The silence perhaps reflects Australians' identification of law with enforcement.

By these standards the judgement of the International Court was a mere opinion to which the United Nations General Assembly of the United Nations may decide whether and how to give effect.

For many Australian politicians and commentators, too, questions of legality are irrelevant in international relations. Disputes between nations are resolved by power and not by law. The judgements of international agencies are no more than an exercise in public relations.

Opinion significant

The ICJ opinion, however, is significant because it is carefully and thoroughly argued, and because international law is based on the ethical conviction that all human beings are of equal value.

Nations and their representatives who take pride in their democratic tradition boast that adherence to the rule of law distinguishes them from totalitarianism.

They will find embarrassing the legal judgement by an impartial Court that an allied nation has consistently violated international law. The opinion may not be enforceable, but it will reverberate in international institutions and ultimately in public opinion.

Although the questions put to the Court were asked prior to the Hamas invasion in late 2023, the opinion also sets standards for comment on the War in Gaza.

I shall summarise the opinion by drawing on and sometimes paraphrasing its accompanying summary.

The Court first established its right to speak, established by the request by the General Assembly for an opinion on two questions.

The first concerned the legal consequences arising from certain policies and practices of Israel as an occupying power in a situation of belligerent occupation since 1967.

The second concerned how such policies and practices affect the legal status of the occupation in light of international law, and the legal consequences which arise from this status.

The Court was satisfied that these were legal questions.

It also established its discretion to make an opinion on a bilateral dispute in which one side does not consent, dismissed as speculative any arguments that it risked inflaming the dispute, argued that it was sufficiently well informed to make a judgment, and that any bias in the formulation of the questions could be excluded.

In coming to its opinion, the ICJ measured the practices of Israel in the territory it had occupied against the provisions of international statutory and customary law.

Under these provisions the inhabitants of the occupied land may not be removed by force except in emergency, must be able to return, must not be discriminated against, must be free to form its government and institutions, and enjoy for their own benefit and not for that of the occupying power the resources of their territory.

In its findings, the Court decided that in all these areas the Israeli occupation had violated international law by encouraging settlements on occupied land, destroying houses belonging to Palestinians, by effectively controlling Palestine and weakening its institutions.

Israel remained capable of exercising, and continued to exercise, certain key elements of authority over the Gaza Strip, including control of the land, sea and air borders, restrictions on movement of people and goods, collection of import and export taxes, and military control over the buffer zone.

Furthermore the violence by settlers against Palestinians, Israel's failure to prevent or to punish it effectively, and the excessive use of force against Palestinians contributed to the creation and maintenance of a coercive environment against Palestinians.

In summary, contrary to International law, Israel occupied by force territory that was not its own and has since not yielded that territory but has maintained control over it and exploited its resources for its own purposes.

In doing so it has violated the law governing occupation in which the occupying power must govern in the interests of the occupied people, respect its self-government and their human rights.

Such prolonged and exploitative occupation cannot be justified by appeal to the occupiers' security, nor is it justified by the length of time that it has lasted.

Consequences for Israel

The ICJ then dealt with its consequences for Israel of this judgment.

It stated that it is obliged to bring an end to its presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory as rapidly as possible and cease to act unlawfully by ceasing all new settlement activity, repealing laws that created or maintained the unlawful situation, including those which discriminate against the Palestinian people in the occupied Palestinian Territory.

It is also bound to make reparations for the damage done.

'The history of violence provides both the people of Israel and of Palestine with reasonable fear for their security. To reach a mutually acceptable and enduring settlement will be like unscrambling an egg that has already been fried.'

Consequences for others

The Court also spelled out the consequences for other States and international agencies.

They may not recognise as legal the situation arising from the unlawful presence of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

Neither may they render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by the occupation.
Finally, the Court left it to the United Nations Security Council decide what further action is required to put an end to the illegal presence of Israel, taking into account its advisory opinion.

Devastating legal judgement

The ICJ opinion is a devastating legal judgment on the actions of Israel in Palestinian territory. Though the Court does not explicitly consider Israel's continuing actions in Gaza, many of them would likely be adjudged to violate international law.

Although the judgment imposes legal obligations on Israel and the international community, it did not consider how they might be met.

It left it to the parties and to the international community to negotiate a settlement in which the rights and the security of the people of Israel and of Palestine can be assured.

