Syrian Army and National Defence Force in Raqqah alone.[452][454] At the same time, Several senior UK and US figures urged Turkey to stop allowing ISIL to cross the border to Syria and Iraq.[455]

On the following day, the Islamic State seized Tabqa airbase from government forces.[456] The battle for the base left 346 ISIL fighters and 195 soldiers dead.[457] Prisoners taken by ISIL forces were executed and a video from the mass killing was posted on YouTube. The death toll varied from 120 to 250.[458]

On 26 August, the Syrian Air Force carried out airstrikes against ISIL targets in the Governorate of Deir ez-Zor. This was the first time the Syrian army attacked them in Deir ez-Zor as the Syrian Army pulled out of Raqqah and shifted to Deir ez-Zor in a bid to seize its oil and natural gas resources as well as strategically splitting ISIL territories.[459][460]

American jets began bombing ISIL in Syria on 23 September 2014, raising U.S. involvement in the war-torn country. At least 20 targets in and around Raqqa were hit, the opposition group Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said. Foreign partners participating in the strikes with the United States were Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Jordan. The US and "partner nation forces" began striking ISIL targets using fighters, bombers and Tomahawk missiles, Pentagon spokesman Rear Adm. John Kirby said.[461]

US aircraft include B-1 bombers, F-16s, F-18s and Predator drones, with F-18s flying missions off the USSGeorge H.W. Bush(CVN-77) in the Persian Gulf. Tomahawk missiles were fired from the destroyer USSArleigh Burke(DDG-51) in the Red Sea. Syria's Foreign Ministry told the Associated Press that the US informed Syria's envoy to the U.N. that "strikes will be launched against the terrorist group in Raqqa".[462] The United States informed the Free Syrian Army beforehand of the impending airstrikes, and the rebels said that weapons transfers to the Free Syrian Army had begun.[463]

The United States also attacked a specific faction of Al-Nusra called the Khorasan Group, who according to the United States had training camps and plans for attacking the United States in the future.[464]

For its part, Turkey launched an official request to the UN for a no-fly zone over Syria.[465]

The same day, Israel shot down a Syrian warplane after it entered the Golan area from Quneitra.[466]

By 3 October, ISIL forces were heavily shelling the city of Kobane and were within a kilometer of the town.[467]

Within 36 hours from 21 October, the Syrian air force carried out over 200 airstrikes on rebel-held areas across Syria and US and Arab jets attacked IS positions around Kobane. Syrian Information Minister Omran al-Zoubi said the YPG forces in Kobane had been provided with military and logistical support.[468][469] Syria reported that its air force had destroyed two fighter jets being operated by IS.[470]

By 26 January, the Kurdish YPG forced ISIL forces in Koban to retreat,[471] thus fully recapturing the city.[472] The U.S. confirmed that the city had been cleared of ISIL forces on 27 January,[473] and ISIL admitted defeat in Koban city three days later, although they vowed to return.[474]

In February 2014, the Southern Front of the Free Syrian Army formed in southern Syria. Six months later, they started a string of victories in Daraa and Quneitra during the 2014 Quneitra offensive, the Daraa offensive (October 2014), the Battle of Al-Shaykh Maskin, the Battle of Bosra (2015) and the Battle of Nasib Border Crossing. A government counter-offensive (the 2015 Southern Syria offensive) during this period, that included the IRGC and Hezbollah, recaptured 15 towns, villages and hills,[475][476][477] but the operation slowed soon after[478] and stalled.[479]

Since early 2015, opposition military operations rooms based in Jordan and Turkey began increasing cooperation,[480] with Saudi Arabia and Qatar also reportedly agreeing upon the necessity to unite opposition factions against the Syrian government.[481]

In late October 2014, a conflict erupted between the Al-Nusra Front on one side and the western-backed SRF and Hazzm Movement on the other (Al-Nusra FrontSRF/Hazzm Movement conflict). ISIL reportedly reinforced Al-Nusra. By the end of February 2015 Al-Nusra had defeated both groups, captured the entire Zawiya Mountain region in Idlib province and several towns and military bases in other governorates, and seized weapons supplied by the CIA to the two moderate groups.[482][483] The significant amount of weapons seized included a small number of BGM-71 anti-tank missiles similar to weapons systems al-Nusra Front had previously captured from government stockpiles such as French MILANs, Chinese HJ-8s and Russian 9K111 Fagots.[484] Reuters reported that this represented al-Nusra crushing pro-Western rebels in the north of the country.[485] According to FSA commanders in northern Syria, however, the elimination of Harakat Hazm and the SRF was a welcome development due to the leaders of those factions allegedly involved in corruption.[486] The Western-backed 30th Division of the FSA remained active elsewhere in Idlib.[487]

By 24 March 2015 the Al-Nusra Front dominated most of Idlib province, except for the government-held provincial capital, Idlib, which they had encircled on three sides along with its Islamist allies.[488] On 28 March a joint coalition of Islamist forces, the Army of Conquest, captured Idlib.[489][490][491] This left the north largely taken over by Ahrar ash-Sham, Al-Nusra Front and other Islamist rebels, with the south of the country becoming the last significant foothold for the mainstream, non-jihadist opposition fighters.[492]

On 22 April, a new rebel offensive was launched in the north-west of Syria and by 25 April, the rebel coalition Army of Conquest had captured the city of Jisr al-Shughur.[493] At the end of the following month, the rebels also seized the Al-Mastumah military base,[494] and Ariha, leaving government forces in control of tiny pockets of Idlib, including the Abu Dhuhur military airport.[495] In addition, according to Charles Lister (Brookings Doha Center), the Army of Conquest coalition was a broad opposition effort to ensure that the Al-Qaeda-affiliated Al-Nusra Front was contained, with the rearguard involvement of Western-backed factions being regarded as crucial.[486] Still, according to some, the FSA in northern Syria had by this point all but dissipated. Many of the moderate fighters joined more extremist organizations, such as Ahrar ash-Sham, the largest faction in the Army of Conquest, which led to the subsequent rise of the Islamist Army of Conquest coalition.[496]

Rebel advances led to government and Hezbollah morale plunging dramatically.[497] In north-west Syria these losses were countered by a Hezbollah-led offensive in the Qalamoun mountains north of Damascus, on the border with Lebanon, that gave Hezbollah effective control of the entire area.[498]

On 21 May, ISIL took control of Palmyra, a UNESCO World Heritage Site, after eight days of fighting.[499] The jihadists also captured the nearby towns of Al-Sukhnah and Amiriya, as well as several oil fields.[500] Following the capture of Palmyra, ISIL conducted mass executions in the area, killing an estimated 217329 government civilian supporters and soldiers, according to opposition activists.[501][502][503] Government sources put the number of killed at 400450.[504]

By early June, ISIL reached the town of Hassia, which lays on the main road from Damascus to Homs and Latakia, and reportedly took up positions to the west of it, creating a potential disaster for the government and raising the threat of Lebanon being sucked further into the war.[505]

On 25 June, ISIL launched two offensives. One was a surprise diversionary attack on Koban, while the second targeted government-held parts of Al-Hasakah city.[506] The ISIL offensive on Al-Hasakah displaced 60,000 people, with the UN estimating a total of 200,000 would be displaced.[507]

More here:
Syrian Civil War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Holocaust – Wikipedia

Posted By on August 17, 2015

De Holocaust, ook wel Shoah, Shoa of Sjoa (Hebreeuws: Ha-Shoah) genoemd, was de systematische Jodenvervolging door de nazi's en hun bondgenoten voor en tijdens de Tweede Wereldoorlog. Tijdens de overheersing door nazi-Duitsland werden er tussen de 5,1[1] en 6[2] miljoen Europese Joden vermoord. De moorden vonden grotendeels plaats in concentratie- en vernietigingskampen.

Het woord Holocaust betekent brandoffer en is afgeleid van het Oud-Griekse woord (holokauston), wat letterlijk 'geheel verbrand' betekent. Dit was een aanduiding voor een brandoffer aan een godheid. De term Holocaust als synoniem voor de Sjoa is in zwang gekomen vanuit de Verenigde Staten, waar eind jaren zeventig de gelijknamige televisieserie grote aandacht trok.

Omdat de term Holocaust oorspronkelijk de naam was van een vrijwillig brandoffer aan God, en er bij de Jodenvervolging in de Tweede Wereldoorlog geen vrijwillige offers aan een godheid werden gebracht, gebruiken sommigen liever de term Sjoa ( = vernietiging).

Volgens de betrouwbaarste schattingen ligt het totaal aantal vermoorde Joden tussen de 5,1[3] en iets meer dan zes miljoen.[2]

Naoorlogse schattingen per land (grenzen van voor de oorlog):

Per jaar zijn de slachtofferaantallen als volgt in te delen:[20]

Naast Joden werden ook andere groepen al dan niet systematisch vermoord, zoals homoseksuelen, Esperantisten, zigeuners, "economisch onwaardigen", Russen, etnische Polen, gehandicapten, Jehova's getuigen, Vrije Bijbelonderzoekers, vakbondsleden, vrijmetselaars, communisten, Spaanse republikeinen, Serven, Quakers en mensen die zich verzetten tegen de nazi's.[21]

Waarom de nazi's overgingen tot het op grote schaal vermoorden van Joden, homoseksuelen, zigeuners en 'economisch onwaardigen' als fysiek en mentaal gehandicapten is nog steeds onduidelijk. Het debat hierover werd onder meer gevoerd door Daniel Goldhagen met zijn boek Hitlers gewillige beulen. Duidelijk is wel dat Adolf Hitlers felle antisemitisme de 'motor' was die het nationaalsocialisme schuldig maakte aan etnische zuivering of volkerenmoord.

Hermann Gring verklaarde tijdens het proces te Neurenberg (Nrnberg) (1945-'46) dat "de kampen" voor hen uiteindelijk de strop zouden betekenen.

Een genocide op zo grote schaal was slechts mogelijk doordat een aantal factoren gelijktijdig speelden in delen van Europa, en met name Duitsland:

Antisemitisme en antiziganisme hadden altijd al onderdeel uitgemaakt van het NSDAP-partijprogramma. Dit antisemitisme vond onder het Duitse volk, dat leed onder de gevolgen van een hyperinflatie, gretig aftrek vanwege de gedachte dat Joden zich vaak in de bankiers- en zakenwereld bevonden. Niet alleen Hitler, maar ook vele kopstukken van zijn partij waren antisemiet. Julius Streicher spande met zijn radicale partijblad "Der Strmer" de kroon: soms waren zijn ideen zelfs de nazi's wat te gortig. De nazi's zagen de Joden als "bacillen", die de Duitse natie "ziek maakten" en "ondermijnden". Al ver voordat Hitler aan de macht kwam, heeft hij onder meer in "Mein Kampf" beweerd dat de Eerste Wereldoorlog niet zou zijn verloren als de Duitsers "tien- of twaalfduizend van deze volksverraders onder het gifgas hadden gehouden".

Toen Adolf Hitler in 1933 aan de macht kwam, was er wel zeker latent antisemitisme, dat door de NSDAP en de SA werd uitgebuit. Toch was dit zeker niet hetzelfde antisemitisme als dat van de NSDAP. Het antisemitisme in Duitsland was eerder economisch van aard en ging beslist niet zo ver dat men de Joden wilde uitroeien of verwijderen. Veel Joden integreerden in de Duitse samenleving en werden dan ook niet meer als Jood gezien. Het antisemitisme van de NSDAP was hoofdzakelijk benvloed door het antisemitisme in Oostenrijk en Sudetenland, dat veel radicaler was. Hitler had zelf jaren in Wenen gewoond, waar de Duitssprekenden zich bedreigd voelden door de groeiende aanwezigheid van de niet-Duitssprekenden en Joden. Hier kwamen groeperingen op die betoogden dat er een "joods ras" bestond dat inferieur was aan het "Germaanse ras" en dat dit ras en diens zuiverheid "ondermijnde". Dit was het antisemitisme dat de NSDAP propageerde, en dat al in de 19e eeuw radicalere oplossingen voorstond.

De weg naar de Holocaust/Shoa begon met door de regering en partij aangemoedigde pesterijen door radicale elementen. Deze pesterijen omvatten onder andere uitschelden, belachelijk maken, molestaties en zo nu en dan ook moord. Wanneer het te gortig werd, werd van bovenaf "ingegrepen", waarna de regering de radicalen "tevreden stelde" met antisemitische maatregelen om "verder geweld te voorkomen". Dit culmineerde uiteindelijk in de "Neurenberger wetten" van 1935. Dit omvatte een pakket discriminerende maatregelen alsmede regelgeving die bepaalde wie er wel en wie niet een Duitser of Jood was. Door die nieuwe wetgeving raakten Joden hun burgerrechten kwijt en werden huwelijken tussen Joden en niet-Joden verboden. In de jaren dertig was de nazipartij zeer populair en werd het antisemitisme "op de koop toe genomen", ook door degenen die niet antisemiet waren. Men veronderstelde bovendien dat de ideologie mettertijd zou verzwakken nu de NSDAP regeerde, wat tijdens de Olympische Spelen van 1936 ook werkelijk leek te gebeuren. De NSDAP had echter de pesterijen doelbewust tegengehouden om de schone schijn tijdens de Spelen op te houden. Na 1936 gingen de maatregelen en pesterijen weer door.

Op 10 november 1938 vond na de moord op Vom Rath de Reichskristallnacht of kortweg Kristallnacht plaats. Duizenden SA-mannen in burger overvielen Joodse huizen en winkels, stichtten brand in synagogen en sloegen Joden in elkaar. Dit leidde tot het buiten de economie plaatsen van de Joden en het opleggen van een boete van 1 miljard mark aan de Joodse gemeenschap, aangezien volgens de regering de Joden de aanstichters waren. Buitenlandse kritiek werd gepareerd met de mededeling dat dit een uiting was van het gezonde volksoordeel, het "Gesundes Volksempfinden".

In de jaren 1938-1941 werd gewerkt aan een "oplossing" waarbij Joden naar een bepaald gebied gezonden zouden worden. En optie was Brits Palestina, een andere was Madagaskar. Met name na de overwinning op Frankrijk zouden veel nazi's het Madagaskarplan aanhangen, maar dit was zolang de oorlog duurde niet haalbaar. De Britse marine beheerste de zee en de Duitsers durfden niet te veel druk op de Fransen uit te oefenen om ze hun kolonie te laten afstaan. De uiteindelijke bezetting van het eiland door geallieerde troepen zorgde dat dit plan definitief van de agenda verdween. Een verdere stap in de richting van genocide was het idee Joden als gijzelaars te gebruiken om de Verenigde Staten buiten de oorlog te houden.

In bezet Polen begonnen ondertussen de Gauleiters van oostelijke Gouwen als Wartheland en Danzig-Westpruisen hun Gaue "Judenrein" te maken door Joden naar het Generalgouvernment (de door de Duitsers genitieerde Poolse rompstaat) te deporteren. De nieuwe Gaue werden gezien als mogelijkheid om een ideale nazi-samenleving te creren. Daarbij hoorde uiteraard het "verwijderen" van "ongewenste elementen", waaronder Joden. Tussen de Gauleiters ontstond een zekere concurrentie: wie had de meest genazificeerde Gau? In de Poolse grote steden ontstonden hierdoor getto's: overvolle afgebakende woonwijken waar de Joden onder de meest onhyginische omstandigheden moesten wonen.

De aanval op de Sovjet-Unie opende nieuwe "mogelijkheden" voor de nazifilosofen. Nu konden ze alle Joden uit Groot-Duitsland en zijn satellieten naar Siberi sturen, waar ze "zouden creperen". Immers, wanneer ze het "te gemakkelijk" hadden, zouden de Joden in een nieuwe Joodse staat wellicht een bedreiging vormen. Daarom konden ze volgens de nazi's maar beter creperen. In het oosten ontstonden de eerste kampen voor Joden, maar na de nederlaag bij Moskou bleek dat de optie om de Joden naar Sovjetgebied te deporteren voorlopig niet haalbaar was. Uitroeiing of vernietiging werd meer en meer als de beste optie gezien, bovendien kostte het deporteren en opsluiten van de Joden geld en voedsel.

Verschillende manieren werden overwogen. Doodschieten "kostte te veel kogels", en bovendien was het voor de beulen "geestelijk te belastend". Ook het gebruik van explosieven werd overwogen, maar dit leidde ertoe dat de lichaamsdelen her en der verspreid raakten, wat eveneens tot zenuwziektes bij het kamppersoneel kon leiden. Vergassing zag men als oplossing. Aanvankelijk geschiedde dit nog met koolmonoxide. Speciale gaswagens werden ingezet. De Joden werd verteld dat ze "op transport" gingen per vrachtwagen, en vervolgens werden de uitlaatgassen de laadruimte ingeleid. De wagen reed nadien door naar een massabegraafplaats. Eind augustus of begin september 1941 werd in Auschwitz de eerste proef gedaan met Zyklon B. In een kelder van Blok 11 werden Russische krijgsgevangenen bijeen gedreven en blootgesteld aan Zyklon B. De dag erna werd de effectiviteit ervan gecontroleerd, waarbij bleek dat een groot deel van de gevangenen nog in leven was. Men verhoogde daarop de dosis. De SS liet gevangenen de lijken opruimen en verbranden in het crematorium. Na dit eerste experiment werd een tweede vergassing met Zyklon B uitgevoerd op een transport met Russische krijgsgevangenen.[22] Zyklon B werd al gebruikt voor ontluizing (het middel was dan ook ontworpen als insectenbestrijdingsmiddel), maar de extreme giftigheid van het middel bracht waarnemend commandant van Auschwitz Karl Fritzsch op het idee om het te gebruiken voor het vergassen van gevangenen.

Hitler nam het besluit tot vernietiging van het Europese Jodendom (de zogeheten Endlsung der Judenfrage, ofwel de Eindoplossing van het Jodenprobleem) naar alle waarschijnlijkheid in september 1941.[23] Tijdens de Wannseeconferentie in een villa aan de Wannsee nabij Berlijn in januari 1942 werd de logistieke uitvoering van het besluit besproken. Adolf Eichmann, een van de beruchtste betrokkenen bij de Holocaust, was een van de aanwezigen. Vanaf dat moment kon gesproken worden van een van tevoren beraamde en systematisch uitgevoerde genocide, voor zover deze feitelijk al niet aan de gang was.

De nazi's hielden hun krijgsgevangenen al in het begin van de jaren dertig in concentratiekampen. In januari 1939 liet Hitler in een toespraak weten dat het "joodse ras" in de komende oorlog vernietigd zou worden. Voor dit doel, de zogenaamde Endlsung (Duits voor "eindoplossing"), werden vernietigingskampen ofwel Vernichtungslager ingericht. Deze kampen waren bedoeld om doelbewust en systematisch groepen te vermoorden, die door de nazi's Untermenschen (Duits voor "ondermensen") genoemd werden. Naast Joden waren dit onder andere zigeuners, gehandicapten, communisten en homoseksuelen.[24] In totaal kregen zeven kampen de functie van vernietigingskamp, waarvan zes in Polen en n in Wit-Rusland. Deze zeven kampen waren:

Een vernietigingskamp is een kamp waar de meeste gevangenen onmiddellijk na aankomst vergast werden. Dit lot trof sowieso de zieken, ouderen en kinderen. De gevangenen die in leven gehouden werden, kregen verscheidene taken met als doel het kamp draaiende te houden. Die werkzaamheden varieerden van zware arbeid tot dienst in bijvoorbeeld de keukens. Uiteindelijk zouden ook deze gevangenen vergast worden. Deze kampen bevonden zich in het oosten van het Reich (in het huidige Polen met als belangrijkste Auschwitz) en werden bijgevolg ook door het Rode Leger bevrijd.

Naast vernietigingskampen hadden de nazi's een groot aantal concentratiekampen, zoals Dachau (bij Mnchen) en Buchenwald (bij Weimar). Een concentratiekamp is niet hetzelfde als een vernietigingskamp. Zoals de naam impliceert is een concentratiekamp een werkkamp waar gevangenen geconcentreerd werden. De meeste doden vielen daar door het zware werk, ondervoeding, ziekten en mishandeling. Deze werkkampen kan men bijvoorbeeld vergelijken met de zogenoemde "Goelags" in Sovjet-Russisch Siberi. In de jaren veertig werden veel concentratiekampen ook van gaskamers voorzien, waarna ook daar gevangenen vergast werden.

Naast de concentratie- en vernietigingskampen bestonden er ook nog de zogenoemde doorgangskampen. Dit zijn kampen die opgezet werden om de mensen als het ware in op te slaan. Vanuit deze doorgangskampen reed er elke week een trein naar de vernietigingskampen. Westerbork is een voorbeeld van een doorgangskamp in Nederland. In Belgi werd hiervoor de oude bestaande Dossinkazerne te Mechelen gebruikt. Deze kazerne is nu deels ingericht als "Joods Museum van Deportatie en Verzet". In het Franse kamp Drancy ten noorden van Parijs, werden tijdens de Tweede Wereldoorlog circa 65 duizend Joden vastgehouden, vooraleer zij naar het vernietigingskamp Auschwitz werden getransporteerd. Ook Theresienstadt was een doorgangskamp.