This challenge is made the greater by the historical claim of each party to the same land and by the aggravation of mutual hatred by military actions of Israel and Palestinian groups over many years.

The history of violence provides both the people of Israel and of Palestine with reasonable fear for their security. To reach a mutually acceptable and enduring settlement will be like unscrambling an egg that has already been fried.

The ICJ opinion highlights the long-term challenge to Israel's place in the world.

The pressure on public opinion in the West arising from the critical judgment, together with the radicalisation of nationalist politics in Israel and of populist policies in the West, already threaten to weaken military support for Israel at a time when it relies most on it.

For its lasting security Israel will need to build bridges to nations in its region. It cannot do that without respecting the rights of its Palestinian neighbours.

Other nations, including Australia, should not take sides in the present war in Gaza, but by refusing to supply arms and by other actions should press for the end of military actions that build and intensify mutual hatred. They should also press for negotiations that might lead to a lasting peace.

• First published in Eureka Street
• Andrew Hamilton is consulting editor of Eureka Street, and writer at Jesuit Social Services.

"Ethical export policy is a myth," states the WPF.

Of the 32 wars of this century that the WPF analyzed all of them but one received weapons from the leading arms exporting nations - U.S., Russia, France, U.K., China, Germany, Israel, Italy, Netherlands, Ukraine, and Spain - even when serious violations of international humanitarian law and human rights abuses were clearly on display.

U.S. weapons to the Israeli government's ongoing bombing of civilians in Gaza is current tragic example.

Rivers of mostly innocent civilian blood doesn't deter the ongoing shipments of instruments of death.

Where there's a huge profit to be made, and power to be gained, any serious consideration of morality is virtually nonexistent among the arms exporting countries.

And to a lesser degree it is important to note that some less affluent nations are also involved in the deadly arms business.

Corporations that are profiting the most from the immoral business of weapons production and sales are the U.S. companies Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, BAE Systems (U.K.), Norinco (China), AVIC (China).

If weapons production, and subsequent weapons sales were to end, wars and armed conflicts would virtually come to a halt. Wars can't be waged without weapons.

And think of all the good that could be done, both domestically and globally, if we ever come to our senses and transfer the vast amounts of money spent on weapons of war to building instruments of peace.

Imagine seeing all of that money being used to ensure that every single person on the planet would receive basic human services like adequate food, decent housing, clean water and sanitation, health care, education, life-enhancing jobs with a living wage.

And with these huge funds we could totally and quickly move from dirty fossil fuels to clean energy for our health, the health of our common earth home, and the health of future generations yet to born.

But very sadly, this wonderful scenario is not on the radar screens of the vast majority of rich and powerful individuals, corporations and nations.

At the Second Vatican Council the world's Catholic bishops, in union with S. Pope Paul VI declared:

"While extravagant sums are being spent for the furnishing of ever new weapons, an adequate remedy cannot be provided for the multiple miseries afflicting the whole modern world.

"Disagreements between nations are not really and radically healed; on the contrary, they spread infection to other parts of the earth.

"New approaches based on reformed attitudes must be taken to remove this trap and to emancipate the world from its crushing anxiety through the restoration of genuine peace.

"Therefore, we say it again: the arms race is an utterly treacherous trap for humanity, and one which ensnares the poor to an intolerable degree."

As dioceses, parishes and individuals we need to tirelessly urge national leaders to finally move away from war preparation and warmaking to nonviolent peacemaking.

It is bread, and not bombs, that humanity is hungry for.

Catholics, other Christians, and all people of faith in the God of peace who are in anyway connected with the arms industry should seriously pray and think about leaving the business of making weapons.

It is truly the morally right thing to do.

Better to have far less money and more peace of soul. With an open heart and mind please prayerfully consider this powerful Pope Francis video.

https://youtu.be/hUtxTvdSF_4?si=P7NIEDuGxq71iKUM

In the actual words of one of the Catholic Church's greatest champions of nonviolence and peace, St Francis of Assisi, let us greet everyone with "Pace e Bene" (Peace and all good)!

• Tony Magliano is an internationally syndicated Catholic social justice and peace columnist. He is available to speak at parish and diocesan venues. To invite Tony, contact him at tmag6@comcast.net.

People both in the antagonists and in their normal allies are pressed to make a choice.