Het oude fort Breendonk bij Willebroek op 20km ten zuiden van de stad Antwerpen valt eerder onder de categorie werkkamp. Er waren ook Vlaamse SS'ers als beulen aan het werk. Hier werden vooral politieke gevangenen als slaven aan het werk gezet, gemarteld en gexecuteerd. Breendonk is als museum ingericht en staat open voor bezoek.

Verzet tegen de Jodenvervolging leidde meestal tot aanzienlijke vertragingen of zelfs afstel. Soms was verzet een individuele actie of een actie van een kleinere groep, maar er zijn voorbeelden bekend van collectief verzet tegen de Jodenvervolgingen, zoals de Amsterdamse Februaristaking.

De Joden zelf zijn een aantal malen in opstand gekomen. In 1943 kwam het getto van Warschau in opstand. In Auschwitz bliezen in oktober 1944 Joodse gevangenen een crematorium op met binnengesmokkelde explosieven. In oktober 1943 was er een geslaagde opstand in Sobibr: 11 Duitse SS-officieren, onder wie de ondercommandant, werden gedood en ongeveer 300 van de 600 gevangen ontsnapten. Ongeveer 60 daarvan hebben de oorlog overleefd. De ontsnapping bracht de nazi's ertoe het kamp te sluiten, waarschijnlijk uit angst voor bekendmaking. In Nederland zaten nogal wat politiek links-georinteerde (socialistische en communistische) Joden in het verzet. Zij weigerden ook vaak de gehate Jodenster te dragen.

Op 19 april 1943, dezelfde dag waarop ook het getto van Warschau in opstand kwam, werd in Belgi het twintigste treinkonvooi aangevallen door drie Jonge verzetslieden. Dit Jodentransport was vertrokken vanuit Mechelen met bestemming Auschwitz. Gewapend met n revolver, een stormlamp en rood papier dwongen drie studenten (Georges Livschitz, Robert Maistriau en Jean Franklemon) van het atheneum te Ukkel de trein te stoppen op de spoorlijn MechelenLeuven tussen Boortmeerbeek en Haacht. Dit is een uniek feit in de geschiedenis van de Holocaust. Nergens in Europa is tijdens de Tweede Wereldoorlog een bevrijdingsactie uitgevoerd op een Jodentransport.

In Itali weigerden de meeste legerbevelhebbers en politiebeambten de Joden te vervolgen. Toen men in Denemarken de kleine Joodse gemeenschap trachtte te vervolgen, werd deze beschermd en uiteindelijk naar Zweden getransporteerd. Finland, bondgenoot van Duitsland uit opportunistische overwegingen, weigerde Joden te vervolgen of uit te leveren. Japan beschermde de weinige Joden die op Japans of bezet grondgebied waren. Toen de Duitsers de Bulgaarse Joden sterren wilden laten dragen, ging de gehele bevolking deze trots dragen. Ook latere pogingen van de Duitsers en Bulgaarse antisemieten werden geblokkeerd.

Enkele bekende personen die zich actief tegen de Holocaust hebben verzet:

Over de motieven van degenen die actief of passief in verzet kwamen werd en wordt druk gespeculeerd. Oprechte sympathie met de Joodse medemensen en verontwaardiging over hun behandeling zal in de meeste gevallen in meerdere of mindere mate een rol hebben gespeeld. Anderen probeerden hun eigen straatje schoon te houden en wilden niet na de oorlog als oorlogsmisdadiger worden berecht. Weer anderen maakten misbruik van de situatie en verrijkten zich aan de vluchtelingen. Hoe dan ook, de hulp van (al) deze personen aan de Joden was uiterst belangrijk.

Waar de Duitsers actief of passief verzet ontmoetten, mislukte de Jodenvervolging of werd deze aanzienlijk vertraagd. Waar de bevolking echter actief meewerkte, werd een zeer groot percentage van de Joden uitgeroeid. De Nederlandse ambtenaren stelden de bevolkingsregisters aan de bezetter ter beschikking, terwijl slechts sporadisch verzet voorkwam. Voorafgaand aan de analyse van de bevolkingsregisters door de nazi's is door het toenmalige Nederlandse Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken een uitgebreid onderzoek gedaan naar de historische herkomst van Nederlandse geslachtsnamen. Familienamen van Nederlandse Joden werden daarin in een aparte sectie opgenomen en verklaard. Van dit onderzoek is nog tijdens de bezetting een samenvatting van de hand van de onderzoekende rijksambtenaar in boekvorm gepubliceerd. Het boek zelf geeft geen duidelijk uitsluitsel over de aanleiding van het onderzoek. Rond de 75% van de Nederlandse Joden overleefde de oorlog niet, mede door het overdragen van de bevolkingsregisters. De precieze ambtenaren van de burgerlijke stand noteerden hen zelfs als "gemigreerd". Een belangrijke factor die in dit verband meespeelde, kwam hierop neer dat Nederland tijdens de oorlogsjaren een Zivilverwaltung (een burgerlijk bestuur) had en geen Militrverwaltung (militair bestuur), dit in tegenstelling tot onder andere Belgi tijdens het grootste deel van de bezetting. Dit vloeide voort uit het machtsvacum veroorzaakt door de vlucht van de koninklijke familie.

In Roemeni vormde de radicaal antisemitische IJzeren Garde in 1940 samen met het leger een regering. Dit bewind werd gekenmerkt door geweld tegen Joden, soms met dodelijke afloop. De ordeverstoringen waren zo ernstig dat legerleider maarschalk Ion Antonescu de Garde in 1941 uit de regering zette. Roemeni verbond zich met Duitsland, maar de toestand leek voor de Roemeense Joden te verbeteren, en antisemitische maatregelen werden in Walachije slechts zeer sporadisch ingevoerd. Deze gematigdheid was echter schijn. Antonescu wilde wel degelijk de Joden uit de Roemeense samenleving verwijderen, maar was tegen de gewelddadige plunderingen van de IJzeren Garde die het land ontwrichtte. Hiertoe werkte hij met onder anderen Adolf Eichmann samen. Hoewel Antonescu soms de Duitse transporten tegenhield, stond hij eveneens toe dat honderdduizenden andere Joden wel naar de concentratiekampen werden gestuurd. Met name in het verarmde Moldavi werkte de bevolking bovendien enthousiast mee aan de Jodenvervolging.

In de Baltische staten nam de bevolking wraak voor de steun van veel Joden aan de Russische, en dus communistische, bezetters. In zowel Roemeni als de Baltische Staten was men zich bovendien bewust van de grote aantallen Joodse leden van de communistische partijen.

In Kroati waren de Joden nog het slechtst af. Velen konden echter in de eerste twee bezettingsmaanden ontsnappen, doordat de Kroaten zich eerst concentreerden op de uitroeiing en assimilatie van de Servirs, van wie er meer dan een half miljoen verdwenen. De Joden die bleven, vielen echter ten prooi aan Kroatisch geweld, waarna ze met Duitse efficintie naar de kampen werden gestuurd.

In Denemarken was het verzet tegen de deportatie van de Joden het sterkst. Nadat in september 1943 bekend werd dat de deportatie van de Joodse bevolking in Denemarken werd voorbereid, kwam er spontaan een grootscheepse reddingsactie op gang waar alle lagen van de bevolking aan meewerkten. Er werd groot alarm geslagen via synagogen, artsen, pastoors en studenten die weer de Joden inlichtten. De Joden werden verzameld en met alles wat maar wielen had naar de Deense kusten vervoerd. De Joden werden vervolgens door vissers met boten over de Sont naar het neutrale Zweden overgebracht, waarmee de Denen al hadden afgesproken dat zij de Deense Joden op zouden vangen. De Deens-joodse gemeenschap bestond voor de oorlog uit 8.200 mensen, hiervan overleefde ruim 95% de nazi's. Na de oorlog keerden de Deense Joden terug naar hun thuisland en vonden hun huizen en eigendommen precies zo terug zoals ze ze hadden achtergelaten.[25]

Dat was elders in Europa wel anders: daar waren de meeste Joodse bezittingen geroofd of vernield. Dat was onder andere in Nederland het geval. Van de weinigen die uit de kampen terugkeerden, vonden de meesten hun huizen bewoond door Nederlanders en hun bezittingen onteigend. Maar weinigen lukte het hun bezittingen terug te krijgen en dan ook nog pas na vaak jarenlange processen. Pas in het jaar 2000 zijn voor deze kille houding door de naoorlogse autoriteiten excuses aangeboden door de Nederlandse overheid en werd een financile tegemoetkoming toegezegd aan hun nabestaanden.[26]

Bepaalde groepen, vaak als Holocaustontkenners (negationisten) aangeduid, ontkennen dat de Holocaust heeft plaatsgevonden.

Sommige holocaustrevisionisten beweren dat het aantal Joodse slachtoffers dat traditioneel wordt genoemd incorrect is. Zij zeggen dat veel minder dan zes miljoen Joden werden gedood en dat de meeste slachtoffers zijn gevallen door verhongering en door uitgebroken ziektes, zoals tyfus en cholera. Holocaustrevisionisten beweren ook dat (zowel mobiele als stationaire) gaskamers enkel gebruikt werden voor desinfectiedoeleinden.

Het ontkennen, bagatelliseren of goedpraten van de Holocaust is verboden en strafbaar in onder andere Belgi, Frankrijk, Australi, Canada, Zwitserland, Polen en Isral. In Duitsland kan het bestraft worden met vijf jaar gevangenisstraf. Vooral in de jaren tachtig zijn er zware straffen uitgesproken tegen mensen die openlijk hun twijfels uitten over de officile Holocaustversie. Sinds 1 april 2010 is het ontkennen, bagatelliseren of goedpraten van de Holocaust ook in Hongarije verboden en wordt dit bestraft met een gevangenisstraf van drie jaar.

In Iran werd op 11 en 12 december 2006 een conferentie gehouden over het ontkennen van de Holocaust. Hieraan namen ook Joodse intellectuelen deel.

Ruim honderdduizend Nederlandse Joden werden omgebracht, zeker driekwart van de Joden die bij het begin van de bezetting in Nederland woonden. Zij worden allen met naam en geboortedatum genoemd in de gedenkboeken van de Oorlogsgravenstichting in Den Haag, en in het boek In Memoriam, uitgegeven door Sdu te Den Haag. Vijfduizend Roma in Nederland stierven aan de gevolgen van de zigeunervervolging.

Ongeveer 25 duizend Belgische Joden werden het slachtoffer. Het relatief kleine aantal was het gevolg van ten dele het Belgische verzet en het feit dat Belgi een Militrverwaltung (een militair bestuur) had tijdens de Duitse bezetting. Pas in 1944 werd de administratie omgevormd in een Zivielverwaltung (burgerlijk bestuur). Het doorgangskamp, de Dossinkazerne waar de Joden verzameld werden voordat zij op transport gezet werden naar de vernietigingskampen in Polen, bevond zich te Mechelen, halfweg tussen Antwerpen en Brussel, waar de meeste Joden woonden.

De Holocaust (en daarmee samenhangende aspecten) wordt op verschillende dagen herdacht:

De Duitsers hebben zelf archieven bijgehouden van de slachtoffers van de Holocaust. De Duitse archieven zijn bijzonder gedetailleerd omdat de nazi's alle informatie nauwkeurig bijhielden.

Onder andere het Nederlandse overzicht In memoriam met de namen van 100 duizend vermoorde Joden is hierop gebaseerd. Daarnaast zijn de namen van Joodse slachtoffers opgenomen in het Digitaal Monument Joodse Gemeenschap in Nederland.

In de Duitse stad Bad Arolsen, Hessen, bevindt zich het enorm archief (ongeveer 47 miljoen stukken, ongeveer 6 huizen vol papier). Dit archief bevat informatie over 17,5 miljoen mensen en vult ruim 27 kilometer archiefplanken. Het bestaat uit lijsten, inventarissen, persoonsbeschrijvingen, verslagen van medische experimenten, verordeningen, enz. Met name de hele bureaucratie van terreur die de ordelijke nazi's bijhielden voor hun machinerie van dwangarbeid, deportatie en uitroeiing. Het volledige archief uit de concentratiekampen Buchenwald en Dachau is er te vinden. De ontstellende omvang van de oorlog en de ambtelijk gestuurde Duitse moordmachine wordt er duidelijk.

De "International Tracing Service", een afdeling van het Rode Kruis, beheert de archieven. Deze service werd na de oorlog opgericht om vermiste personen op te sporen. Ze werd vooral gebruikt door overlevenden die bewijsmateriaal nodig hadden om een uitkering te kunnen krijgen. Het archief werd verder gesloten gehouden uit privacy-overwegingen, ook voor onderzoekers omdat de documenten gevoelige informatie bevatten over personen, zoals iemands politieke overtuiging, over Joodse collaborateurs en hoe men daartoe aangezet werd, wie luizen had, welke medische experimenten er werden uitgevoerd, de aard van een mentale handicap, wie beschuldigd werd van homoseksualiteit, incest of pedofilie. Er was ook de Duitse vrees voor rechtsprocedures als die informatie vrij zou komen. De mogelijkheid tot juridische stappen is ondertussen verjaard. Fundamenteel nieuws dat de geschiedenis van de Holocaust zal bijsturen, wordt niet verwacht bij het raadplegen van het archief door historici. De onderzoekers hopen wel meer details te vinden om de geschiedenis van de gruwel te reconstrueren.

Op 24 april 2007 ratificeerde het Belgisch Parlement het Protocol dat wetenschappers en onderzoekers tot de archieven van de deportatie tijdens Wereldoorlog II in Bad Arolsen (Duitsland) toegang geeft. Tot de openstelling van de archieven werd beslist na onderhandelingen tussen de lidstaten van de Internationale Commissie van de Internationale Opsporingsdienst. Belgi maakt, samen met Nederland, Luxemburg, Duitsland, Frankrijk, Groot-Brittanni, Itali, Isral, de Verenigde Staten van Amerika, Griekenland en Polen deel uit van deze Internationale Commissie.[27]

Eind november 2007 werd het archief opengesteld voor onderzoekers en voor het algemene publiek.[28]

Op 7 oktober 2013 werden door het Fritz Bauer Institut te Frankfurt de getuigenverklaringen in het eerste in Frankfurt gehouden Auschwitzproces (1963-1965) digitaal beschikbaar gemaakt.[29][30]

Noten

Literatuur

Externe links

Link:
Holocaust - Wikipedia

Judaism 101: The Land of Israel

Posted By on August 17, 2015

Level: Basic

Israel is the land promised to Abraham in the Bible Israel is central to the Jewish religion Zionism is a political movement to establish a Jewish homeland Israel is a democratic country Israel is home to more than 1/3 of the world's Jews 20% of Israel's citizens are not Jewish

The history of the Jewish people begins with Abraham, and the story of Abraham begins when G-d tells him to leave his homeland, promising Abraham and his descendants a new home in the land of Canaan. (Gen. 12). This is the land now known as Israel, named after Abraham's grandson, whose descendants are the Jewish people. The land is often referred to as the Promised Land because of G-d's repeated promise (Gen. 12:7, 13:15, 15:18, 17:8) to give the land to the descendants of Abraham.

The land is described repeatedly in the Torah as a good land and "a land flowing with milk and honey" (e.g., Ex. 3:8). This description may not seem to fit well with the desert images we see on the nightly news, but let's keep in mind that the land was repeatedly abused by conquerors who were determined to make the land uninhabitable for the Jews. In the few decades since the Jewish people regained control of the land, we have seen a tremendous improvement in its agriculture. Israeli agriculture today has a very high yield.

Jews have lived in this land continuously from the time of its original conquest by Joshua more than 3200 years ago until the present day, though Jews were not always in political control of the land, and Jews were not always the majority of the land's population.

The land of Israel is central to Judaism. A substantial portion of Jewish law is tied to the land of Israel, and can only be performed there. Some rabbis have declared that it is a mitzvah (commandment) to take possession of Israel and to live in it (relying on Num. 33:53). The Talmud indicates that the land itself is so holy that merely walking in it can gain you a place in the World to Come. Prayers for a return to Israel and Jerusalem are included in daily prayers as well as many holiday observances and special events.

Living outside of Israel is viewed as an unnatural state for a Jew. The world outside of Israel is often referred to as "galut," which is usually translated as "diaspora" (dispersion), but a more literal translation would be "exile" or "captivity." When we live outside of Israel, we are living in exile from our land.

Jews were exiled from the land of Israel by the Romans in 135 C.E., after they defeated the Jews in a three-year war, and Jews did not have any control over the land again until 1948 C.E.

The Jewish people never gave up hope that we would someday return to our home in Israel. That hope is expressed in the song Ha-Tikvah (The Hope), the anthem of the Zionist movement and the state of Israel.

Kol od baleivav p'nima Nefesh Y'hudi homiya Ul'fa-atey mizrach kadima Ayin L'Tziyon tzofiya Od lo avda tikvateynu Hatikva bat sh'not alpayim Lih'yot am chofshi b'artzenu Eretz Tziyon v'yirushalayim. Lih'yot am chofshi b'artzenu Eretz Tziyon v'yirushalayim.

As long as deep within the heart The Jewish soul is warm And toward the edges of the east An eye to Zion looks Our hope is not yet lost, The hope of two thousand years To be a free people in our own land In the land of Zion and Jerusalem. To be a free people in our own land In the land of Zion and Jerusalem.

But for a long time, this desire for our homeland was merely a vague hope without any concrete plans to achieve it. In the late 1800s, Theodor Herzl and Chaim Weizmann founded Zionism, a political movement dedicated to the creation of a Jewish state. They saw a state of Israel as a necessary refuge for Jewish victims of oppression, especially in Russia, where pogroms were decimating the Jewish population.

The name "Zionism" comes from the word "Zion," which was the name of a stronghold in Jerusalem. Over time, the term "Zion" came to be applied to Jerusalem in general, and later to the Jewish idea of utopia.

Zionism was not a religious movement; it was a primarily political. The early Zionists sought to establish a secular state of Israel, recognized by the world, through purely legal means. Theodor Herzl, for example, was a completely assimilated secular Jewish journalist. He felt little attachment to his Jewish heritage until he covered the trial of Alfred Dreyfus, a Jewish captain in the French military who was (unjustly) convicted of passing secrets to Germany. The charges against Dreyfus brought out a wave of anti-Jewish sentiment that shocked Herzl into realizing the need for a Jewish state. Early Zionists were so desperate for a refuge at one point that they actually considered a proposal to create a Jewish homeland in Uganda. Alaska and Siberia were also discussed. But the only land that truly inspired Jewish people worldwide was our ancient homeland, at that time a part of the Ottoman (Turkish) Empire known as Palestine.

During World War I, the Zionist cause gained some degree of support from Great Britain. In a 1917 letter from British foreign secretary Lord Balfour to Jewish financier Lord Rothschild, the British government expressed a commitment to creating a Jewish homeland in Palestine. This letter is commonly known as the Balfour Declaration. Unfortunately, the British were speaking out of both sides of their mouth, simultaneously promising Arabs their freedom if they helped to defeat the Ottoman Empire, which at that time controlled most of the Middle East (including the modern states of Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq, as well as significant portions of Saudi Arabia and northern Africa). The British promised the Arabs that they would limit Jewish settlement in Palestine mere months after the Balfour Declaration expressed support for "the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people."

After World War I, Palestine was assigned to the United Kingdom as a mandated territory by the newly-formed League of Nations. The Palestinian Mandate initially included the lands that are now Israel and Jordan, but all lands east of the Jordan River were later placed into a separate mandate known as Transjordan (now the nation of Jordan). The document creating the Palestinian mandate incorporated the terms of the Balfour Declaration, promising the creation of a national Jewish homeland within the mandated territory. Many Arab leaders were initially willing to give Palestine to the Jews if the rest of the Arab lands in the Middle East were under Arab control. However, the Arabs living in Palestine vigorously opposed Jewish immigration into the territory and the idea of a Jewish homeland. It is around this time that the idea of Palestinian nationality (distinct from Arab nationality generally) first begins to appear. There were many riots in the territory, and the British came to believe that the conflicting claims were irreconcilable. In 1937, the British recommended partition of the territory.

The Holocaust brought the need for a Jewish homeland into sharp focus for both Jews and for the rest of the world. The Jews who tried to flee Nazi Germany were often turned back due to immigration limitations at the borders of every country, including the United States, Britain and Palestine. Many of those who were sent back to Germany ended up in death camps where they were systematically murdered.

The British were unable to come up with a solution that would satisfy either Arabs or Jews, so in 1947, they handed the problem to the newly-founded United Nations, which developed a partition plan dividing Palestine into Jewish and Arab portions. The plan was ratified in November 1947. The mandate expired on May 14, 1948 and British troops pulled out of Palestine. The Jews of Palestine promptly declared the creation of the State of Israel, which was recognized by several Western countries immediately.

However, the surrounding Arab nations did not recognize the validity of Israel and invaded, claiming that they were filling a vacuum created by the termination of the mandate and the absence of any legal authority to replace it. The Arabs fought a year-long war to drive the Jews out. Miraculously, the new state of Israel won this war, as well as every subsequent Arab-Israeli war, gaining territory every time the Arabs attacked them.

Today, approximately five million Jews, more than a third of the world's Jewish population, live in the land of Israel. Jews make up more than eighty percent of the population of the land, and Jews are in political control of the land, though non-Jews who become citizens of Israel have the same legal rights as Jewish citizens of Israel. In fact, there are a few Arab members of the Knesset (the Israeli parliament).

About half of all Israelis are Mizrachim, descended from Jews who have been in the land since ancient times or who were forced out of Arab countries after Israel was founded. Most of the rest are Ashkenazic, descended from Jews who fled persecution in Eastern Europe starting in the late 1800s, from Holocaust survivors, or from other immigrants who came at various times. About 1% of the Israeli population are the black Ethiopian Jews who fled during the brutal Ethiopian famine in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

Jews continue to immigrate to Israel in large numbers. Immigration to Israel is referred to as aliyah (literally, ascension). Under Israel's Law of Return, any Jew who has not renounced the Jewish faith (by converting to another religion) can automatically become an Israeli citizen, somewhat similar to the way Ireland gives automatic citizenship to second or third generation descendants of Irish citizens. Gentiles may also become citizens of Israel after undergoing a standard naturalization process, much like the one required to become a United States citizen.

Israel is governed by a legislative body called the Knesset (literally, "Assembly"), made up of 120 members. Under the Israeli electoral system, each party presents a list of candidates, and voters vote for the list rather than for individual candidates. The party receives a number of seats proportional to the number of votes it received, thus a party getting 10% of the vote will get 10% of the available seats. As a result, no Israeli party ever has a majority of the seats in the Knesset, and governmental business is conducted by coalition building. This system can give minority groups a significant amount of power, because their support may be needed to gain a majority. Israel also has a president, elected by the Knesset, and a Prime Minister, formerly elected directly but this system is in flux.

Most Jews today support the existence of the state of Israel, though not necessarily all of the policies of its government (as one would expect in any democracy). There are a small number of secular Jews who are anti-Zionist. There is also a very small group of right-wing Orthodox Jews who object to the existence of the state of Israel, maintaining that it is a sin for us to create a Jewish state when the messiah has not yet come. However, this viewpoint does not reflect the mainstream opinion of Orthodoxy. Most Orthodox Jews support the existence of the state of Israel as a homeland, even though it is not the theological state of Israel that will be brought about by the messiah.

This page barely scratches the surface of all there is to say about Israel and Zionism. There are entire sites devoted to these subjects. Here are a few that are worth checking out:

Virtual Jerusalem is a great place to start your search for information about Israel. The site is based in Israel, and has lots of useful information, including Israeli news, travel information, information about making aliyah, and lots of great links.

If you are interested in the history of Zionism, you may want to read the founding treatise on the subject, Theodor Herzl's The Jewish State (Paperback) (Kindle).

See original here:
Judaism 101: The Land of Israel

Golan Heights, biblical Bashan (BiblePlaces.com)

Posted By on August 17, 2015

Dolmens

Hundreds of dolmens have been found in the Golan Heights. Used for burial in the basalt areas where grave digging is difficult, dolmens were used for burial during both the Early Bronze I and Intermediate Bronze periods. The dolmen was most likely intended as a burial chamber for the chief of a clan, or another member of the nomadic elite. A dolmen is constructed of two large vertical stone slabs capped by a horizontal stone, which can weigh up to 30 tons.

Nimrod's Fortress

Known in Arabic as Subebe (from the Crusader name LAsibebe), this English name for the castle mistakenly associates it with Nimrod, an ancient figure of great strength mentioned in Genesis 10:8-9. This is one of the castles that was built by the Muslims, but it changed hands several times in the 12th century. The fortress was strengthened in the 13th century and most remains visible today are from that period. The mountain is over 400 m (1,300 ft) long, and in places its width reaches 150 m (490 ft). The summit rises to an elevation of 800 m (2,600 ft) above sea level. The castle is also known as the Citadel of the Mosquitoes since swarms tend to rise up at times and cover the entire area.

Syrian Territory

The Golan Heights belonged to the country of Syria until 1967. During the Six Day War, Israel took this high ground overlooking the Huleh Basin and Sea of Galilee. Today evidence of Syrian habitation, including military bases and mosques (right) lie in ruins throughout the area. The region is now populated by Druze (who there before the war) and Israelis who have moved in since the war. Syria insists on the return of the Golan Heights as part of any peace agreement.

Rogem Hiri

Rogem Hiri (in Arabic, Rujm al-Hiri) is located in the Golan Heights about 10 miles (16 km) east of the Sea of Galilee. Four concentric circles surround a central cairn. The largest circle measures 150 m (490 ft) in diameter. The walls measure up to 3.5 m (11.5 ft) in width and have been preserved up to 2.5 m (8 ft) high. Its last use was no later than the Late Bronze Age (1500-1200 B.C.). The function of Rogem Hiri is not known. Suggestions include that it was a defensive complex, a burial complex, an astronomical observation center, or the tomb of Og, giant king of Bashan (Deut 3:11).

Nahal Saar

The Golan is a basalt plateau which rises in the northeast to an average altitude of 900 m (3,000 ft) above sea level. The Golan Heights is bordered by Mt. Hermon on the north and the Yarmuk River on the south. At the northeastern corner is an inactive chain of volcanic cones. Their activities in the past created thick basalt layers, resulting in rocky terrain unsuitable for intensive agriculture. Instead, it is used mainly for grazing and pasture. The situation of the Golan Heights results in a significant amount of winter rainfall, with large run-off in the spring through numerous wadis draining to the Huleh Basin and the Sea of Galilee.

Mount Hermon

Mount Hermon is the southern tip of the anti-Lebanon mountain range. The highest peak of Mount Hermon is 9,230 ft. The highest point inside Israel's borders today is Mizpe Shelagim, the snow observatory, at 7,295 ft. In the Bible it is known as Baal Hermon, Sirion, and Sion. Psalm 133 gives an image of the pleasantness and fruitfulness of this mountain. It speaks of the bounty of water, a place that receives much precipitation. Hermon, on average, gets 60 inches of precipitation a year (in 1992 it received 100 in). It is quite possible that the Transfiguration took place somewhere on the slopes of Mount Hermon, as Jesus and his disciples were previously noted to be in the region of Caesarea Philippi. Caesarea Philippi sits at the base of Mount Hermon and thus Mount Hermon could be the mountain where Jesus took the disciples.

Related Websites

The Golan Heights (Jewish Virtual Library) Describes the region's geology, geography,and history, including the events of the last century and the situation today. This site also offers a map of the region here.

UNDOF (United Nations) Provides information about the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force that maintains the area of separation between Israel and Syria.

Nimrod Fortress National Park (Israel Nature & National Parks Protection Authority) Gives general information on the site, including some of its history and tips on visiting.

The Nimrod Fortress (Jewish Virtual Library) A detailed description of the fortress and its history.

Nimrod Fortress (Jewish Mag) A set of photographs highlighting various aspects of the fortress.

Hippos Excavation Project Official site of the Hippos-Sussita excavation. Provides information about the excavation and some excavation reports.Also contains a picture gallery located here.

Hippos (Sussita) 2003 Photo Gallery (The Bible and Interpretation) Displays pictures and plans from the Hippos excavations. This website also offers excavation reports on these excavations. The most recent one is located here.

Continue reading here:
Golan Heights, biblical Bashan (BiblePlaces.com)

Striscia di Gaza – Wikipedia

Posted By on August 16, 2015

Da Wikipedia, l'enciclopedia libera.

Coordinate: 3125N 3420E / 31.416667N 34.333333E31.416667; 34.333333

Col termine Striscia di Gaza (in arabo: , Qi Ghazza; in ebraico: , Retzu'at 'Azza) si indica un territorio palestinese confinante con Israele e Egitto nei pressi della citt di Gaza, de facto un territorio autonomo e autogovernato dal 2005.

Si tratta di una regione costiera di 360km di superficie popolata da circa 1.645.500 abitanti di etnia araba.[3] Rivendicato dai palestinesi, assieme alla Cisgiordania e a Gerusalemme est, come parte dello Stato di Palestina

dunque del conflitto israelo-palestinese. Dal 2012 l'ONU riconosce formalmente la Striscia come parte dello Stato di Palestina, entit statale semi-autonoma.

Quest'area non riconosciuta internazionalmente come uno Stato sovrano, ma reclamata dall'Autorit Palestinese come parte dei Territori palestinesi. Nel gennaio 2006, con una vittoria a sorpresa alle elezioni legislative in Palestina del 2006, Hamas ha ottenuto la maggioranza alla camera.[4] A seguito della battaglia di Gaza del 2007, Hamas ha assunto il governo de facto della Striscia di Gaza.

L'Egitto ha governato la Striscia di Gaza tra il 1948 e il 1967, e oggi controlla la propria frontiera meridionale tra il deserto del Sinai e la Striscia di Gaza, dalla quale diviso dalla Philadelphi Route. Israele ha governato la Striscia di Gaza dal 1967 al 2005, quando si formalmente ritirato. Ai sensi degli accordi di Oslo firmati tra Israele e l'Organizzazione per la Liberazione della Palestina, Israele mantiene per il controllo militare dello spazio aereo della Striscia di Gaza, delle frontiere terrestri (attraverso la barriera tra Israele e la Striscia di Gaza) e delle acque territoriali, oltre al controllo de facto delle frontiere.

Nel 1517 gli Ottomani conquistano Gaza, e la terranno fino alla Prima guerra mondiale.

Dopo la prima guerra mondiale, Gaza diventata parte del Mandato britannico della Palestina sotto l'autorit della Societ delle Nazioni. Il dominio britannico sulla Palestina si concluso con la dichiarazione d'indipendenza israeliana nel 1948.

Secondo i termini del piano di partizione delle Nazioni Unite del 1947, la zona di Gaza era destinata a diventare parte di un nuovo Stato arabo. Dopo lo scioglimento del Mandato britannico della Palestina, la successiva Guerra arabo-israeliana del 1947-1948 e la dichiarazione d'indipendenza di Israele (maggio 1948), la striscia di Gaza si ritrov isolata dal restante territorio palestinese, incuneata tra Israele, l'Egitto e con alle spalle il mare. L'Egitto ne assunse quindi l'amministrazione, analogamente a quanto avvenne al resto dell'ipotizzato Stato arabo di Palestina, vale a dire la Cisgiordania, entrata nell'orbita del Regno di Giordania.

La Striscia di Gaza stata quindi la risultanza di accordi successivi all'armistizio del 1949 tra Egitto e Israele. L'Egitto ha controllato la Striscia dal 1949 (ad eccezione di quattro mesi di occupazione israeliana nel corso della Crisi di Suez del 1956) fino al 1967, senza annetterla formalmente e governandola tramite un'amministrazione militare. Ai rifugiati palestinesi non venne peraltro mai offerta la cittadinanza egiziana.

Israele ha occupato la Striscia di Gaza nel giugno 1967 durante la guerra dei sei giorni. L'occupazione militare durata per 27 anni, fino al 1994.

Durante il periodo di occupazione Israele ha creato un insediamento, Gush Katif, nell'angolo sud ovest della Striscia, vicino a Rafah e il confine egiziano. In totale, Israele ha creato 21 insediamenti nella Striscia di Gaza, su circa il 20% del totale del territorio. Durante tale periodo l'amministrazione militare stata anche responsabile per la manutenzione di impianti civili e dei servizi.

Nel maggio 1994, a seguito degli accordi israelo-palestinesi, noti come accordi di Oslo, ha avuto luogo un graduale trasferimento di autorit governative per i palestinesi. Gran parte della Striscia (tranne che per la liquidazione blocchi militari e le zone insediate) pass sotto il controllo palestinese. Le forze israeliane evacuarono Madnat Ghazza (la citt di Gaza) e le altre aree urbane, lasciando l'amministrazione alla nuova Autorit Nazionale Palestinese.

Tuttavia, secondo gli accordi, Israele mantiene il controllo dello spazio aereo, le acque territoriali, l'accesso off-shore marittimo, l'anagrafe della popolazione, l'ingresso degli stranieri, le importazioni e le esportazioni, nonch il sistema fiscale.

L'Autorit palestinese, guidata da Yasser Arafat, ha scelto la citt di Gaza come la sua prima sede provinciale. Nel settembre 1995, Israele e l'OLP firmarono un secondo accordo di pace che estende l'amministrazione dell'Autorit palestinese alla maggior parte delle citt della Cisgiordania. La Pubblica Amministrazione della Striscia di Gaza e Cisgiordania sotto la leadership di Arafat ha visto episodi di cattiva gestione.

Il 14 agosto 2005 il governo israeliano ha disposto l'evacuazione della popolazione israeliana dalla Striscia e lo smantellamento delle colonie che vi erano state costruite (piano di disimpegno unilaterale israeliano).

Il 15 agosto ebbe inizio l'operazione "Mano tesa ai fratelli", che tendeva a conseguire pacificamente lo sgombero dei coloni israeliani insediatisi nelle Striscia di Gaza e in alcuni insediamenti della Cisgiordania. I soldati israeliani passarono casa per casa, tentando di convincere i coloni rimasti a partire.

Il governo israeliano ordin ad ogni colono di nazionalit israeliana di abbandonare gli insediamenti entro la mezzanotte, considerando chiunque fosse rimasto oltre il limite prefissato in condizione di illegalit. Dopo la mezzanotte, il governo concesse due giorni di tolleranza, durante i quali le colonie furono progressivamente circondate da 40.000 militari e poliziotti israeliani.

Tutti i coloni che partirono entro la mezzanotte del 16 agosto, ebbero la possibilit di utilizzare mezzi propri e si videro riconosciuto il diritto all'indennizzo stanziato dal governo. Trascorsi i due giorni di tolleranza, dalla mezzanotte del 17 agosto ebbe inizio l'evacuazione forzata: i militari furono autorizzati ad imballare ed a caricare in container beni e mobili rimasti nelle case. I coloni ancora presenti furono spostati di forza dagli insediamenti.

Nella colonia di Nev Dekalim, l'insediamento pi importante della regione, si sono avuti gli scontri pi violenti. Qui vivono pi di 2.600 persone. In serata era circondato dalla polizia e dai militari. Secondo fonti da verificare un portavoce dell'esercito, parlando degli elementi israeliani pi oltranzisti che rifiutavano di abbandonare il territorio palestinese occupato dal 1967, afferm che il nostro problema non sono gli abitanti originari ma i militanti contrari all'evacuazione che si sono infiltrati illegalmente a Gaza.

Lo sgombero della Striscia termin il 22 agosto, con il trasferimento delle ultime famiglie della colonia di Netzarim. I soldati impegnati nell'evacuazione furono trasferiti in Cisgiordania, dove vennero evacuati i coloni di Hamesh e Sa-Nur.

L'11 settembre, con una cerimonia molto sobria svoltasi presso i resti della colonia di Nev Dekalim, i comandanti militari di Israele ammainarono la loro bandiera a Gaza. Verso sera, lunghe colonne di mezzi militari israeliani abbandonarono la Striscia.

Il 12 settembre 2005 il territorio della Striscia di Gaza pass in mano palestinese, e gli abitanti ebbero accesso alle aree che erano state loro precedentemente vietate. Alcuni palestinesi diedero fuoco alle sinagoghe abbandonate e ad infrastrutture varie (del valore di circa 10 milioni di dollari), fra cui alcune serre per coltivazioni. Il partito di al-Fat govern in questo modo ufficialmente sulla striscia di Gaza, primo pezzo dello Stato di Palestina.

Motivo: Le affermazioni sottostanti non hanno riferimenti e tendono ad essere filo-hamas

Dopo quasi due anni di controllo da parte di al-Fath, nel 2006 vennero indette nuove elezioni, che si tennero sia nella Striscia di Gaza che negli altri territori palestinesi della West Bank (ovvero la Cisgiordania, che costituisce la parte pi estesa e pi popolata dei territori palestinesi): secondo l'Onu e gli osservatori internazionali le elezioni furono regolari e furono vinte da Hamas, che con gli altri gruppi politici ad esso legati ottenne circa il 44% dei voti validi, mentre il principale partito rivale, Al-Fatah, che fino a quel momento aveva guidato i palestinesi, ottenne circa il 41%. La distribuzione del voto per era molto differente nei vari territori: le principali basi elettorali di Hamas erano nella Striscia di Gaza, mentre quelle del Fatah erano concentrate in Cisgiordania; questo lasci subito presagire che, se i due partiti non avessero trovato un compromesso, sarebbe potuta scoppiare una lotta per il controllo dei due territori nei quali ciascuno dei due partiti era pi forte e radicato.

Venne formato un governo a guida Hamas al quale Fatah rifiut di partecipare, ma poich l'Unione europea, e allo stesso modo gli Stati Uniti, consideravano Hamas un'organizzazione terroristica, interruppero l'invio dei loro aiuti ai territori palestinesi. Durante il giugno del 2007 la tensione tra Hamas e al-Fath, il partito dell'allora presidente dell'Autorit Nazionale Palestinese, che non voleva accettare la "coabitazione" col Governo espresso da Hamas, sfoci in scontri aperti tra le due fazioni che in pochi giorni fecero oltre un centinaio di morti. Il 14 giugno 2007 Hamas, dopo una campagna militare efficace e violenta, conquist la sede militare dell'ANP arrivando di fatto al controllo dell'intera Striscia di Gaza, uccidendo od espellendo ogni appartenente ad al-Fat.

Inizi contestualmente una nuova fase del conflitto tra Hamas ed Israele che vide, da parte israeliana, un embargo verso la Striscia, missioni di guerra e cosiddetti assassinii mirati contro esponenti palestinesi giudicati particolarmente pericolosi per la sua sicurezza, che causarono per diverse centinaia di morti tra la popolazione della Striscia, e da parte Hamas, il lancio di razzi Qassam e tiri di mortaio dalla Striscia di Gaza, contro installazioni e citt israeliane.

Il 1 marzo 2008, l'esercito dello Stato di Israele con l'operazione Inverno caldo invase direttamente l'area con forze blindate ed aeree.

Nell'ambito di una tregua di sei mesi, mediata nel giugno 2008 dall'Egitto, Hamas accett di porre fine al lancio dei razzi in cambio di un alleggerimento del blocco da parte di Israele. Il cessate il fuoco venne contestato da Hamas in quanto riteneva che Israele non ha rispettato la parte centrale dell'accordo, che prevedeva l'alleggerimento del blocco: invece dei 450 camion di aiuti giornalieri previsti, ne venne permesso l'attraversamento dei confini di Gaza al massimo a una settantina, aggravando le condizioni di vita di una popolazione che sopravviveva in gran parte grazie ad aiuti umanitari.

Il 4 novembre ci fu un attacco di Israele dentro il territorio di Gaza che uccise 6 guerriglieri di Hamas, azione che i palestinesi interpretarono come un'aperta violazione della tregua[6]. A met dicembre, Hamas, per voce del primo ministro del suo Governo a Gaza, ha dichiarato "Non ci sar nessun rinnovo della tregua senza un alleggerimento dell'assedio". A fronte di una crisi umanitaria interna sempre pi grave, e nella speranza di poter trattare con Israele da posizioni di forza, Hamas ha ripreso le ostilit il 19 dicembre con lanci di razzi dalla Striscia, riportando all'attenzione internazionale la situazione della regione.

Dichiarando di voler ripristinare la sicurezza di zone dello Stato di Israele, minacciate dai lanci di razzi di Hamas, il 27 dicembre 2008 i vertici politici israeliani hanno lanciato l'operazione Piombo fuso contro la Striscia, con bombardamenti aerei mirati a colpire le postazioni di lancio dei razzi artigianali Qassam. Secondo fonti israeliane e filo-israeliane i militanti di Hamas, posizionavano tali rampe in prossimit di scuole, abitazioni civili (nonostante l'opposizione dei proprietari delle abitazioni stesse), ospedali[7], sedi televisive [8].