To choose Israel is to see its war against Hamas as just in all respects.

It is to weep only for its fallen, to approve of all its actions in war, to minimise and count as collateral damage the harm done to the people of Gaza.

It is to see attempts to make peace or to point out unethical behaviour by Israel, or moral complexities in its cause as anti-Semitic, weak-minded, dishonest moral equivalence, and lacking in necessary strength of commitment.

To choose Hamas would be to adopt the same attitudes in reverse.

In both cases the appeal to allies is strengthened by identifying its cause with the best of their tradition and by asserting that its loss would fatally wound that tradition.

Advocates for Israel portray it as bright light of Western democracy in the storm clouds of totalitarian corruption or as the best of the Judaeo-Christian civilisation in a culturally bereft Islamic world.

To opponents of Israel, Hamas represents best the spirit of Islam in resisting the colonisation of Muslim lands by a corrupt and Godless West and in fighting against the existence of Israel.

Such binary views of responses to the conflict are based on the conflating of terms that are quite different.

They identify Israel with the land, with the people to whom it is home and who put their stamp on it and on its Government and its policies and actions.

Similarly they identify Gaza with the territory, with the people who live there, and with its ruling party Hamas and its policies and actions.

This identification blurs proper distinctions between land, people and ruling powers, and so between combatants and civilians. It also obscures the complexity of the conflict and lead to actions that will lead to further and more bitter conflict.

In Australia most people have a natural sympathy for Israel, and public advocacy for choosing its cause over that of Hamas is stronger.

We should then reflect on the reasons that are given to commend this stance.

The first is that criticism by Australians of actions taken by the Israeli Government is anti-Semitic. Some such criticism may be so described, but much is not.

The test is whether the criticism is driven by prejudice against Israel and its Jewish citizens or by reflection on the actions and policies of its Government.

In fact such criticism is compatible with an adamantine conviction that the State of Israel has a right to exist and to defend itself, with respect for its inhabitants, and with a full recognition of the appalling history of pogrom and extermination that they have suffered, and with abhorrence at the unjustifiable brutality of the Hamas invasion.

Such criticism, too, can be a gift, as it was to Australia when outsiders criticised it for the White Australia policy.

It can encourage citizens to question the actions of its Government for failure to live up to its proclaimed values, and lead to better policy and actions.

The charge of anti-Semitism, too, encourages wider reflection on the phrase itself. In common usage it refers only to Jewish people and to the State of Israel, and calls to mind the Holocaust.

Etymologically, however, it does not refer solely to attitudes to Jews and to Israel.

The Semites as an ethnic group include both Jews and Palestinians and by extension the Jewish and Muslim religions and customs of their people.

Seen from this broader perspective anti-Semitism therefore would strictly include prejudice against and consequent ill-treatment of the inhabitants of both Israel and Gaza.

Second, the attempt to align the State of Israel, its people and its Government and its allies with Judaeo-Christian civilisation and with Western democracy in opposition to Gaza, identified with its Government and people, is weakly founded.

In historical practice Christian societies tried to break the link that is now claimed to connect them with Jewish people.

In societies where Christians were the majority, Jews were periodically persecuted and always had reason to fear discrimination.

In Christian faith, certainly, God's enduring relationship with the Jewish people through Jesus the Jew is central and irreplaceable. That is why the pervasive anti-Jewish prejudice found historically among Christians is so shaming.

If we are to talk coherently about a Judaeo-Christian civilisation, however, we must situate it more broadly within all the actual connections, religious and other, that have formed our contemporary world.

These include Judaism and Christianity, but also other Abrahamic religions, notably Islam with its profound influence on the formation of modern Europe.

As with the charge of anti-Semitism, reflection on the invocation of Judaeo-Christian civilization in the current war leads away from a simple taking of sides to the recognition of complexity.

The association of Israel, its citizens and its Government with the Western tradition of democracy in opposition to the totalitarianism of Gaza, its citizens and Hamas is equally oversimplified.

It is true that, even though Hamas also came to power in Gaza through a democratic election, the democratic institutions of Israel under the rule of law are far stronger than in many states in which Islam is the established religion.

Democracy, however, means more than free elections and winning votes. It demands a respect for the rule of law and an equal respect for all citizens.