Nonostante la dichiarata intenzione di colpire postazioni di lancio, sedi governative ed altri obiettivi militari, il numero di vittime fra i civili palestinesi stato alto, anche per via dell'assenza di adeguati rifugi per la popolazione della striscia e per l'elevata densit di popolazione della stessa. Secondo le stime del ministero della salute palestinese, riprese dall'ONU[9], gli attacchi avrebbero causato la morte di 1.380 palestinesi (la maggior parte dei quali civili, di cui circa 400 minori di 14 anni) e il ferimento di 5.380. L'IDF ha dichiarato che sarebbero morte negli attacchi circa 1.100/1.200 persone, ritenendo per che i due terzi di queste fossero miliziani di Hamas[10]. Durante i primi giorni successivi al cessate il fuoco, un medico rimasto anonimo avrebbe confidato al giornalista Lorenzo Cremonesi del Corriere della Sera che le cifre fornite dal governo palestinese avrebbero potuto essere gonfiate con scopo propagandistico e che quindi le vittime sarebbero potute scendere fino a circa 500-600 persone, mentre gli ospedali sarebbero stati in parte inutilizzati[7], ma la notizia di questa stima, giunta in Palestina, stata smentita sia da fonte palestinese che israeliana[10] n pi stata citata dal Corriere della Sera.

La notte del 3 gennaio 2009 iniziata l'invasione di terra da parte dell'esercito israeliano; la notte del 12 gennaio 2009, invece, per la prima volta nella storia della Striscia, le truppe israeliane penetrano nella citt di Gaza, invadendo la periferia. L'avanzata avviene poche ore dopo che il primo ministro Ehud Olmert aveva messo in guardia i militanti di Hamas contro il "pugno di ferro" che si sarebbe abbattuto su di loro se avessero rifiutato di porre fine alle ostilit. L'inasprirsi del conflitto ha, di fatto, congelato, il difficilissimo processo di pace nella regione. Subito dopo l'inizio dell'operazione "piombo fuso", la diplomazia internazionale si messa in moto per cercare di rilanciare il dialogo tra le due parti. L'Unione europea, il 15 gennaio 2009, ha approvato una risoluzione in cui viene chiesto il ritiro delle truppe israeliane e l'apertura dei valichi di frontiera per permettere il passaggio degli aiuti umanitari [11].

Ai sensi del diritto internazionale, vi sono alcune leggi di guerra che disciplinano l'occupazione militare, comprese le convenzioni dell'Aja del 1899 e 1907 e la quarta Convenzione di Ginevra.[12] Israele afferma che Gaza non pi territorio occupato, nella misura in cui Israele non esercita un controllo effettivo o ha l'autorit su qualche propriet o istituzione nella Striscia di Gaza.[13][14] Il Ministro degli Esteri di Israele Tzipi Livni ha dichiarato nel mese di gennaio 2008: "Israele se n' andato da Gaza. Ha smantellato i suoi insediamenti. Non sono stati lasciati soldati israeliani l, dopo il disimpegno".[15]

Tuttavia, questa visione contestata poich Gaza non appartiene a nessuno Stato sovrano e poich Israele mantiene il controllo delle frontiere terrestri, ad eccezioni di quelle con l'Egitto, di quelle marine e dello spazio aereo. Subito dopo il ritiro nel 2005 di Israele, il presidente dell'Autorit Nazionale Palestinese Mahmud Abbas ha dichiarato, "lo status giuridico delle aree previsto per l'evacuazione non cambiato".[13] Poco dopo, l'avvocato palestinese-americano Gregory Khalil, ha dichiarato: "Israele ancora controlla ogni persona, ogni bene, letteralmente ogni goccia d'acqua che entra o esce dalla Striscia di Gaza. pur vero che le sue truppe non ci sono pi... ma non vi ancora la possibilit da parte dell'Autorit palestinese di esercitare il controllo".[16] Anche Human Rights Watch ha contestato che l'occupazione sia effettivamente finita.[17][18] L'Ufficio delle Nazioni Unite per il Coordinamento degli Affari Umanitari mantiene un ufficio su "Territorio palestinese occupato", che comprende la stessa Striscia di Gaza.[19]

La produzione economica nella Striscia di Gaza diminuita di circa un terzo tra il 1992 e il 1996. Questa flessione stata variamente attribuita alla corruzione e la cattiva gestione da parte di Yasser Arafat, e alle politiche di chiusura di Israele. Un grave effetto negativo sociale di questo rallentamento stato l'emergere di un alto tasso di disoccupazione. Il numero di residenti di Gaza che vive sotto la soglia di povert ($ 2 pro capite al giorno) costituisce l'85% della popolazione in seguito all'Operazione Piombo Fuso lanciata nel dicembre 2008 dal governo israeliano.[20]

I coloni israeliani di Gush Katif avevano costruito serre e sperimentato nuove forme di agricoltura. Queste serre inoltre fornivano occupazione a molte centinaia di palestinesi di Gaza. Quando Israele si ritirato dalla Striscia di Gaza nell'estate del 2005, le serre sono state acquistate con i fondi raccolti da ex Presidente della Banca mondiale, James Wolfensohn, e date al popolo palestinese per iniziare la loro economia. Tuttavia, lo sforzo di miglioramento stato limitato a causa dello scarso approvvigionamento di acqua, dell'incapacit di esportare prodotti a causa di restrizioni israeliane di confine, e della corruzione dilagante all'interno dell'Autorit palestinese. La maggior parte delle serre sono state saccheggiate o distrutte.[21][22]

I principali partner commerciali della Striscia di Gaza sono Israele, Egitto, e la Cisgiordania. Prima della seconda rivolta palestinese scoppiata nel settembre 2000, circa 25.000 lavoratori dalla Striscia di Gaza, ogni giorno si recavano in Israele per lavoro.[23]

Israele, Stati Uniti, Canada, e l'Unione europea hanno congelato tutti i fondi al governo palestinese dopo la formazione di un governo controllato da Hamas, che ha vinto le elezioni legislative palestinesi del 2006. Infatti Hamas considerata dalle maggiori democrazie occidentali un'organizzazione terroristica.

I palestinesi e gli organismi internazionali stanno cercando di valutare il danno economico subito dalla Striscia di Gaza dall'inizio dell'offensiva israeliana Piombo fuso (dicembre 2008). Rafiq al-Husayni, consulente del Presidente palestinese Mahmud Abbas, ha stimato che il danno ammonta a $ 2 miliardi di euro. Circa 26.000 palestinesi non possono pi vivere nelle proprie case e sono appoggiati in 31 grandi rifugi delle Nazioni Unite. Funzionari egiziani sono preoccupati per l'effetto del conflitto a Gaza sull'industria del turismo. Un calo nella prenotazione di hotel egiziani stato risentito durante la vacanze di Natale 2008 e Capodanno 2008-2009.[24]

I residenti della Striscia di Gaza, a seguito della massiccia operazione di Israele lanciata nel dicembre 2008 sono stati costretti ad affrontare il peggioramento della situazione economica. Il rifornimento dei prodotti di base diminuito in maniera significativa da quando le Forze di Difesa di Israele hanno bombardato decine di gallerie di contrabbando. I residenti nella Striscia hanno riferito che un sacco di farina stato venduto per pi di 200 NIS (circa $ 53), rispetto a 100 NIS ($ 26,5) da quando Israele ha iniziato l'Operazione. I prezzi del carburante hanno visto un aumento significativo da quando l'operazione militare iniziata.[25]

A seguito dell'offensiva israeliana a Gaza nel dicembre 2008, una nuova iniziativa mira ad utilizzare l'offerta pubblica nella Striscia di Gaza al fine di aumentare i fondi necessari per la sua ricostruzione. Diverse organizzazioni arabe e islamiche si sono impegnate per la ricostruzione della Striscia di Gaza, trascurando la conferenza dei donatori svoltasi a Sharm el-Sheikh, in Egitto, nel mese di febbraio. stato dichiarato dal promotore dell'iniziativa che l'investimento dei fondi raccolti dalla IPO (offerta pubblica) sar effettuato solo dopo che il governo a Gaza - vale a dire quello di Hamas verr consultato.[26]

Dalla fine dell'Operazione Piombo Fuso e la distruzione di molte gallerie di contrabbando a Rafah, molti dei piccoli investitori nella Striscia sono caduti vittima di un investimento sbagliato, nel migliore dei casi, e di una grande truffa nel peggiore dei casi. L'industria dei tunnel ha prosperato da quando Hamas ha assunto controllo della Striscia di Gaza nell'estate del 2007, come mezzo per raccogliere fondi da parte del pubblico in cambio di un buon profitto.[27]

Il governo di Hamas a Gaza si impegnato nel febbraio 2009 nella campagna di raccolta di fondi volti a raccogliere $ 25 milioni necessari per ripristinare decine di moschee rovinate dai raid israeliani. I danni alle moschee ammontano a circa $ 25 milioni di euro. 45 moschee sono state completamente distrutte durante la guerra, mentre 55 sono state parzialmente danneggiate.[28]

Nel gennaio 2009, a termine dell'offensiva israeliana a Gaza, circa 50 stazioni televisive in tutto il mondo arabo hanno unito le forze per una speciale trasmissione dedicata alla Striscia di Gaza, con l'obiettivo di raccogliere fondi. Il primo giorno della campagna sono stati raccolti circa mezzo miliardo di dollari da parte dei cittadini del mondo arabo, e dagli arabi e musulmani che vivono all'estero. Il denaro stato depositato in conti bancari, aperti appositamente per questo scopo. [29]

Vari elementi nel mondo arabo musulmano hanno utilizzato le reti sociali, i messaggi di testo e volantini per chiedere di boicottare i prodotti americani, come le societ McDonald's e Starbucks per protestare contro l'offensiva israeliana a Gaza lanciata nel dicembre 2008. Una vasta campagna stata lanciata sul social network Facebook per propagare il boicottaggio delle imprese americane che sostengono l'operazione militare israeliana nella Striscia di Gaza. Gli organizzatori della campagna sostenevano che se i musulmani di tutto il mondo avessero boicottato i prodotti americani, l'economia statunitense avrebbe perso $ 8,6 miliardi al mese. La campagna di boicottaggio non sembra aver riscontrato un grande successo.[30]

Gli abitanti di Rafah si sono preoccupati fin dall'inizio dell'operazione Piombo Fuso per il rallentamento economico che potrebbe derivare dai danni causati ai tunnel usati per il contrabbando di armi con l'Egitto. Le gallerie sono state infatti una fonte di prosperit per la citt di Gaza negli ultimi due anni, e ora c' grande preoccupazione che le future disposizioni in materia di sicurezza limitino il loro uso. stato affermato che il reddito creato grazie al contrabbando attraverso i tunnel era di circa $ 30 milioni l'anno fino al 2006 e ha raggiunto $ 650 milioni il primo anno in cui Hamas salito al potere.[31]

Aprile 2009: Una parte della merce acquistata dai mercanti di Gaza viene trattenuta in magazzini controllati da Israele. Il numero dei beni trattenuti dallo stato ebraico ha recentemente raggiunto i 1.757 contenitori per un valore di circa $ 100 milioni.[32] Oltre Israele, anche l'Egitto in parte responsabile ad aggravare la situazione economica dei palestinesi. Le autorit egiziane organizzano a Rafah vendite all'asta di beni sequestrati sul territorio egiziano nella parte palestinese della frontiera. Spesso i commercianti egiziani sono la fonte del contrabbando di merci, e a rimettere sono i mercanti palestinesi che pagano per merci che non riceveranno mai.[33] Il 1 giugno 2010, il presidente egiziano Hosni Mubarak, in risposta diretta agli eventi per quanto riguarda l'incidente della Freedom Flotilla di Gaza, ha aperto il Valico di Rafah a tempo indeterminato. Come risultato, i camion di aiuti sono entrati a Gaza per tutta la mattinata seguente, inoltre sono stati fatti entrare generatori di energia trasportati dalla Mezzaluna Rossa egiziana, e centinaia di abitanti di Gaza che si trovavano in Egitto[34].

Il 99,3% della popolazione musulmano; lo 0,7% invece cristiano.[35]

Read the original:
Striscia di Gaza - Wikipedia

historical revisionism – The Holocaust History Project

Posted By on August 16, 2015

an essay by Gord McFee

Introduction

This essay describes, from a methodological perspective, some of the inherent flaws in the "revisionist" 1 approach to the history of the Holocaust. It is not intended as a polemic, nor does it attempt to ascribe motives. Rather, it seeks to explain the fundamental error in the "revisionist" approach, as well as why that approach of necessity leaves no other choice.

It concludes that "revisionism" is a misnomer because the facts do not accord with the position it puts forward and, more importantly, its methodology reverses the appropriate approach to historical investigation.

What Is the Historical Method?

History is the recorded narrative of past events, especially those concerning a particular period, nation, individual, etc. It recounts events with careful attention to their importance, their mutual relations, their causes and consequences, selecting and grouping events on the ground of their interest or importance. 2 It can be seen from this that history acknowledges the existence of events and facts and seeks to understand how they came about, what they resulted in, how they are interconnected and what they mean.

The distinctions need to be made among facts, analysis and interpretation. Facts are demonstrably empirical events whose occurrence can be proven using evidentiary methods. Analysis is the method of determining or describing the nature of a thing by resolving it into its parts. Interpretation is the attempt to give the meaning of something. It follows that facts lead to analysis which leads to interpretation. And it follows that each step in the process is more subjective than the preceding step.

In this context, history is inductive in its methodology, in that it accumulates the facts, tries to determine their nature and their connectivities and then attempts to weave them into an understandable and meaningful mosaic.

What is Legitimate Historical Revisionism?

On its basic level, revisionism is nothing more than than the advocacy of revision, which in itself is the act of revising, or modifying something that already exists. Applied to history, it means that historians challenge the accepted version of the causes or consequences of historical events. As such, it is an accepted and important part of historical endeavour for it serves the dual purpose of constantly re-examining the past while also improving our understanding of it. Indeed, if one accepts that history attempts to help us better understand today by better understanding how we got here, revisionism is essential.

Three examples of legitimate historical revisionism should suffice to illustrate this:

What Do "Revisionists" Do?

"Revisionists" depart from the conclusion that the Holocaust did not occur and work backwards through the facts to adapt them to that preordained conclusion. Put another way, they reverse the proper methodology described above, thus turning the proper historical method of investigation and analysis on its head. That is not to say that historians never depart from a preconceived or desired result; they often do. But in adhering rigorously to the correct methodology, they accept that the result of their investigation may not be what they envisaged at the beginning. They are prepared to adapt their theories to that reality. Indeed, they are often required to revise their conclusions based on the facts. To put it tritely, "revisionists" revise the facts based on their conclusion.

Since "revisionists" depart from the conclusion that the Holocaust did not happen, i.e., they deny its existence, they are often called "deniers". Rather than analyze historical events, facts, their causes and consequences, and their interactions with other events, they defend a conclusion, whether or not the facts support it.

Why they do this is not the subject of this piece, but a few examples of the distortions, evasions and denials that it forces on them will illustrate how intellectually dishonest it is. And it should be remembered that they are forced on them, since "revisionists" are denying a historical occurrence, then distorting the facts into accord with that denial.

The Conspiracy Theory

Since the facts are not in accord with the "revisionist" conclusion, they must find an all-encompassing way to dismiss them. This is not a simple task, since the facts converge in the result that the Nazis had a plan to exterminate European Jewry, succeeded in large part in accomplishing it, and left behind multitudinous evidence of the attempt. 6

Hence, "revisionists" must argue that there is a conspiracy to fabricate all that evidence - a conspiracy that must have begun its work before the end of the war - and one that continues to this day. "Organized Jewry" or several variants on "Zionists" are at the root of this conspiracy. The conspiracy theory manifests itself in the following contrived positions:

Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Omnibus

Since, as this list shows, the amount of empirical evidence for the Holocaust is so overwhelming, the "revisionists" must throw in another dismissal trick. This has been called the "falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus" condition (one thing mistaken equals all things mistaken). It means, for example, that if any single piece of survivor evidence can be shown to be wrong, all survivor evidence is wrong and is to be dismissed. If any Nazi official lied about an aspect of the Holocaust (on-topic or not), all Nazi officials lied, and anything Nazis said after the war is dismissed. If any Nazi can be shown to have been tortured or mistreated, they all were and anything they said is invalid.

Conclusion

"Revisionism" is obliged to deviate from the standard methodology of historical pursuit because it seeks to mold facts to fit a preconceived result, it denies events that have been objectively and empirically proved to have occurred, and because it works backward from the conclusion to the facts, thus necessitating the distortion and manipulation of those facts where they differ from the preordained conclusion (which they almost always do). In short, "revisionism" denies something that demonstrably happened, through methodological dishonesty.

Its ethical dishonesty and antisemitic motivation are topics for another day.

Notes

Suggested further reading: Pierre Vidal-Naquet's A Paper Eichmann: Anatomy of a Lie, in particular part 4, On the Revisionist Method.

Gordon McFee received his Master's degree in 1973, from the University of New Brunswick, Canada, and Albert Ludwigs Universitt, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany (split studies), in history and German.

Original post:
historical revisionism - The Holocaust History Project

Jared Taylor on the Jewish Question – Tribal Theocrat

Posted By on August 15, 2015

M

any white advocates are grateful for the work of Jared Taylor. Hes at the forefront of racial realism as a researcher, writer, conference speaker, and leader. His American Renaissance magazine and website enjoy widespread respect among white advocates. But as white advocacy work is at some level invariably involved with the Jewish Question, many in the movement wonder why Taylor is not. What are this forerunners views about the racial group that is at the forefront in stifling white advocacy?

Thankfully, Joe Adams of The White Voice asked him point blank:

Why is it that you dont focus on the Jews, who have history been parasites upon many nations and continents which theyve put themselves in. They also control mass media and are responsible for pulling the strings behind many different forms of government. Why is it that you do not confront the Jewish problem?

Go to 22:15 in this podcast to hear it yourself, but below is Taylors response followed by our commentary.

As far as the Jewish Question is concerned, I think that whites need to take responsibility for what they do themselves. I think that its not useful to blame our failure on the machinations of others. People who are constantly talking about and complaining about Jewish influence remind me of blacks who think everything thats ever gone wrong for blacks in the past or ever will go wrong for blacks in the future is because of white racism. I think that blacks need to be responsible for their successes and their own failure, and I think that the whites have to as well. At the same time, I think that although many Jews are on the wrong side of questions of nationality and questions of race, I think that some Jews are on the right side. And I think that it would be wrong simply to exclude them from the efforts of any kind of racial sanity in this country simply because theyre Jews.

Adams had a response:

At the same time you dont, Mr Tayloryou dont have to look very far to realize that 90 percent of these [media] outlets are controlled by Jews. How often would you see black against white being portrayed as hate crime in the media? But as soon as a white person does something against a black person, its this big national story. Its the way the media pushes things and because they are 90 percent controlled by people within the Jewish either race or religionHow about the Israeli interest that this government has? A politician in this country cannot get elected if he is not pro-Israel There are a lot of pulling of the strings behind the scenesI think once we overcome Jewish influence, a lot of white people will have their minds straightened out.

Again, Taylor:

I think that it would be a mistake to say that the media of the United States are controlled 90 percent by Jews. The implication there, of course, is that there is a Jewish interest that is constantly being expressed by 90 percent the media. I think that these days if you were to poll Episcopalians, for example, on questions that have to do with race and nationality, you wouldnt find much difference in their views on these things from those of Jews. And again, I think that the essential question is: What is it that white people must do? I think that if white people had a sensible view of their own history and their own future, it wouldnt make any difference what a small minority, whether Jewish or Episcopalian or anyone else, is doing. I think that if you had the kind of message that has been broadcast in the United States in terms of anti-racism or anti-Nationalism in any other groupsay you tried that on the Japanese or you tried that on the Nigeriansthey would just laugh at you. I think white people are particularly susceptible to appeals to a kind of altruism. I think that our very virtues are easily turned against it. But I think that it is to our own selves that we have to look for solutions, rather than blame them on the machinations of others.

I think that something that tends to happen to people who have the interests of whites at heart, they start fixating on the activities of Jews in a way that, I think, they begin to miss the point almost. That it seems that trying to counter Jews or trying to thwart their interests becomes more important than advancing our own interests. I think that at the same time some people become so obsessed with Jews that they refuse to see anything good that any Jewish group or any Jewish individual is doing for our race. That, too, is a mistake. At this point, we need allies of all kinds, and I think to the extent that we can find allies among Jews or any other group, its very foolish to try to fend them off simply because of what their religion or what their ethnic background may be.

It is true that societies die from suicide rather than murder, and that whites need to take responsibility for their actions. Whites have indeed gotten themselves in the mess theyre in, but according the general Jewish Question thesis, one key way in that whites got in this mess was by letting Jews in their societies to manipulate and pervert them. And a key means of this control and perversion is their promotion of the multiculturalism and miscegenation that Taylor and we all despise. Of course, there is copious historic and present data available that corroborates this general thesis: the primary group responsible for corrupting and controlling mainline media, humanities and social sciences in the universities, and economic and social legislation in European nations, is a Jewish group. They themselves admit it. Does Taylor outright denounce this claim as false? Not quite. But if whites are to take responsibility for their failures as Taylor wishes, then they must analyze and understand every aspect of their failures, and the JQ is directly on the radar.