Ultimately Western democracy rests on the secular version of the Christian belief that the life of each human being is equally precious, and that this should be reflected in public life and institutions.

Both the rule of law and the equal value of each human being have come under increasing pressure recently in Israel and Gaza, as indeed they have in many of Israel's allies as well as in its enemies.

This is shown in the widespread disapproval by citizens both of Israel and Gaza of their ruling powers.

Third, the imputation that those who criticise the actions of Israel in war and call for peace and protection for the people of Gaza are guilty of moral equivalence between Hamas and Israel is also misplaced.

One can argue that the Hamas incursion and indiscriminate killing in Israel was morally unjustifiable and that the people of Israel have the right to defend itself, while at the same time criticising also the response of the Government of israel as disproportionate, without being guilty of moral equivalence.

This position can be better described as moral universality.

The basis of morality is the equal value and right to life of each human being, Jewish or Muslim, Israeli or Palestinian.

That impartial universality and the consequent obligation to respect equally the life of each human being shape the criteria for judging the actions in war of both sides.

The viciousness of the actions of an enemy military force does not justify a disproportionate killing of its non-combatants.

To praise one Government for actions that would be reprehensible if taken by another Government, and to demand that others adopt this position, is moral partisanship and bullying.

In this war we should resist the attempt to build total and uncritical support for the States of Israel and the territory of Gaza, still less of their ruling powers.

We should focus our attention on the lives of the persons of precious and equal value who compose these states. That alone focuses on the complexities of the relationships on which any enduring peace, justice and equality must be built.

To fail to do so ignores the resentment and hostility which feed discrimination and inequality, which in turn breed violence and revolt.

In the Cretan myth, dragons' teeth sown in the ground rose up as fully armed soldiers.

The response to the present war will come back to haunt or to bless the peoples of both Palestine and Israel in the future.

The proper role of non-combatant nations is to encourage the saving, not the taking of lives. Continue reading

• Andrew Hamilton is consulting editor of Eureka Street, and writer at Jesuit Social Services.

In a joint statement, Bishops from New Zealand's two biggest Christian Churches - Catholic and Anglican - are begging the warring factions in the Holy Land to stop.

Stop the war with the accompanying acts of violence it executes, the bishops' joint statement says.

Let it go. Release hostages. Stop fighting.

Everyone's saying stop the war!

The bishops' words join the international community's pleas for peace.

It's a sentiment Pope Francis applauds.

"Brothers, stop! Stop!" he said to thousands waiting to hear his Angelus message in St Peter's square on Sunday.

"War is always a defeat. Hamas must free Israeli hostages and all sides must allow humanitarian aid to reach the people of Gaza."

Later in the day, Francis phoned US President Joe Biden to discuss various conflicts and the need to identify paths toward peace, the Holy See Press Office says.

Then during his Angelus message on Wednesday, and for the 6th time, Francis called for a stop to the Isreal-Hamas war.

Violence doesn't work

"Hospitals and civilian infrastructure are protected under International Humanitarian Law," Anglican Archbishop Phillip Richardson says in the joint statement.

"Such niceties of law did not protect the wounded in Al Ahli Anglican Hospital and the people who were seeking sanctuary and protection. There are no winners in war: so often, it is innocent people who are maimed and killed."

The conflict between Israel and Palestine is a wound that has continued to fester... diplomatic efforts ... have failed because of the unwillingness to honour international agreements.

"Violence will never be a solution."

Blessed be the peacemakers

Bishop Steve Lowe, President of the New Zealand Catholic Bishops' Conference, spoke of peace.

"As Bishops, we endorse ... those groups and institutions in Israel and Palestine who work for peace, justice and reconciliation.

"Such work recognises our common humanity. This is the path that we advocate for peace in the Holy Land."

Government and diplomatic authorities must advocate for an immediate ceasefire and the opening and ongoing safeguarding of humanitarian corridors, the bishops' joint statement says.

"In this very emotional time, we cannot let anger lead us into antisemitism or Islamophobia.

"Let us remember that there are innocent victims on both sides of the conflict. To our fellow interfaith religious leaders, we ask: ‘Let us unite in prayer and action for a lasting peace.

"To the people of Aotearoa New Zealand, we urge you to pray for peace and to support aid appeals for those impacted by this humanitarian crisis."