Taylors comparison of whites who complain about Jewish influence to blacks who blame whites for their failures is desperately inadequate. During the limited time of American slavery, whites goverened blacks by rule of law (righteous law in my view). Jews, however, rule whites by deception, usury, censorship, blackmail, espionage, warfare, racial mixing, propaganda, Zionism, etc. And most of said practices have a much longer history than the sum of American slavery and Jim Crow. The petulant bickers of blacks about white oppression are mostly imaginary while white complaints against Jews are as bona fideas the Federal Reserve Notes in your wallet, the US military that is presently spreading Israeli hegemony in the Middle East, or the Sallie Mae bill at home on your desk. The physicalcommand centers of Jewish supremacy are present in several European countries and in major cities here along our East Coast. Youll find no white dominion headquarters on black soil. The comparison is simply preposterous.

The bit about some Jews being on the right side of questions of race and nationality is disingenuous. Is Taylor so benighted that hes unaware of the Talmudic doctrine of inherent gentile inferiority? Is it news to him that Jews are the most noxiously xenophobic and scrounging group on the planet? Has he not spoken about these things with other white advocacy leaders over the years (e.g., David Duke, Kevin MacDonald, William Pierce, James Edwards)? Yes, there are exceptions, but as members of an infamous class it behooves Jews to own their perverse Talmudic teachings and their historically parasitic behavior in European nationsafter all, Taylor himself is calling for racial groups to take responsibility for their actions. These are not the problems of any other groups, be it Nigerians, Japanese, or Episcopalian. These are Jewishproblems. Perhaps Rabbi Schiller, who has written positive things at AmRen, will concede these things.

The question of whether Jews control 90 percent of the media must be decided by examination of who actually owns the media conglomerates, not necessarily by determining whether the medias message is explicitly pro-Jewish. The irony, however, is that no message could be more pro-Jewish than mass medias. What message is pumped from Hollywood, sitcoms, reality shows, documentaries, news broadcasts, etc? Nothing but multiculturalism, miscegenation, suppression of minority crime, feminism, sexual liberation, anti-children/family innuendo, outright mockery of Christianity and Europeans, Zionism, and the suggestion that Jews are successful, smart, and funny yet dreadfully persecuted. According to the JQ thesis, that is as pro-Jewish as it gets. Taylors implicit claim that the mainline media doesnt promote Jewish interest a priori dismisses the very thesis the JQ poses for his consideration!

Taylor is correct that we whites are susceptible to a kind of altruism that easily turns our virtues against us. And one way we do thismaybe the chief wayis by capitulating to the fear of being politically incorrect instead of bravely decrying and boldly challenging the evils perpetrated by protected classes. By doing so, by not calling out the Jew, we are validating the farce of racism and reinforcing the weaponry of our enemy. Did you know that Taylor has the honor of being recognized on the ADLs website as personally refraining from anti-Semitsm? Yet they and the SPLC still demonize him as a white supremacist who conducts pseudo-scholarship and pseudo-scientific studies, and as one who provides venues for anti-Semites to gather and collaborate. Why the need to thread that PC needle when Jews call you a bigot all the same?

Taylor presents our situation as if we may either fixate on trying to thwart Jewish interests, or we may more nobly focus on advancing our own. This is the fallacy of bifurcation, committed when one presents a distinction or classification as if its conclusive or exhaustive when other alternatives exist, or when one presents contraries as contradictories. The alternative is that we fixate on advancing own interests as well as on removing the obstacles in our path. Many of these obstacles are placed by Jews.

Before we finish the commentary, lets raise an interesting perspective on Taylors refusal to focus on the Jew. Many white advocates believe that Taylor is being strategic, that he really knows what we know but that hes using a long-term tactic. Maybe the strategy is to fly under the radar long enough to recruit greater forceswork that wouldnt be possible using the scorched earth approach of Alex Linder. Maybe its another. Personally, I dont buy it. Its an unethical tactic to deceive your own people about that which youre hiding. There are other (albeit difficult) ways to side step the JQ, but Taylor hasnt done that. He hasnt been neutral. He has instead made a positive case for turning away from such silly Jew business. Consider the rest of his response.

Taylor says its a mistake to ignore any good that Jewish groups or individuals may be doing for whites. Indeed it is. We appreciate Brother Nathaniel Kapner, Bobby Fischer,Norman Finklestein, Benjamin Freedman, etc. But since these white favors involve Jews blowing the whistle on their own tribesomething Taylor refuses to dohis point backfires. Our point is that its also a mistake to ignore the mass evil that Jewish groups and individuals are doing to whites.

Shockingly, Taylor ends his response by stating that we must have cross-racial allies and that its very foolish to try to fend off other people simply because of their religion or race. While this warrants a blog post of its own, allow four points to suffice.

First, speaking the truth about group behavior should not be equated with (irrationally) fending off a group because of race or religion. Jared Taylor of all people knows this. Its precisely for his work in exposing black crime, for example, that Jews call him a racist. Yet, here is the pot calling the kettle black. Second, as mentioned, we welcome the work of whistle blowing Jews; he doesnt. Third, weno doubt Taylor includedappreciate Pastor James Mannings efforts in taking on the Black Question by calling a spade a spade, as it were. How can we applaud Manning for taking responsibility for the failures of his race but not also applaud when Jews like Kapner do the same? Double standard. Fourth and last, there are times when we should (rationally) fend off folks for their religion or race. Those who embrace Judaism embrace an explicitly anti-Christ and anti-Goyim religion. Unless this is an inaccurate evaluation of Judaism, Taylor should explain why we should welcome their help. If a black Muslim of the anti-white variety wanted to join our cause, wouldnt we first require a denouncement of his religion? Taylors point about refusing help for religious reasons is surely overstated. Race, too, can be a helpful profiling attribute. Rather than rashly fending off a black or a Jew because his race has historically been hostile to ours, we must at least allow his race to inform our first approximations. If we decide to allow his help, it is because we made an exception, not because we were color blind at the outset.

In Taylors reasoning for refusing to focus on the JQ, weve seen a poor analogy, contradictions, double standards, a bifurcation, and a take-away message that The Jew is one of us. As a leader in the white advocacy movement, thats simply irresponsible. We can condense our response to Taylor thusly: We are not blaming our failures on the machinations of others by opposing and exposing those who are forcefully and systematically contributing to our failures.

On the basis of Taylors being an erudite man, his acquaintance with those who strongly oppose Jews, and the very nature of his work, we may reasonably conclude that he is indeed aware of the realities behind the JQeven if he once told Phil Donahue that Jews are fine by me. Thus, puzzled white advocates are left seeking an explanation for his deeply deficient response to Joe Adams, as well as for his known policy of banning the JQ as a discussion topic at his AmRen conferences and web forum. The fairest judgment I can personally give to Taylor is that perhaps his tactic is to raise awareness of and offer credence to the JQ by never explicitly denying it, choosing instead to gain modest media coverage so that a larger number of possible converts can connect those dots on their own. But many white advocates will not be convinced; they will think that Taylors troublesome position on the JQ, which whitewashes a substantial threat to our work, has the efficacy of placing a Trojan Horse in the camp.

Ours is a time for straight talk and lasting solutions, not polished dialogue and misdirection. The great white leaders of the past spelled out the enemys name as clearly as they laid out the path to victory. Today, white politics is not for sport; it is for survival.

comments

Go here to see the original:
Jared Taylor on the Jewish Question - Tribal Theocrat

Anne Frank United States Holocaust Memorial Museum

Posted By on August 15, 2015

Frank, Anne. Anne Frank: The Diary of a Young Girl. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1952. (D 810 .J4 F715 1952) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

First edition of the Diary to be published in English. Based on Annes original and self-edited diaries, which were further edited by Otto Frank for publication. Includes an introduction by Eleanor Roosevelt.

Frank, Anne. Anne Franks Tales from the Secret Annex. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983. (PT 5881.16 .R26 V413 1983) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

A collection of Anne Franks lesser-known writings, including short stories, fables, personal reminiscences, and essays.

Frank, Anne. The Diary of Anne Frank: The Revised Critical Edition. New York: Doubleday, 2003. (DS 135 .N5 A53413 2003) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Revised and expanded version of the Critical Edition, originally published in 1989. Collates all of Annes known writings, including different versions of her diary and her short stories. Also includes a summary of the document examination and handwriting identification analysis completed in 1986 by the Netherlands State Forensic Science Laboratory.

Frank, Anne. Diary of a Young Girl. West Hatfield, MA: Pennyroyal Press with Jewish Heritage Publishing, 1985. (Rare DS 135 .N5 F73 1985) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Along with the text of the diary, includes finely etched plates that reflect the events, places, and people living in the Secret Annex.

Frank, Anne. The Diary of a Young Girl: The Definitive Edition. New York: Doubleday, 1995. (DS 135 .N6 F73313 1995) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Based in large part on the edited version of the diary Anne created in 1944 in the hopes that it would be published after the War. Includes thirty percent more material than the shorter version of the diary Annes father originally published.

Frank, Anne. The Works of Anne Frank. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1959. (PT 5834 .F828 A1 1959a) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Includes the text of the diary, as well as Annes personal reminiscences, essays, and stories.

Metselaar, Menno. The Story of Anne Frank. Amsterdam: Anne Frank House, 2004. (DS 135 .N6 F3492513 2004) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Presents the diary of Anne Frank with descriptions throughout the text. Includes images of the diary, family photographs, and other illustrations.

Adler, David, and Karen Ritz. Picture Book of Anne Frank. New York: Holiday House, 1994. (DS 135 .N6 F7313 1993) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

An illustrated chronicle of the life of Anne Frank, who kept a diary during her familys attempts to hide from the Nazis in the 1940s. Written for children.

Amdur, Richard. Anne Frank. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1993. (DS 135 .N6 F7315 1993) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

A biography written for young adults and illustrated with photographs of Anne and her family, their helpers, and scenes from the Holocaust. Includes three appendices, a Further Reading section, a chronology, and an index. Part of the Chelsea House Library of Biography series.

Anne Frank Stichting. Anne Frank: A History for Today. Amsterdam: Anne Frank House, 1995. (DS 135 .N5 A535 1995) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Uses illustrations and text to chronicle Annes story, along with the history of the Holocaust. Interweaves this story with the experiences of Holocaust survivors and Frank family friends. Briefly comments on the state of post-war anti-Semitism and racism worldwide.

Ashby, Ruth. Anne Frank: Young Diarist. New York: Aladdin, 2005. (DS 135 .N6 F73157 2005) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Recounts the life story of Anne Frank. Includes lists of further readings. Part of the Childhood of World Figures series, this book is written for young readers.

Brown, Gene. Anne Frank, Child of the Holocaust. New York: Blackbirch Marketing, 1997. (DS 135 .N6 F732 1991) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

A brief biography with illustrations that sets Annes story in the larger context of the Holocaust. Includes a short glossary and bibliography. Written for young adults as part of the Library of Famous Women series.

Brown, Jonatha A. Anne Frank. Milwaukee, WI: World Almanac Library, 2004. (DS 135 .N6 F7323 2004) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Tells the story of Anne Frank and the Holocaust through pictures and narrations. Includes statistics, a chronology, a glossary, recommended readings, and an index. Part of the Trailblazers of the Modern World series, this book is written for young readers.

Frank, Otto. Anne Frank and Family: Photographs. Amsterdam: Anne Frank House, 2004. (DS 135 .N6 F733433 2004) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Compiles images of the Frank family taken by Otto Frank between 1926 and 1941. Includes captions, an introduction, and a list of family members and their fates.

Gies, Miep. Anne Frank Remembered: The Story of the Woman who Helped to Hide the Frank Family. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1987. (DS 135 .N5 A536 1987) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

One of the people who helped the Frank family while they were in hiding recalls life under Nazi occupation, including the day the Franks were discovered, her attempts to bribe the Gestapo to release the Franks, and the Hunger Winter in Holland. Includes photographs of the Frank family and their helpers.

Gold, Alison Leslie. Memories of Anne Frank: Reflections of a Childhood Friend. New York: Scholastic, 1997. (DS 135 .N6 P493 1997) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

An account of Anne Franks life before and after she went into hiding by Hannah Pick-Goslar, a close childhood friend. Includes photographs of Hannah and Anne. Written for young adults.

Hansen, Jennifer, editor. Anne Frank. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2003. (DS 135 .N6 F7316 2003) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Presents various essays which examine aspects of Annes life in hiding, her arrest, the diary, and her legacy. Includes discussion questions, appendices, a chronology, recommended readings, and an index. Part of the People Who Made History series, this book is written for young readers.

Hermann, Spring. Anne Frank: Hope in the Shadows of the Holocaust. Berkeley Heights, NJ: Enslow, 2004. (DS 135 .N6 F73344 2004) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Discusses the life of Anne Frank and the events of the Holocaust. Includes illustrations, a detailed chronology, chapter notes, a glossary, and an index. Part of the Holocaust Heroes and Nazi Criminals series, this book is written for young readers.

Hudson-Goff, Elizabeth, and Jonatha A. Brown. Anne Frank. Milwaukee, WI: World Almanac Library, 2006. (DS 135 .N6 F733449 2006) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Graphic novel recounting the life of Anne Frank through illustrations and a chronological story line. Includes a list of suggested readings and Web sites of interest. Part of the World Almanac Library series, this book is written for young readers.

Hurwitz, Johanna. Anne Frank: Life in Hiding. Philadelphia, PA: Jewish Publication Society, 1988. (DS 135 .N6 F7335 1988) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

A short biography of Anne written for young adults. Includes black-and-white drawings and a chronology of important dates.

Johnson, Emma. Anne Frank. Austin, TX: Raintree Steck-Vaughn, 2002. (DS 135 .N6 F7336 2002) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Details the life of Anne Frank, the history of the Holocaust, and the postwar publication of her diary. Includes illustrations, a glossary, timeline, recommendations for further reading, and an index. Part of the Twentieth-Century History Makers series, this book is written for young readers.

Kniesmeyer, Joke. Frank, Anne. In The Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, edited by Israel Gutman, 519-524. New York: Macmillan, 1990. (Ref D 810 .J4 E6 1990 v.2) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Briefly describes Anne Franks family life, their time in hiding, the diary, and the Anne Frank House in Amsterdam.

Koestler-Grack, Rachel A. The Story of Anne Frank. Philadelphia, PA: Chelsea Clubhouse, 2004. (DS 135 .N6 F73375 2004) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Details Annes life and the postwar publication of her diary. Includes illustrations, lists of facts and important dates, biographies of other important women of Anne Franks time, a glossary, suggested readings, and an index. Part of the Breakthrough Biographies series, this book is written for young readers.

Kramer, Ann. Anne Frank: The Young Writer who Told the World Her Story. Washington, DC: National Geographic, 2007. (DS 135 .N6 F73385 2007) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Illustrated introduction to the life and writings of Anne Frank. Written for young readers, ages 9-12.

Lee, Carol Ann. Roses from the Earth: The Biography of Anne Frank. London: Viking, 1999. (DS 135 .N6 F7334 1999) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

An authoritative, detailed biography depicting Annes life and death, as well as that of the other occupants of the Secret Annex. Foreword written by Buddy Elias, last living direct relative of Anne Frank and president of the Anne Frank-Fonds. Includes notes, a selected bibliography, and an index.

Lee, Carol Ann. A Friend Called Anne: One Girls Story of War, Peace, and a Unique Friendship with Anne Frank. New York: Viking, 2005. (DS 135 .N6 F73392 2005) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Retells the story of Jacqueline van Maarsen, Annes best friend before she went into hiding. Discusses the friendship, van Maarsens wartime experiences, and the fame of Annes diary. Includes several letters from Anne to Jackie. Written for young readers.

Lindwer, Willy. The Last Seven Months of Anne Frank. New York: Pantheon Books, 1991. (DS 135 .N6 F734413 1991) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

An account of what happened to Anne between her arrest in August 1944 until her death seven months later. Provides the eyewitness testimony of six Jewish female survivors who describe Annes ordeals as she was transported to Westerbork, Auschwitz, and finally, Bergen-Belsen. Based on the film of the same name.

Mller, Melissa. Anne Frank: The Biography. New York: Metropolitan Books, 1998. (DS 135 .N6 F7349713 1998) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

A detailed biography of Anne Frank that portrays both her life in hiding and her death. Draws upon exclusive interviews with family and friends, previously unavailable correspondence, and five additional, unpublished pages of the diary. Includes a diagram of Annes family tree. The Library also has an edition in German under the title, Das Mdchen Anne Frank: Die Biographie, and the story of Mllers research in the video, Anne Frank: The Missing Chapter.

Pressler, Mirjam. Anne Frank: A Hidden Life. New York: Dutton Childrens Books, 2000. (DS 135 .N6 F73513 2000) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Explores the background in which Anne Franks life and diary were set, and presents detailed descriptions of the other occupants of the Secret Annex. Written for young adults by the editor of the definitive edition of the diary.

Rol, Ruud van der. Anne Frank, Beyond the Diary: A Photographic Remembrance. New York: Viking, 1993. (DS 135 .N6 F7385 1993) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Uses extensive photographs and full-color illustrations to chronicle the life of the Frank family both before and during their time in hiding, and places their story in the context of the Holocaust. Includes a glossary, a chronology, and a bibliography, along with a brief essay regarding the different versions of the diary. Written for young adults. The Library also has an edition in French under the title, Anne Frank: Une Vie.

Saunders, Nicholas J. The Life of Anne Frank. Columbus, OH: School Specialty, 2006. (DS 135 .N6 F73558 2006) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Graphic novel recounting the life of Anne Frank through illustrations and a chronological story line. Includes a timeline, list of facts, a glossary, and an index. Part of the Stories from History series, this book is written for young readers.

Sawyer, Kem Knapp. Anne Frank. New York: DK Publishing Company, 2004. (DS 135 .N6 F73395 2004) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Intersperses the story of Anne Frank with photographs and illustrations to portray the history of the Holocaust. Includes a timeline of Annes life, source notes, and an index.

Schnabel, Ernst. Anne Frank: A Portrait in Courage. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1958. (D 810 .J4 S32 1958) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

A biography of Anne Franks life before she went into hiding, based on interviews with her schoolmates, friends, and acquaintances who survived the war. Interweaves excerpts from Annes diary with a narrative that presents a well-rounded picture of her life before the war. The Library also has an edition in German under the title, Anne Frank: Spur eines Kindes: Ein Bericht.

Shapiro, Edna, editor. The Reminiscences of Victor Kugler, the Mr. Kraler of Anne Franks Diary. Yad Vashem Studies 13 (1979): 353-385. (DS 135.E83 Y3 v. 13) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Presents the first-person account of Victor Kugler, a colleague of Otto Frank, who assisted the Frank family during their time in hiding. Includes a description of Mr. Kuglers attempts to help the Frank family as well as a detailed account of his arrest and imprisonment for helping Jews.

Van Maarsen, Jacqueline. My Friend Anne Frank. New York: Vantage Press, 1989. (DS 135 .N6 F7335513 1989) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Annes best friend in Amsterdam, known to Anne as Jopie, interweaves her own remembrances of Anne with selections from the diary.

Wiesenthal, Simon. Epilogue to Anne Franks Diary. In The Murderers Among Us: The Simon Wiesenthal Memoirs, 171-183. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967. (D 804 .G4 W47 1967) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Recounts the authors difficult attempt to locate Anne Franks arrestor, Karl Silberbauer, and describes what became of Silberbauer after his involvement in the Frank familys arrest became known.

Williams, Brian. The Life and World of Anne Frank. Oxford: Heinemann Library, 2004. (DS 135 .N6 F73873 2004) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Account of Anne Franks life and diary in relation to the history of World War II. Includes a glossary, index, and many photographs and illustrations.

Wilson, Cara. Dear Cara: Letters from Otto Frank. Sandwich, MA: North Star Publications, 2001. (DS 135 .S93 F738 2000) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Recounts Wilsons correspondence with Otto Frank during the 1960s and 1970s, and explains the relationship that formed between the two during this turbulent part of the authors life. Portions of this work were previously published in Wilsons earlier book Love, Otto.

Wilson, Cara. Love, Otto: The Legacy of Anne Frank. Kansas City, MO: Andrews and McMeel, 1995. (DS 135 .S93 F738 1995) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Reproductions of the twenty-two years of correspondence between Otto Frank and Cara Weiss (now Wilson), a devotee of Anne Frank since reading her diary at the age of twelve.

Woog, Adam. Anne Frank. San Diego: Lucent Books, 2004. (DS 135 .N6 F73875 2004) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Discusses Annes life before hiding, her period in the attic, her arrest and death, and the postwar efforts to publish her diary. Contains illustrations, endnotes, references, recommendations for further reading, and an index. Part of the Heroes and Villains series, this book is written for young readers.

Woronoff, Kristen. Anne Frank: Voice of Hope. Detroit, MI: Blackbirch Press, 2002. (DS 135 .N6 F7388 2002) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Briefly discusses Annes life and the publication of her diary. Includes illustrations, a glossary, references, and an index. Part of the Famous Women series, this book is written for young readers.

Zee, Nanda van der, and Fritz Pfeffer. De Kamergenoot van Anne Frank. Amsterdam: Lakeman Publishers, 1990. (DS 135 .N6 P4858 1990) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

A biography of Fritz Pfeffer, one of the occupants of the Secret Annex.

Rol, Ruud van der. Anne Frank: Une Vie. Amsterdam: Fondation Anne Frank, 1992. (Oversize DS 135 .N6 F738514 1992) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Uses extensive photographs and full-color illustrations to chronicle the life of the Frank family both before and during their time in hiding, and places their story in the context of the Holocaust. Includes a glossary, a chronology, and a bibliography, along with a brief essay regarding the different versions of the diary. Written for young adults. The Library also has an edition in English under the title, Anne Frank, Beyond the Diary: A Photographic Remembrance.

Alexander-Ihme, Esther, et al. Frher wohnten wir in Frankfurt--: Frankfurt am Main und Anne Frank. Frankfurt am Main: Amt fr Wissenschaft und Kunst der Stadt Frankfurt am Main, 1985. (D 810 .J4 F78 1985) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Describes Annes early years in Frankfurt before moving to Amsterdam. Focuses primarily on the lives of Otto and Edith Frank.

Hellwig, Joachim, and Gnther Deicke. Ein Tagebuch fr Anne Frank. Berlin: Verlag der Nation, [1959]. (D 810 .J4 H35 1959) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

A photographic essay that places the life of Anne Frank within the context of the events of the Holocaust and the Second World War.

Mller, Melissa. Das Mdchen Anne Frank: Die Biographie. Mnchen: Claasen, 1998. (DS 135 .N6 F73497 1998) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

A detailed biography of Anne Frank that portrays both her life in hiding and her death. Draws upon exclusive interviews with family and friends, previously unavailable correspondence, and five additional, unpublished pages of the diary. Includes a diagram of Annes family tree. The Library also has an edition in English under the title, Anne Frank: The Biography.

Schnabel, Ernst. Anne Frank: Spur eines Kindes: Ein Bericht. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1958. (D 810 .J4 S32 1958) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

A biography of Anne Franks life before she went into hiding, based on interviews with her schoolmates, friends, and acquaintances who survived the war. Interweaves excerpts from Annes diary with a narrative that presents a well-rounded picture of her life before the war. The Library also has an edition in English under the title, Anne Frank: A Portrait in Courage.

Steen, Jrgen, et al. Anne aus Frankfurt: Leben und Lebenswelt Anne Franks. Frankfurt am Main: Historisches Museum Frankfurt am Main, 1990. (DS 135 .G42 H52 FRA A56 1990) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

Describes life for the Franks in Frankfurt and Amsterdam, as well as conditions in both cities while the Franks were living there.

Anne Frank House: A Museum with a Story. s-Gravenhage: Sdu Uitgeverij Koninginnegracht, 1992. (D 804.175 .A47 A55213 1992) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

An historical look at the actual canal-side house where Anne Frank wrote her diary. Reviews the story of the Frank family and their time in hiding. Contains illustrations of the house and the surrounding area.

Anne Frank House: A Museum with a Story. Amsterdam: Anne Frank House, 1999. (Oversize DS 135 .N6 F7384 1999) [Find in a library near you (external link)]

An extensively illustrated work with images from the collection and exhibition of the Anne Frank House, quotations from the diary, and other photographs from the Holocaust period.

Read more:
Anne Frank United States Holocaust Memorial Museum

Anne Frank – My Jewish Learning

Posted By on August 15, 2015

The story of the young diarist. By Lawrence Graver

Reprinted with permission from The Yale Holocaust Encyclopedia (Yale University Press).

Anne Frank (1929-1945) was a German-Dutch Jewish girl whose diary of life in hiding from the Nazis in Amsterdam is the best-known personal document associated with the Holocaust and one of the most widely read books of modern times.

Born Anneliesse Marie in Frankfurt am Main on 12 June 1929, she was the second daughter of Otto Heinrich (1889-1980), a member of an assimilated, successful Frankfurt banking family that had suffered financial setbacks during the economic crises of the 1920s, and Edith Frank-Hollander (1890-1944), the daughter of a well-to-do manufacturer in Aachen.

After the Nazis came to power in March 1933 and began to persecute the Jews, Otto Frank tried to protect his family and livelihood by moving to Amsterdam (a city he knew well), where he established an independent branch of Opekta Work, a firm that made pectin, a powdered fruit extract in jams and jellies. His wife and children joined him in the winter of 1933-34 and the Franks moved to an apartment on Merwedeplein, a quiet neighborhood in the south of the city.

In the late 1930s, Anne and her sister Margot lived the conventional lives of upper middle-class Dutch children, attending a local Montessori school and socializing with a wide circle of friends; but after the Germans invaded Holland in May 1940 and began to restrict the economic and social activities of Jews, the girls were compelled to attend a segregated school (the Jewish Lyceum), and their father transferred overt control of Opekta and a subsidiary firm to Gentile co-workers.

He also began to make preparations to go into hiding in a sealed-off set of rooms behind his office and warehouse at 263 Prinsengracht.

In May 1942, Jews in Holland were ordered to wear yellow stars for instant identifications; and on 29 June plans were announced to deport all Jews to labor camps in Germany. On 6 July, the morning after Margot received a call-up notice, the Frank family and three friends (Hermann, Auguste, and Peter van Pels), fearing deportation and worse, moved into what became known as the secret annex, or Het Achterhuis (the house behind). An acquaintance, the dentist Fritz Pfeffer, subsequently joined them there.

Did you like this article? MyJewishLearning is a not-for-profit organization.

Please consider making a donation today.

Lawrence Graver is Professor Emeritus at Williams College, and author of An Obsession with Anne Frank, and other books.

Reprinted with permission from The Yale Holocaust Encyclopedia (Yale University Press).

Anne Frank (1929-1945) was a German-Dutch Jewish girl whose diary of life in hiding from the Nazis in Amsterdam is the best-known personal document associated with the Holocaust and one of the most widely read books of modern times.

Born Anneliesse Marie in Frankfurt am Main on 12 June 1929, she was the second daughter of Otto Heinrich (1889-1980), a member of an assimilated, successful Frankfurt banking family that had suffered financial setbacks during the economic crises of the 1920s, and Edith Frank-Hollander (1890-1944), the daughter of a well-to-do manufacturer in Aachen.

After the Nazis came to power in March 1933 and began to persecute the Jews, Otto Frank tried to protect his family and livelihood by moving to Amsterdam (a city he knew well), where he established an independent branch of Opekta Work, a firm that made pectin, a powdered fruit extract in jams and jellies. His wife and children joined him in the winter of 1933-34 and the Franks moved to an apartment on Merwedeplein, a quiet neighborhood in the south of the city.

In the late 1930s, Anne and her sister Margot lived the conventional lives of upper middle-class Dutch children, attending a local Montessori school and socializing with a wide circle of friends; but after the Germans invaded Holland in May 1940 and began to restrict the economic and social activities of Jews, the girls were compelled to attend a segregated school (the Jewish Lyceum), and their father transferred overt control of Opekta and a subsidiary firm to Gentile co-workers.

He also began to make preparations to go into hiding in a sealed-off set of rooms behind his office and warehouse at 263 Prinsengracht.

In May 1942, Jews in Holland were ordered to wear yellow stars for instant identifications; and on 29 June plans were announced to deport all Jews to labor camps in Germany. On 6 July, the morning after Margot received a call-up notice, the Frank family and three friends (Hermann, Auguste, and Peter van Pels), fearing deportation and worse, moved into what became known as the secret annex, or Het Achterhuis (the house behind). An acquaintance, the dentist Fritz Pfeffer, subsequently joined them there.

Earlier, on June 12, Anne started keeping a diary in an album she received as a gift from her parents for her thirteenth birthday, writing on the front page: I hope I will be able to confide everything to you, as I have never been able to confide in anyone, and I hope that you will be a great source of comfort and support. The you was not on the diary itself but an imaginary friend, Kitty, to whom she described the daily lives of the incarcerated Jews and her own reactions to growing up in hiding.

During the early months of confinement, Anne wrote vividly about domestic routines and tensions (notably quarrels with her mother), teenage concerns, fear of discovery, longing for independence and freedom, and the stark accounts that reached her of the Nazi persecution of Jews in Amsterdam and elsewhere. As time passed, however, she also recorded with urgency, humor and beauty an expanding awareness of herself as a sexual, moral, political and philosophical being, and as a writer.

In March 1944, in her twenty-first month in hiding, she heard a broadcast from London in which the education minister of the Dutch government in exile urged his countrymen and women to keep accounts of what they endured under German occupation, and she decided to rewrite and edit her diary for publication after the war.

Recasting earlier passages, fictionalizing the names of the actual inhabitants, and sharpening her style, she produced an unfinished, but unfailingly interesting tale of fugitives in hiding, a bitter-sweet adolescent romance involving Peter, and a stirring psychological drama of a girl becoming a young woman. While sequestered, she also wrote a handful of short stories that were to appear in 1956 as Tales of the Secret Annex.

On 4 August 1944, German and Dutch security police (tipped off by an unidentified informer) raided the secret annex and arrested the eight Jews who had been sheltered there for twenty-five months. Annes original and revised diaries, scattered on the floors, were recovered that afternoon by Miep Gies and Bep Voskuijl, two of the Gentiles who had courageously kept the occupants alive (the others were Victor Kugler, Johannes Kleiman and Jan Gies).

The Franks, van Pels and Pfeffer were taken first to a local police station, then to the transit camp at Westerbork and finally in September to the extermination camp at Auschwitz Birkenau. Hermann van Pels and Edith Frank died there; Peter van Pels perished in Mauthausen, Fritz Pfeffer in Neuengamme, and Auguste van Pels most likely in or near Theresienstadt.

Anne and Margot were sent to Bergen-Belsen, where they died of typhus and starvation in March 1945, a few weeks before the liberation of the camps by the British and three months short of Annes sixteenth birthday. Otto Frank, the only one of the group to survive, had been freed when Auschwitz was liberated by the Russian army in late January 1945. (See Willy Lindwer, The Last Seven Months of Anne Frank, 1991.)

After Otto Frank returned to Amsterdam in June 1945 and eventually learned that his daughters were dead, Miep Gies gave him Annes diaries and exercise books. In the weeks that followed, he began copying out sections that might interest relatives and friends. Since parts of the diary existed in several versions, Frank served as editor as well as transcriber.

When others read his selections, they were convinced of the manuscripts unusual value both as a document of the war and an engrossing story of a lively young girls maturation, and they urged Frank to seek a publisher. At first he thought the diary would attract little attention from outside the immediate family, but he was persuaded to allow friends to make inquiries.

In early April 1946 (after several Dutch firms turned it down), the Amsterdam newspaper Het Parool printed on its first page an eloquent article by the historian Jan Romein, praising the diary as a strikingly graphic account of daily life in wartime and a revelation of the real hideousness of Fascism, which had destroyed the life of a talented, endearing young girl. Uitgeverji Contact published Het Achterhuis in an edition of 1,500 in June 1947, and it received uniformly positive reviews.

Publishers in other countries were at first skeptical that there would be a market for what some saw as the mundane jottings of a little Dutch girl and a bleak reminder of the recently ended war, but French and German translations appeared in 1950.

The turning point in the history of the diary was its remarkable reception in the United States in the summer of 1952. Thanks mainly to a brilliant review by the novelist Meyer Levin on the front page of The New York Times Book Review, Anne Frank: Diary of a Young Girl (after having been rejected a dozen times) was an immediate best-seller, providing an intensely personal experience for tens-of-thousands of readers.

Adapted for the theater by Frances Goodrich and Albert Hackett in 1955, The Diary of Anne Frank induced tears in large audiences, many of whom felt as if one of the unknown Jewish dead in Europe had risen from a mass grave and taken on a distinctive identity. Honored by the Pulitzer prize and the Tony and Drama Critics awards, the play was soon staged in many other countries.

A film version by George Stevens in 1959 further popularized the heart-rending, yet in these versions, reassuring story of the child, her fate, and her book. In America a broad public found it easier to relate to a romantic rendering of the victimization of a real/fictional child than to the almost unimaginable number six million. Dozens of translations followed and sales reached into the many millions.

See the original post here:
Anne Frank - My Jewish Learning

IsraeliPalestinian conflict – Wikipedia, the free …

Posted By on August 15, 2015

The IsraeliPalestinian conflict (Arabic: - al-Niza'a al'Filastini al 'Israili; Hebrew: - Ha'Sikhsukh Ha'Yisraeli-Falestini) is the ongoing struggle between Israelis and Palestinians that began in the mid-20th century.[5] The conflict is wide-ranging, and the term is sometimes also used in reference to the earlier sectarian conflict in Mandatory Palestine, between the Jewish yishuv and the Arab population under British rule. The IsraeliPalestinian conflict has formed the core part of the wider ArabIsraeli conflict. It has been referred to as the world's "most intractable conflict".[7][8][9]

Despite a long-term peace process and the general reconciliation of Israel with Egypt and Jordan, Israelis and Palestinians have failed to reach a final peace agreement. The remaining key issues are: mutual recognition, borders, security, water rights, control of Jerusalem, Israeli settlements,[10]Palestinian freedom of movement,[11] and resolving Palestinian claims of a right of return for their refugees. The violence of the conflict, in a region rich in sites of historic, cultural and religious interest worldwide, has been the object of numerous international conferences dealing with historic rights, security issues and human rights, and has been a factor hampering tourism in and general access to areas that are hotly contested.[12]

Many attempts have been made to broker a two-state solution, involving the creation of an independent Palestinian state alongside the State of Israel (after Israel's establishment in 1948). In 2007, the majority of both Israelis and Palestinians, according to a number of polls, preferred the two-state solution over any other solution as a means of resolving the conflict.[13] Moreover, a majority of Jews see the Palestinians' demand for an independent state as just, and thinks Israel can agree to the establishment of such a state.[14] The majority of Palestinians and Israelis in the West Bank and Gaza Strip have expressed a preference for a two-state solution.[15][16][unreliable source?] Mutual distrust and significant disagreements are deep over basic issues, as is the reciprocal scepticism about the other side's commitment to upholding obligations in an eventual agreement.[17]

Within Israeli and Palestinian society, the conflict generates a wide variety of views and opinions. This highlights the deep divisions which exist not only between Israelis and Palestinians, but also within each society. A hallmark of the conflict has been the level of violence witnessed for virtually its entire duration. Fighting has been conducted by regular armies, paramilitary groups, terror cells, and individuals. Casualties have not been restricted to the military, with a large number of fatalities in civilian population on both sides. There are prominent international actors involved in the conflict.

The two parties engaged in direct negotiation are the Israeli government, currently led by Benjamin Netanyahu, and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), currently headed by Mahmoud Abbas. The official negotiations are mediated by an international contingent known as the Quartet on the Middle East (the Quartet) represented by a special envoy, that consists of the United States, Russia, the European Union, and the United Nations. The Arab League is another important actor, which has proposed an alternative peace plan. Egypt, a founding member of the Arab League, has historically been a key participant.

Since 2006, the Palestinian side has been fractured by conflict between the two major factions: Fatah, the traditionally dominant party, and its later electoral challenger, Hamas. After Hamas's electoral victory in 2006, the Quartet (United States, Russia, United Nations, and European Union) conditioned future foreign assistance to the Palestinian Authority (PA) on the future government's commitment to non-violence, recognition of the State of Israel, and acceptance of previous agreements. Hamas rejected these demands,[18] which resulted in the Quartet's suspension of its foreign assistance program, and the imposition of economic sanctions by the Israelis. A year later, following Hamas's seizure of power in the Gaza Strip in June 2007, the territory officially recognized as the State of Palestine (former Palestinian National Authority the Palestinian interim governing body) was split between Fatah in the West Bank, and Hamas in the Gaza Strip. The division of governance between the parties had effectively resulted in the collapse of bipartisan governance of the Palestinian National Authority (PA). However, in 2014, a Palestinian Unity Government, composed of both Fatah and Hamas, was formed. The latest round of peace negotiations began in July 2013 and was suspended in 2014.

The IsraeliPalestinian conflict has its roots in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, with the birth of major nationalist movements among the Jews and among the Arabs, both geared towards attaining sovereignty for their people in the Middle East.[19] The collision between those two forces in southern Levant and the emergence of Palestinian nationalism in the 1920s eventually escalated into the IsraeliPalestinian conflict in 1947, and expanded into the wider Arab-Israeli conflict later on.[20]

With the outcome of the First World War, the relations between Zionism and the Arab national movement seemed to be potentially friendly, and the FaisalWeizmann Agreement created a framework for both aspirations to coexist on former Ottoman Empire's territories. However, with the defeat and dissolution of the Arab Kingdom of Syria in July 1920 following the Franco-Syrian War, a crisis fell upon the Damascus-based Arab national movement. The return of several hard-line Palestinian Arab nationalists, under the emerging leadership of Haj Amin al-Husseini, from Damascus to Mandatory Palestine marked the beginning of Palestinian Arab nationalist struggle towards establishment of a national home for Arabs of Palestine.[21] Amin al-Husseini, the architect of the Palestinian Arab national movement, immediately marked Jewish national movement and Jewish immigration to Palestine as the sole enemy to his cause,[22] initiating large-scale riots against the Jews as early as 1920 in Jerusalem and in 1921 in Jaffa. Among the results of the violence was the establishment of Jewish paramilitary force of Haganah. In 1929, a series of violent anti-Jewish riots was initiated by the Arab leadership. The riots resulted in massive Jewish casualties in Hebron and Safed, and the evacuation of Jews from Hebron and Gaza.[19]

In the early 1930s, the Arab national struggle in Palestine had drawn many Arab nationalist militants from across the Middle East, most notably Sheikh Izaddin al-Qassam from Syria, who established the Black Hand militant group and had prepared the grounds for the 1936 Arab revolt. Following, the death of al-Qassam at the hands of the British in late 1935, the tensions erupted in 1936 into the Arab general strike and general boycott. The strike soon deteriorated into violence and the bloody revolt against the British and the Jews.[20] In the first wave of organized violence, lasting until early 1937, much of the Arab gangs were defeated by the British and a forced expulsion of much of the Arab leadership was performed. The revolt led to the establishment of the Peel Commission towards partitioning of Palestine, though was subsequently rejected by the Palestinian Arabs. The two main Jewish leaders, Chaim Weizmann and David Ben-Gurion, accepted the recommendations but some secondary Jewish leaders did not like it.[23][24][25]

The renewed violence, which had sporadically lasted until the beginning of WWII, ended with around 5,000 casualties, mostly from the Arab side. With the eruption of World War II, the situation in Mandatory Palestine calmed down. It allowed a shift towards a more moderate stance among Palestinian Arabs, under the leadership of the Nashashibi clan and even the establishment of the JewishArab Palestine Regiment under British command, fighting Germans in North Africa. The more radical exiled faction of al-Husseini however tended to cooperation with Nazi Germany, and participated in the establishment of pro-Nazi propaganda machine throughout the Arab world. Defeat of Arab nationalists in Iraq and subsequent relocation of al-Husseini to Nazi-occupied Europe tied his hands regarding field operations in Palestine, though he regularly demanded the Italians and the Germans to bomb Tel Aviv. By the end of World War II, a crisis over the fate of the Holocaust survivors from Europe led to renewed tensions between the Yishuv and the Palestinian Arab leadership. Immigration quotas were established by the British, while on the other hand illegal immigration and Zionist insurgency against the British was increasing.[19]

On 29 November 1947, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted Resolution 181(II)[26] recommending the adoption and implementation of a plan to partition Palestine into an Arab state, a Jewish state and the City of Jerusalem.[27] On the next day, Palestine was already swept by violence, with Arab and Jewish militias executing attacks. For four months, under continuous Arab provocation and attack, the Yishuv was usually on the defensive while occasionally retaliating.[28] The Arab League supported the Arab struggle by forming the volunteer based Arab Liberation Army, supporting the Palestinian Arab Army of the Holy War, under the leadership of Abd al-Qadir al-Husayni and Hasan Salama. On the Jewish side, the civil war was managed by the major underground militias the Haganah, Irgun and Lehi, strengthened by numerous Jewish veterans of World War II and foreign volunteers. By spring 1948, it was already clear that the Arab forces were nearing a total collapse, while Yishuv forces gained more and more territory, creating a large scale refugee problem of Palestinian Arabs.[19] Popular support for the Palestinian Arabs throughout the Arab world led to sporadic violence against Jewish communities of Middle East and North Africa, creating an opposite refugee wave.

Following the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel on 14 May 1948, the Arab League decided to intervene on behalf of Palestinian Arabs, marching their forces into former British Palestine, beginning the main phase of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.[27] The overall fighting, leading to around 15,000 casualties, resulted in cease fire and armistice agreements of 1949, with Israel holding much of the former Mandate territory, Jordan occupying and later annexing the West Bank and Egypt taking over the Gaza Strip, where the All-Palestine Government was declared by the Arab League on 22 September 1948.[20]

Through the 1950s, Jordan and Egypt supported the Palestinian Fedayeen militants' cross-border attacks into Israel, while Israel carried out reprisal operations in the host countries. The 1956 Suez Crisis resulted in a short-term Israeli occupation of the Gaza Strip and exile of the All-Palestine Government, which was later restored with Israeli withdrawal. The All-Palestine Government was completely abandoned by Egypt in 1959 and was officially merged into the United Arab Republic, to the detriment of the Palestinian national movement. Gaza Strip then was put under the authority of Egyptian military administrator, making it a de facto military occupation. In 1964, however, a new organization, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), was established by Yasser Arafat.[27] It immediately won the support of most Arab League governments and was granted a seat in the Arab League.

The 1967 Six Day War exerted a significant effect upon Palestinian nationalism, as Israel gained authority of the West Bank from Jordan and the Gaza Strip from Egypt. Consequently, the PLO was unable to establish any control on the ground and established its headquarters in Jordan, home to hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, and supported the Jordanian army during the War of Attrition, most notably the Battle of Karameh. However, the Palestinian base in Jordan collapsed with the Jordanian-Palestinian civil war in 1970. The PLO defeat by the Jordanians caused most of the Palestinian militants to relocate to South Lebanon, where they soon took over large areas, creating the so-called "Fatahland".

Palestinian insurgency in South Lebanon peaked in the early 1970s, as Lebanon was used as a base to launch attacks on northern Israel and airplane hijacking campaigns worldwide, which drew Israeli retaliation. During the Lebanese Civil War, Palestinian militants continued to launch attacks against Israel while also battling opponents within Lebanon. In 1978, the Coastal Road massacre led to the Israeli full-scale invasion known as Operation Litani. Israeli forces, however, quickly withdrew from Lebanon, and the attacks against Israel resumed. In 1982, following an assassination attempt on one of its diplomats by Palestinians, the Israeli government decided to take sides in the Lebanese Civil War and the 1982 Lebanon War commenced. The initial results for Israel were successful. Most Palestinian militants were defeated within several weeks, Beirut was captured, and the PLO headquarters were evacuated to Tunisia in June by Yasser Arafat's decision.[20] However, Israeli intervention in the civil war also led to unforeseen results, including small-scale conflict between Israel and Syria. By 1985, Israel withdrew to a 10km occupied strip of South Lebanon, while the low-intensity conflict with Shia militants escalated.[19]Those Iranian-supported Shia groups gradually consolidated into Hizbullah and Amal, operated against Israel, and allied with the remnants of Palestinian organizations to launch attacks on Galilee through the late 1980s. By the 1990s, Palestinian organizations in Lebanon were largely inactive.[citation needed]

The first Palestinian uprising began in 1987 as a response to escalating attacks and the endless occupation. By the early 1990s, international efforts to settle the conflict had begun, in light of the success of the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty of 1982. Eventually, the Israeli-Palestinian peace process led to the Oslo Accords of 1993, allowing the PLO to relocate from Tunisia and take ground in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, establishing the Palestinian National Authority. The peace process also had significant opposition among radical Islamic elements of Palestinian society, such as Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, who immediately initiated a campaign of attacks targeting Israelis. Following hundreds of casualties and a wave of radical anti-government propaganda, Israeli Prime Minister Rabin was assassinated by an Israeli fanatic who objected to the policy of the government. This struck a serious blow to the peace process, from which the newly elected government of Israel in 1996 backed off.[19]

Following several years of unsuccessful negotiations, the conflict re-erupted as the Second Intifada on September 2000.[20] The violence, escalating into an open conflict between the Palestinian Authority security forces and the IDF, lasted until 2004/2005 and led to approximately 130 fatalities. Israeli Prime Minister Sharon decided to disengage from Gaza. In 2005, Israel removed every soldier and every Jewish settler from Gaza. Israel and its Supreme Court formally declared an end to occupation, saying it "had no effective control over what occurred" in Gaza.[29] In 2006, Hamas took power by winning a plurality of 44% in a Palestinian parliamentary election. Israel responded it would begin economic sanctions unless Hamas agreed to accept prior Israeli-Palestinian agreements, forswear violence, and recognize Israel's right to exist.[30] Hamas responded with rocket attacks[31][32][33] and an incursion onto Israeli territory using underground tunnels to kidnap Gilad Shalit. After internal Palestinian political struggle between Fatah and Hamas erupted into the Battle of Gaza (2007), Hamas took full control of the area.[34] in 2007, Israel imposed a naval blockade on the Gaza Strip, and cooperation with Egypt allowed a ground blockade of the Egyptian border

The tensions between Israel and Hamas, who won increasing financial and political support of Iran, escalated until late 2008, when Israel launched operation Cast Lead (the Gaza War). By February 2009, a cease-fire was signed with international mediation between the parties, though small and sporadic eruptions of violence continued.[35]

The question of whether Gaza remains occupied following Israel's withdrawal remains contentious. Israel insists that its full withdrawal from Gaza means it does not occupy Gaza. The UN has taken no position over whether Gaza remains occupied. Palestinian leaders insist that the Israeli decision, following attacks from Hamas, to impose a weapons blockade of Gaza, Israel's control of Gaza crossing points into Israel, and Israel's control of air above and sea around Gaza constitutes continued Israeli occupation.[29]

In 2011, a Palestinian Authority attempt to gain UN membership as a fully sovereign state failed. In Hamas-controlled Gaza, sporadic rocket attacks on Israel and Israeli air raids still take place.[36][37][38][39] In November 2012, the representation of Palestine in UN was upgraded to a non-member observer State, and mission title was changed from "Palestine (represented by PLO)" to State of Palestine.

In 1993, Israeli officials led by Yitzhak Rabin and Palestinian leaders from the Palestine Liberation Organization led by Yasser Arafat strove to find a peaceful solution through what became known as the Oslo peace process. A crucial milestone in this process was Arafat's letter of recognition of Israel's right to exist. In 1993, the Oslo Accords were finalized as a framework for future IsraeliPalestinian relations. The crux of the Oslo agreement was that Israel would gradually cede control of the Palestinian territories over to the Palestinians in exchange for peace. The Oslo process was delicate and progressed in fits and starts, the process took a turning point at the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin and finally unraveled when Arafat and Ehud Barak failed to reach agreement at Camp David in July 2000. Robert Malley, special assistant to US President Bill Clinton for ArabIsraeli Affairs, has confirmed that while Barak made no formal written offer to Arafat, the US did present concepts for peace which were considered by the Israeli side yet left unanswered by Arafat "the Palestinians' principal failing is that from the beginning of the Camp David summit onward they were unable either to say yes to the American ideas or to present a cogent and specific counterproposal of their own".[40] Consequently, there are different accounts of the proposals considered.[41][42][43]

In July 2000, US President Bill Clinton convened a peace summit between Palestinian President Yasser Arafat and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. Barak reportedly put forward the following as 'bases for negotiation', via the U.S. to the Palestinian President; a non militarized Palestinian state split into 3-4 parts containing 87-92%[note 1] of the West Bank including only parts of East Jerusalem, and the entire Gaza Strip,[44][45] The offer also included that 69 Jewish settlements (which comprise 85% of the West Bank's Jewish settlers) would be ceded to Israel, no right of return to Israel, no sovereignty over the Temple Mount or any core East Jerusalem neighbourhoods, and continued Israel control over the Jordan Valley.[46][47]

Arafat rejected this offer.[44][48][49][50][51][52] According to the Palestinian negotiators the offer did not remove many of the elements of the Israeli occupation regarding land, security, settlements, and Jerusalem.[53] President Clinton reportedly requested that Arafat make a counter-offer, but he proposed none. Former Israeli Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben Ami who kept a diary of the negotiations said in an interview in 2001, when asked whether the Palestinians made a counterproposal: "No. And that is the heart of the matter. Never, in the negotiations between us and the Palestinians, was there a Palestinian counterproposal."[54] In a separate interview in 2006 Ben Ami stated that were he a Palestinian he would have rejected the Camp David offer.[55]

No tenable solution was crafted which would satisfy both Israeli and Palestinian demands, even under intense US pressure. Clinton has long blamed Arafat for the collapse of the summit.[56] In the months following the summit, Clinton appointed former US Senator George J. Mitchell to lead a fact-finding committee that later published the Mitchell Report aimed at restoring the peace process.[citation needed]

Following the failed summit Palestinian and Israeli negotiators continued to meet in small groups through August and September 2000 to try to bridge the gaps between their respective positions. The United States prepared its own plan to resolve the outstanding issues. Clinton's presentation of the US proposals was delayed by the advent of the Second Intifada at the end of September.[53]

Clinton's plan, eventually presented on 23 December 2000, proposed the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state in the Gaza strip and 9496 percent of the West Bank plus the equivalent of 13 percent of the West Bank in land swaps from pre-1967 Israel. On Jerusalem the plan stated that, "the general principle is that Arab areas are Palestinian and that Jewish areas are Israeli." The holy sites were to be split on the basis that Palestinians would have sovereignty over the Temple Mount/Noble sanctuary, while the Israelis would have sovereignty over the Western Wall. On refugees the plan suggested a number of proposals including financial compensation, the right of return to the Palestinian state, and Israeli acknowledgement of suffering caused to the Palestinians in 1948. Security proposals referred to a "non-militarized" Palestinian state, and an international force for border security. Both sides accepted Clinton's plan[53][57][58] and it became the basis for the negotiations at the Taba Peace summit the following January.[53]

The Israeli negotiation team presented a new map at the Taba Summit in Taba, Egypt in January 2001. The proposition removed the "temporarily Israeli controlled" areas, and the Palestinian side accepted this as a basis for further negotiation. With Israeli elections looming the talks ended without an agreement but the two sides issued a joint statement attesting to the progress they had made: "The sides declare that they have never been closer to reaching an agreement and it is thus our shared belief that the remaining gaps could be bridged with the resumption of negotiations following the Israeli elections." The following month the Likud party candidate Ariel Sharon defeated Ehud Barak in the Israeli elections and was elected as Israeli prime minister on 7 February 2001. Sharons new government chose not to resume the high-level talks.[53]

One peace proposal, presented by the Quartet of the European Union, Russia, the United Nations and the United States on 17 September 2002, was the Road Map for Peace. This plan did not attempt to resolve difficult questions such as the fate of Jerusalem or Israeli settlements, but left that to be negotiated in later phases of the process. The proposal never made it beyond the first phase, which called for a halt to Israeli settlement construction and a halt to Israeli and Palestinian violence, none of which was achieved.[citation needed]

The Arab Peace Initiative (Arabic: Mubdirat as-Salm al-Arabyyah) was first proposed by Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia in the Beirut Summit. The peace initiative is a proposed solution to the ArabIsraeli conflict as a whole, and the IsraeliPalestinian conflict in particular.[citation needed]

The initiative was initially published on 28 March 2002, at the Beirut Summit, and agreed upon again in 2007 in the Riyadh Summit.

Unlike the Road Map for Peace, it spelled out "final-solution" borders based explicitly on the UN borders established before the 1967 Six-Day War. It offered full normalization of relations with Israel, in exchange for the withdrawal of its forces from all the occupied territories, including the Golan Heights, to recognize "an independent Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital" in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, as well as a "just solution" for the Palestinian refugees.[59]

A number of Israeli officials have responded to the initiative with both support and criticism. The Israeli government has expressed reservations on 'red line,' issues such as the Palestinian refugee problem, homeland security concerns, and the nature of Jerusalem.[60] However, the Arab League continues to raise it as a possible solution, and meetings between the Arab League and Israel have been held.[61]

The peace process has been predicated on a "two-state solution" thus far, but questions have been raised towards both sides' resolve to end the dispute.[62] An article by S. Daniel Abraham, an American entrepreneur and founder of the Center for Middle East Peace in Washington, US, published on the website of the Atlantic magazine in March 2013, cited the following statistics: "Right now, the total number of Jews and Arabs living ... in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza is just under 12 million people. At the moment, a shade under 50 percent of the population is Jewish."[63]

Israel has had its settlement growth and policies in the Palestinian territories harshly criticized by the European Union citing it as increasingly undermining the viability of the two-state solution and running in contrary to the Israeli-stated commitment to resume negotiations.[64][65] In December 2011, all the regional groupings on the UN Security Council named continued settlement construction and settler violence as disruptive to the resumption of talks, a call viewed by Russia as a "historic step".[66][67][68] In April 2012, international outrage followed Israeli steps to further entrench the Jewish settlements in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, which included the publishing of tenders for further settler homes and the plan to legalize settler outposts. Britain said that the move was a breach of Israeli commitments under the road map to freeze all settlement expansion in the land captured since 1967. The British Foreign Minister stated that the "Systematic, illegal Israeli settlement activity poses the most significant and live threat to the viability of the two state solution".[69] In May 2012 the 27 foreign ministers of the European Union issued a statement which condemned continued Israeli settler violence and incitement.[70] In a similar move, the Quartet "expressed its concern over ongoing settler violence and incitement in the West Bank," calling on Israel "to take effective measures, including bringing the perpetrators of such acts to justice."[71] The Palestinian Ma'an News agency reported the PA Cabinet's statement on the issue stated that the West, including East Jerusalem, were seeing "an escalation in incitement and settler violence against our people with a clear protection from the occupation military. The last of which was the thousands of settler march in East Jerusalem which included slogans inciting to kill, hate and supports violence".[72]

In a report published in February 2014 covering incidents over the three year period of 2011-2013, Amnesty International asserted that Israeli forces employed reckless violence in the West Bank, and in some instances appeared to engage in wilful killings which would be tantamount to war crimes. Besides the numerous fatalities, Amnesty said at least 261 Palestinians, including 67 children, had been gravely injured by Israeli use of live ammunition. In this same period, 45 Palestinians, including 6 children had been killed. Amnesty's review of 25 civilians deaths concluded that in no case was there evidence of the Palestinians posing an imminent threat. At the same time, over 8,000 Palestinians suffered serious injuries from other means, including rubber-coated metal bullets. Only one IDF soldier was convicted, killing a Palestinian attempting to enter Israel illegally. The soldier was demoted and given a 1 year sentence with a five month suspension. The IDF answered the charges stating that its army held itself "to the highest of professional standards," adding that when there was suspicion of wrongdoing, it investigated and took action "where appropriate".[73][74]

Following the Oslo Accords, which was to set up regulative bodies to rein in frictions, Palestinian incitement against Israel, Jews, and Zionism continued, parallel with Israel's pursuance of settlement in the Palestinian territories,[75] though under Abu Mazen it has reportedly dwindled significantly.[76] Charges of incitement have been reciprocal,[77][78] both sides interpreting media statements in the Palestinian and Israeli press as constituting incitement.[76] In Israeli usage, the term also covers failures to mention Israel's culture and history in Palestinian textbooks.[79] In 2011, Israeli PM Benyamin Netanyahu stated that the incitement promulgated by the Palestinian Authority was destroying Israels confidence, and he condemned what he regarded as the glorification of the murderers of the Fogel family in Itamar on PA television. The perpetrator of the murders had been described as a "hero" and a "legend" by members of his family, during a weekly program.[80][81] This occurred shortly after the official Palestinian Authority Mufti in Jerusalem publicly read out an Islamic hadith that says killing Jews will speed up the redemption,[82] which was criticised by the UK's Minister for the Middle East and North Africa as potentially stirring up "hatred and prejudice".[81][83]

Following the Itamar massacre and a bombing in Jerusalem, 27 US senators sent a letter requesting the US Secretary of State to identify the administration's steps to end Palestinian incitement to violence against Jews and Israel that was occurring within the "Palestinian media, mosques and schools, and even by individuals or institutions affiliated with the Palestinian Authority."[84] Media watchdog, Palestinian Media Watch (PMW), reported in June 2012 that the Palestinian media continually demonizes Israel and Jews and derogates Jewish history. They stated that the Palestinian children are being taught hatred and violence against Jews and Israelis and that only 7 percent of Palestinian teenagers accept Israel's right to exist. They stated that a political peace structure is contingent upon a proceeding educational peace process, which is lacking.[85] Children in a Gaza kindergarten were dressed up in uniforms of the armed wing of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad organisation. They received a toy rifles and chanted anti-Israeli slogans. A teacher stated that this was so the children will "grow up to love the resistance and serve the cause of Palestine and Holy Jihad, as well as to make them leaders and fighters to defend the holy soil of Palestine."[86] The head of the National Security Studies Center, Dan Shiftan, said that this showed a "deep message of the total rejection of Israel, legitimization of terror, and deep-seated victimization."[87]

The United Nations body UNESCO stopped funding a children's magazine sponsored by the Palestinian Authority that commended Hitler's killing of Jews. It deplored this publication as contrary to its principles of building tolerance and respect for human rights and human dignity.[88][89]

The PLO's campaign for full member status for the state of Palestine at the UN and have recognition on the 1967 borders received widespread support[90][91] though it was criticised by some countries for purportedly avoiding bilateral negotiation.[92][93] Netanyahu expressed criticism of the Palestinians as he felt that they were allegedly trying to bypass direct talks,[94] whereas Abbas argued that the continued construction of Israeli-Jewish settlements was "undermining the realistic potential" for the two-state solution.[95] Although denied full member status by the UN Security Council, in late 2012 the UN General Assembly overwhelmingly approved the de facto recognition of sovereign Palestine by granting non-member state status.[96]

Polling data has produced mixed results regarding the level of support among Palestinians for the two-state solution. A poll was carried out in 2011 by the Hebrew University; it indicated that support for a two-state solution was growing among both Israelis and Palestinians. The poll found that 58% of Israelis and 50% of Palestinians supported a two-state solution based on the Clinton Parameters, compared with 47% of Israelis and 39% of Palestinians in 2003, the first year the poll was carried out. The poll also found that an increasing percentage of both populations supported an end to violence63% of Palestinians and 70% of Israelis expressing their support for an end to violence, an increase of 2% for Israelis and 5% for Palestinians from the previous year.[97]

A poll commissioned by The Israel Project conducted in July 2011 by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research and fielded by the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion in the West Bank and Gaza indicated a range of opinions on the peace process that varied according to the wording of the questions.[98] When asked if they "accept a two-state solution" 44% of respondents said yes and 52% said no. When asked if they accepted the following concept: "President Obama said there should be two states: Palestine as the homeland for the Palestinian people and Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people" 34% accepted and 61% rejected. However, when asked if they favoured or opposed a two-state solution in which "the border between Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps of land to take account of realities on the ground so both sides can achieve a secure and just peace", 57% said yes and only 40% said no. When half the respondents were given a choice between two sentences (a. Israel has a permanent right to exist as a homeland for the Jewish people; b. Over time Palestinians must work to get back all the land for a Palestinian state) 84% chose b. and 8% selected a. The other half were asked to choose between a. I can accept permanently a two-state solution with one a homeland for the Palestinian people living side-by-side with Israel, a homeland for the Jewish people, or b. The real goal should to start with a two state solution but then move to it all being one Palestinian state. 30% of those asked selected the first option while 66% chose the second. When asked to choose between a. The best goal is for a two-state solution that keeps two states living side by side, and b. The real goal should be to start with two states but then move to it all being one Palestinian state, 25% chose a. whilst 52% opted for b.

According to the same poll, 65% of respondents preferred talks and 20% preferred violence. More than 70% of those polled said they believed a hadith, or saying, ascribed to Mohammed that is included as a clause of the Hamas Charter and states, The Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews". The poll further reported that "72% of Palestinians endorsed the denial of Jewish history in Jerusalem, 62% supported kidnapping IDF soldiers and holding them hostage and 53% were in favor or teaching songs about hating Jews in Palestinian schools." At the same time, only 29% supported the killing of a settler family in Itamar and 22% supported rocket attacks on Israeli cities and civilians. 64% support seeking UN recognition of a Palestinian state outside of the framework of negotiations with Israel and 85% believe that a settlement freeze should be a pre-requisite for continuing negotiations. 81% rejected the suggestion that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu was serious about wanting peace and a two-state solution whilst only 12% accepted the notion. The methodology and neutrality of this poll has been called into question by Paul Pillar, writing in the National Interest.[99]

The following outlined positions are the official positions of the two parties; however, it is important to note that neither side holds a single position. Both the Israeli and the Palestinian sides include both moderate and extremist bodies as well as dovish and hawkish bodies.

One of the primary obstacles to resolving the IsraeliPalestinian conflict is a deepset and growing distrust between its participants. Unilateral strategies and the rhetoric of hard-line political factions, coupled with violence and incitements by civilians against one another, have fostered mutual embitterment and hostility and a loss of faith in the peace process. Support among Palestinians for Hamas is considerable, and as its members consistently call for the destruction of Israel and violence remains a threat, security becomes a prime concern for many Israelis. The expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank has led the majority of Palestinians to believe that Israel is not committed to reaching an agreement, but rather to a pursuit of establishing permanent control over this territory in order to provide that security.[100]

The control of Jerusalem is a particularly delicate issue, with each side asserting claims over this city. The three largest Abrahamic religionsJudaism, Christianity, and Islamhold Jerusalem as an important setting for their religious and historical narratives. Jerusalem is the holiest city in the world for Judaism, being the former location of the Jewish temples on the Temple Mount and the capital of the ancient Israelite kingdom. For Muslims, Jerusalem is the site of Mohammad's Night Journey to heaven, and the al-Aqsa mosque. For Christians, Jerusalem is the site of Jesus' crucifixion and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.

The Israeli government, including the Knesset and Supreme Court, is centered in the "new city" of West Jerusalem and has been since Israel's founding in 1948. After Israel captured the Jordanian-controlled East Jerusalem in the Six-Day War, it assumed complete administrative control of East Jerusalem. In 1980, Israel issued a new law stating, "Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.".[101]

No country in the world except for Israel has recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital. The majority of UN member states and most international organisations do not recognise Israel's ownership of East Jerusalem which occurred after the 1967 Six-Day War, nor its 1980 Jerusalem Law proclamation.[102] The International Court of Justice in its 2004 Advisory opinion on the "Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory" described East Jerusalem as "occupied Palestinian territory."[103]

As of 2005, there were more than 719,000 people living in Jerusalem; 465,000 were Jews (mostly living in West Jerusalem) and 232,000 were Muslims (mostly living in East Jerusalem).[104]

At the Camp David and Taba Summits in 200001, the United States proposed a plan in which the Arab parts of Jerusalem would be given to the proposed Palestinian state while the Jewish parts of Jerusalem were given to Israel. All archaeological work under the Temple Mount would be jointly controlled by the Israeli and Palestinian governments. Both sides accepted the proposal in principle, but the summits ultimately failed.[105]

Israel expresses concern over the security of its residents if neighborhoods of Jerusalem are placed under Palestinian control. Jerusalem has been a prime target for attacks by militant groups against civilian targets since 1967. Many Jewish neighborhoods have been fired upon from Arab areas. The proximity of the Arab areas, if these regions were to fall in the boundaries of a Palestinian state, would be so close as to threaten the safety of Jewish residents.[106]

Israel has concerns regarding the welfare of Jewish holy places under possible Palestinian control. When Jerusalem was under Jordanian control, no Jews were allowed to visit the Western Wall or other Jewish holy places, and the Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives was desecrated.[105] Since 1975, Israel has banned Muslims from worshiping at Joseph's Tomb, a shrine considered sacred by both Jews and Muslims. Settlers established a yeshiva, installed a Torah scroll and covered the mihrab. During the Second Intifada the site was looted and burned.[107][108] Israeli security agencies routinely monitor and arrest Jewish extremists that plan attacks, though many serious incidents have still occurred.[109] Israel has allowed almost complete autonomy to the Muslim trust (Waqf) over the Temple Mount.[105]

Palestinians have voiced concerns regarding the welfare of Christian and Muslim holy places under Israeli control.[110] Additionally, some Palestinian advocates have made statements alleging that the Western Wall Tunnel was re-opened with the intent of causing the mosque's collapse.[111] The Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs denied this claim in a 1996 speech to the United Nations[112] and characterized the statement as "escalation of rhetoric."[113]

Palestinian refugees are people who lost both their homes and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 Arab-Israeli conflict[114] and the 1967 Six-Day War.[115] The number of Palestinians who fled or were expelled from Israel following its creation was estimated at 711,000 in 1949.[116] Descendants of these original Palestinian Refugees are also eligible for registration and services provided by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), and as of 2010 number 4.7 million people.[117] Between 350,000 and 400,000 Palestinians were displaced during the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.[115] A third of the refugees live in recognized refugee camps in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The remainder live in and around the cities and towns of these host countries.[114]

Most of these people were born outside of Israel, but are descendants of original Palestinian refugees.[114] Palestinian negotiators, most notably Yasser Arafat,[118] have so far publicly insisted that refugees have a right to return to the places where they lived before 1948 and 1967, including those within the 1949 Armistice lines, citing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and UN General Assembly Resolution 194 as evidence. However, according to reports of private peace negotiations with Israel they have countenanced the return of only 10,000 refugees and their families to Israel as part of a peace settlement. Mahmoud Abbas, the current Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization was reported to have said in private discussion that it is "illogical to ask Israel to take 5 million, or indeed 1 million. That would mean the end of Israel." [119] In a further interview Abbas stated that he no longer had an automatic right to return to Safed in the northern Galilee where he was born in 1935. He later clarified that the remark was his personal opinion and not official policy.[120]

The Arab Peace Initiative of 2002 declared that it proposed the compromise of a "just resolution" of the refugee problem.[121]

Palestinian and international authors have justified the right of return of the Palestinian refugees on several grounds:[122][123][124]

Shlaim (2000) states that from April 1948 the military forces of what was to become Israel had embarked on a new offensive strategy which involved destroying Arab villages and the forced removal of civilians.

The most common arguments for opposition are:

Throughout the conflict, Palestinian violence has been a concern for Israelis. Israel,[149] along with the United States[150] and the European Union, refer to the violence against Israeli civilians and military forces by Palestinian militants as terrorism. The motivations behind Palestinian violence against Israeli civilians are multiplex, and not all violent Palestinian groups agree with each other on specifics. Nonetheless, a common motive is the desire to destroy Israel and replace it with a Palestinian Arab state.[151] The most prominent Islamist groups, such as Hamas, view the IsraeliPalestinian conflict as a religious jihad.[152]

Suicide bombing is used as a tactic among Palestinian organizations like Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade and certain suicide attacks have received support among Palestinians as high as 84%.[153][154] In Israel, Palestinian suicide bombers have targeted civilian buses, restaurants, shopping malls, hotels and marketplaces.[155] From 19932003, 303 Palestinian suicide bombers attacked Israel.

The Israeli government initiated the construction of a security barrier following scores of suicide bombings and terrorist attacks in July 2003. Israel's coalition government approved the security barrier in the northern part of the green-line between Israel and the West Bank. According to the IDF, since the erection of the fence, terrorist acts have declined by approximately 90%.[156]

Since 2001, the threat of Qassam rockets fired from the Palestinian Territories into Israel is also of great concern for Israeli defense officials.[157] In 2006the year following Israel's disengagement from the Gaza Stripthe Israeli government recorded 1,726 such launches, more than four times the total rockets fired in 2005.[149] As of January 2009, over 8,600 rockets had been launched,[158][159] causing widespread psychological trauma and disruption of daily life.[160] Over 500 rockets and mortars hit Israel in JanuarySeptember 2010 and over 1,947 rockets hit Israel in JanuaryNovember 2012.

According to a study conducted by University of Haifa, one in five Israelis have lost a relative or friend in a Palestinian terrorist attack.[161]

There is significant debate within Israel about how to deal with the country's security concerns. Options have included military action (including targeted killings and house demolitions of terrorist operatives), diplomacy, unilateral gestures toward peace, and increased security measures such as checkpoints, roadblocks and security barriers. The legality and the wisdom of all of the above tactics have been called into question by various commentators.[16][unreliable source?]

Since mid-June 2007, Israel's primary means of dealing with security concerns in the West Bank has been to cooperate with and permit United States-sponsored training, equipping, and funding of the Palestinian Authority's security forces, which with Israeli help have largely succeeded in quelling West Bank supporters of Hamas.[162]

Some Palestinians have committed violent acts over the globe on the pretext of a struggle against Israel. Many foreigners, including Americans[163] and Europeans,[164] have been killed and injured by Palestinian militants. At least 53 Americans have been killed and 83 injured by Palestinian violence since the signing of the Oslo Accords.[165][unreliable source?]

During the late 1960s, the PLO became increasingly infamous for its use of international terror. In 1969 alone, the PLO was responsible for hijacking 82 planes. El Al Airlines became a regular hijacking target.[166][167] The hijacking of Air France Flight 139 by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine culminated during a hostage-rescue mission, where Israeli special forces successfully rescued the majority of the hostages.

However, one of the most well-known and notorious terrorist acts was the capture and eventual murder of 11 Israeli athletes during the 1972 Olympic Games.[168]

Israeli forces have launched attacks against Palestinians around the globe as part of the conflict. Israel has assassinated dozens of Palestinians and their supporters outside of Palestine, mainly in Europe and the Middle East. Israel has also bombed Palestinian targets in many[quantify] nations such as Syria and Lebanon, including the bombing of the PLO Headquarters in Tunisia, killing several hundred.

Fighting among rival Palestinian and Arab movements has played a crucial role in shaping Israel's security policy towards Palestinian militants, as well as in the Palestinian leadership's own policies.[citation needed] As early as the 1930s revolts in Palestine, Arab forces fought each other while also skirmishing with Zionist and British forces, and internal conflicts continue to the present day. During the Lebanese Civil War, Palestinian baathists broke from the Palestine Liberation Organization and allied with the Shia Amal Movement, fighting a bloody civil war that killed thousands of Palestinians.[169][170]

In the First Intifada, more than a thousand Palestinians were killed in a campaign initiated by the Palestine Liberation Organization to crack down on suspected Israeli security service informers and collaborators. The Palestinian Authority was strongly criticized for its treatment of alleged collaborators, rights groups complaining that those labeled collaborators were denied fair trials. According to a report released by the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group, less than 45 percent of those killed were actually guilty of informing for Israel.[171]

The policies towards suspected collaborators contravene agreements signed by the Palestinian leadership. Article XVI(2) of the Oslo II Agreement states:[172]

"Palestinians who have maintained contact with the Israeli authorities will not be subjected to acts of harassment, violence, retribution, or prosecution."

The provision was designed to prevent Palestinian leaders from imposing retribution on fellow Palestinians who had worked on behalf of Israel during the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

In the Gaza Strip, Hamas officials have killed and tortured thousands of Fatah members and other Palestinians who oppose their rule. During the Battle of Gaza, more than 150 Palestinians died over a four-day period.[173] The violence among Palestinians was described as a civil war by some commentators. By 2007, more than 600 Palestinian people had died during the struggle between Hamas and Fatah.[174]

In the past, Israel has demanded control over border crossings between the Palestinian territories and Jordan and Egypt, and the right to set the import and export controls, asserting that Israel and the Palestinian territories are a single economic space.

In the interim agreements reached as part of the Oslo Accords, the Palestinian Authority has received control over cities (Area A) while the surrounding countryside has been placed under Israeli security and Palestinian civil administration (Area B) or complete Israeli control (Area C). Israel has built additional highways to allow Israelis to traverse the area without entering Palestinian cities. The initial areas under Palestinian Authority control are diverse and non-contiguous. The areas have changed over time because of subsequent negotiations, including Oslo II, Wye River and Sharm el-Sheik. According to Palestinians, the separated areas make it impossible to create a viable nation and fails to address Palestinian security needs; Israel has expressed no agreement to withdrawal from some Areas B, resulting in no reduction in the division of the Palestinian areas, and the institution of a safe pass system, without Israeli checkpoints, between these parts. Because of increased Palestinian violence[citation needed] to occupation this plan is in abeyance.

In the Middle East, water resources are of great political concern. Since Israel receives much of its water from two large underground aquifers which continue under the Green Line, the use of this water has been contentious in the IsraeliPalestinian conflict. Israel withdraws most water from these areas, but it also supplies the West Bank with approximately 40million cubic metres annually, contributing to 77% of Palestinians' water supply in the West Bank, which is to be shared for a population of about 2.6 million.[175]

While Israel's consumption of this water has decreased since it began its occupation of the West Bank, it still consumes the majority of it: in the 1950s, Israel consumed 95% of the water output of the Western Aquifer, and 82% of that produced by the Northeastern Aquifer. Although this water was drawn entirely on Israel's own side of the pre-1967 border, the sources of the water are nevertheless from the shared groundwater basins located under both West Bank and Israel.[176]

In the Oslo II Accord, both sides agreed to maintain "existing quantities of utilization from the resources." In so doing, the Palestinian Authority established the legality of Israeli water production in the West Bank, subject to a Joint Water Committee (JWC). Moreover, Israel obligated itself in this agreement to provide water to supplement Palestinian production, and further agreed to allow additional Palestinian drilling in the Eastern Aquifer, also subject to the Joint Water Committee.[177] Many Palestinians counter that the Oslo II agreement was intended to be a temporary resolution and that it was not intended to remain in effect more than a decade later.

In 1999, Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs said it continued to honor its obligations under the Interim Agreement.[178] The water that Israel receives comes mainly from the Jordan River system, the Sea of Galilee and two underground sources. According to a 2003 BBC article the Palestinians lack access to the Jordan River system.[179]

According to a report of 2008 by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, water resources were confiscated for the benefit of the Israeli settlements in the Ghor. Palestinian irrigation pumps on the Jordan River were destroyed or confiscated after the 1967 war and Palestinians were not allowed to use water from the Jordan River system. Furthermore, the authorities did not allow any new irrigation wells to be drilled by Palestinian farmers, while it provided fresh water and allowed drilling wells for irrigation purposes at the Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.[180]

A report was released by the UN in August 2012 and Maxwell Gaylard, the UN Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator in the occupied Palestinian territory, explained at the launch of the publication: Gaza will have half a million more people by 2020 while its economy will grow only slowly. In consequence, the people of Gaza will have an even harder time getting enough drinking water and electricity, or sending their children to school. Gaylard present alongside Jean Gough, of the UN Childrens Fund (UNICEF), and Robert Turner, of the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). The report projects that Gazas population will increase from 1.6 million people to 2.1 million people in 2020, leading to a density of more than 5,800 people per square kilometre.[181]

Numerous foreign nations and international organizations have established bilateral agreements with the Palestinian and Israeli water authorities. It is estimated that a future investment of about US$1.1bn for the West Bank and $0.8bn[clarification needed] is needed for the planning period from 2003 to 2015.[182]

In order to support and improve the water sector in the Palestinian territories, a number of bilateral and multilateral agencies have been supporting many different water and sanitation programs.

There are three large seawater desalination plants in Israel and two more scheduled to open before 2014. When the fourth plant becomes operational, 65% of Israel's water will come from desalination plants, according to Minister of Finance Dr. Yuval Steinitz.[183]

In late 2012, a donation of $21.6 million was announced by the Government of the Netherlandsthe Dutch government stated that the funds would be provided to the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), for the specific benefit of Palestinian children. An article, published by the UN News website, stated that: "Of the $21.6 million, $5.7 will be allocated to UNRWAs 2012 Emergency Appeal for the occupied Palestinian territory, which will support programmes in the West Bank and Gaza aiming to mitigate the effects on refugees of the deteriorating situation they face."[181]

Occupied Palestinian Territory is the term used by the United Nations to refer to the West Bank, including East Jerusalem,[184] and the Gaza Stripterritories which were captured by Israel during the 1967 Six-Day War, having formerly been controlled by Egypt and Jordan.[185] The Israeli government uses the term Disputed Territories, to argue that some territories cannot be called occupied as no nation had clear rights to them and there was no operative diplomatic arrangement when Israel acquired them in June 1967.[186][187] The area is still referred to as Judea and Samaria by some Israeli groups, based on the historical regional names from ancient times. This is also the name used on the 1947 UN Partition Plan.[188]

In 1980, Israel annexed East Jerusalem.[189] Israel has never annexed the West Bank, apart from East Jerusalem, or Gaza Strip, and the United Nations has demanded the "[t]ermination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force" and that Israeli forces withdraw "from territories occupied in the recent conflict" the meaning and intent of the latter phrase is disputed. See Interpretations.

It has been the position of Israel that the most Arab-populated parts of West Bank (without major Jewish settlements), as well as the entire Gaza Strip, must eventually be part of an independent Palestinian State; however, the precise borders of this state are in question. At Camp David, for example, then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered Arafat an opportunity to establish a non-militarized Palestinian State. The proposed state would consist of 77% of the West Bank split into two or three areas, followed by: an of increase of 86-91% of the West Bank after six to twenty-one years; autonomy, but not sovereignty for some of the Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem surrounded by Israeli territory; the entire Gaza Strip; and the dismantling of most settlements.[47] Arafat rejected the proposal without providing a counter-offer.

A subsequent settlement proposed by President Clinton offered Palestinian sovereignty over 94 to 96 percent of the West Bank but was similarly rejected with 52 objections.[46][190][191][192][193] The Arab League has agreed to the principle of minor and mutually agreed land-swaps as part of a negotiated two state settlement based on June 1967 borders.[194] Official U.S. policy also reflects the ideal of using the 1967 borders as a basis for an eventual peace agreement.[195][196]

Some Palestinians claim they are entitled to all of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem. Israel says it is justified in not ceding all this land, because of security concerns, and also because the lack of any valid diplomatic agreement at the time means that ownership and boundaries of this land is open for discussion.[118] Palestinians claim any reduction of this claim is a severe deprivation of their rights. In negotiations, they claim that any moves to reduce the boundaries of this land is a hostile move against their key interests. Israel considers this land to be in dispute, and feels the purpose of negotiations is to define what the final borders will be. Other Palestinian groups, such as Hamas, have in the past insisted that Palestinians must control not only the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem, but also all of Israel proper. For this reason, Hamas has viewed the peace process "as religiously forbidden and politically inconceivable".[152]

According to DEMA, "In the years following the Six-Day War, and especially in the 1990s during the peace process, Israel re-established communities destroyed in 1929 and 1948 as well as established numerous new settlements in the West Bank."[197] These settlements are, as of 2009, home to about 301,000 people.[198] DEMA added, "Most of the settlements are in the western parts of the West Bank, while others are deep into Palestinian territory, overlooking Palestinian cities. These settlements have been the site of much inter-communal conflict."[197] The issue of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and, until 2005, the Gaza Strip, have been described by the UK[199] and the WEU[200] as an obstacle to the peace process. The United Nations and the European Union have also called the settlements "illegal under international law."[201][202]

However, Israel disputes this;[203] several scholars and commentators disagree with the assessment that settlements are illegal, citing in 2005 recent historical trends to back up their argument.[204][205] Those who justify the legality of the settlements use arguments based upon Articles 2 and 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, as well as UN Security Council Resolution 242.[206] On a practical level, some objections voiced by Palestinians are that settlements divert resources needed by Palestinian towns, such as arable land, water, and other resources; and, that settlements reduce Palestinians' ability to travel freely via local roads, owing to security considerations.

In 2005, Israel's unilateral disengagement plan, a proposal put forward by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, was enacted. All residents of Jewish settlements in the Gaza strip were evacuated, and all residential buildings were demolished.[207]

Various mediators and various proposed agreements have shown some degree of openness to Israel retaining some fraction of the settlements which currently exist in the West Bank; this openness is based on a variety of considerations, such as, the desire to find real compromise between Israeli and Palestinian territorial claims.[208][209]

Israel's position that it needs to retain some West Bank land and settlements as a buffer in case of future aggression,[210] and Israel's position that some settlements are legitimate, as they took shape when there was no operative diplomatic arrangement, and thus they did not violate any agreement.[186][187]

Former US President George W. Bush has stated that he does not expect Israel to return entirely to the 1949 armistice lines because of "new realities on the ground."[211] One of the main compromise plans put forth by the Clinton Administration would have allowed Israel to keep some settlements in the West Bank, especially those which were in large blocs near the pre-1967 borders of Israel. In return, Palestinians would have received some concessions of land in other parts of the country.[208] The current US administration views a complete freeze of construction in settlements on the West Bank as a critical step toward peace. In May and June 2009, President Barack Obama said, "The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements,"[212] and the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, stated that the President "wants to see a stop to settlements not some settlements, not outposts, not natural growth exceptions.[213] However, Obama has since declared that the United States will no longer press Israel to stop West Bank settlement construction as a precondition for continued peace-process negotiations with the Palestinian Authority.[214]

The Israeli government states it is justified under international law to impose a blockade on an enemy for security reasons. The power to impose a naval blockade is established under customary international law and Laws of armed conflict, and a United Nations commission has ruled that Israel's blockade is "both legal and appropriate."[215][216] The Israeli Government's continued land, sea and air blockage is tantamount to collective punishment of the population, according to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.[217] The Military Advocate General of Israel has provided numerous reasonings for the policy:

"The State of Israel has been engaged in an ongoing armed conflict with terrorist organizations operating in the Gaza strip. This armed conflict has intensified after Hamas violently took over Gaza, in June 2007, and turned the territory under its de-facto control into a launching pad of mortar and rocket attacks against Israeli towns and villages in southern Israel."[218]

Go here to read the rest:
IsraeliPalestinian conflict - Wikipedia, the free ...


Page 1,646«..1020..1,6451,6461,6471,648..1,6601,670..»

matomo tracker