The statement then quotes parts of Psalm 130 which begs: "Out of the depths I cry to you O Lord; hear my voice. O let your ears be attentive to the voice of my pleading."

In conclusion the bishops say: "May we too be attentive to those who call out to us from the depths of despair and destruction.

"May we commit ourselves to being instruments of peace."

• NZ Catholic Bishops Conference
• La Croix
• Vatican News
• America Magazine

In a statement released last week, they said:

"Attempts to find a lasting peace in the Holy Land that would provide security for Palestinians and the ordinary people of Israel have remained elusive, seemingly utterly so," the bishops said. "While there may have at times been goodwill, there has been no lasting way forward."

A renewed effort is needed to achieve lasting peace for "ordinary Palestinian peoples" and others living in the troubled land, they stressed.

The Holy Land is a special place for all three Abrahamic religions - Judaism, Christianity and Islam, they also point out.

For many decades now, attempts to find a lasting peace in the Holy Land that would provide security for the Palestinians and the ordinary people of Israel have remained stubbornly elusive, the bishops say.

While there may have at times been good will, there has been no lasting way forward.

US president Joe Biden is similarly concerned.

"Even if the ground is not ripe at this moment to restart negotiations, the US and my administration will not give up on trying to bring ... both sides closer together," he says.

"There must be two states for two peoples living side by side in safety and peace.

"Every people must live in dignity, but the goal of the two-state solution is out of reach because there are restrictions on movement and other restrictions imposed on the Palestinians."

However New Zealand's bishops note the long-standing proposal for a "two-state solution" under which an independent Palestine would exist alongside Israel "remains just … a concept".

Another concern is that "illegal settlements on Palestinian land in the West Bank" continue to be established.

The bishops say international law has required that the West Bank, which Israel has occupied since the 1967 Arab-Israeli War, must be returned to the Palestinians "as the heartland of their own state".

The bishops also pointed to Pope Francis' concern that progress is lacking in rebuilding trust and overcoming hatred and resentment. Without this, peace between Israel and Palestine, allowing two states to exist side by side, cannot be realised.

We strongly "support Pope Francis in that call," they say.

"The conflict in the Holy Land cannot be allowed to continue with no serious moves toward finding a just and peaceful solution for the peoples of Israel and Palestine, but particularly for Palestinians, whose long years of turmoil, occupation, blockading (as in Gaza) and impoverishment are a blight on the region and indeed on humanity."

Source

• NZ Catholic Bishops
• Crux
• CN
• Arab News

"The communique follows this week's controversial announcement that the U.S. government is reversing its decades-old position that Israeli settlements in the West Bank are "inconsistent with international law."

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Monday that he instead preferred to refer to such settlements as "ill-advised," as former President Ronald Reagan once did.

The Vatican statement referred to "recent decisions that risk undermining further the Israeli-Palestinian peace process."

"The Holy See reiterates its position of a two-state solution for two peoples, as the only way to reach a complete solution to this age-old conflict." Continue reading

The Vatican says the good relations between the Holy See and Palestine were noted during the meeting, "as were the positive role of Christians and the activity of the Church in Palestinian society, enshrined in the Global Agreement of 2015."

Francis and Abbas also discussed reconciliation among the Palestinian people, as well as efforts to reactivate the peace process between Israelis and Palestinians, and to reach a two-state solution.

They hope for a renewed commitment on the part of the international community to meet the legitimate aspirations of both peoples.

The Vatican says particular attention was reserved for the status of Jerusalem.

Francis and Abbas underlined the importance of recognising and preserving Jerusalem's identity and the universal value of the Holy City for the three Abrahamic religions - Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

The 20-minute meeting concluded with a discussion about other conflicts afflicting the Middle East. The urgency of promoting paths of peace and dialogue, with the contribution of the religious communities, to combat every form of extremism and fundamentalism was flagged in this respect.

Source

• Crux Now
• Vatican News
• Image: BBC.com

Palestinian Orthodox Christians limited their celebrations on Palm Sunday, restricting the occasion to religious rituals to mourn the deaths of 17 Gazans killed in a protest.

The deadly "Land Day" demonstration at the Israeli border on March 30 also left 1,400 people wounded. Read more

As General Allenby's troops marched through Bab al-Khalil, launching a century of settler colonialism across Palestine, prime minister David Lloyd George heralded the city's capture as "a Christmas present for the British people".

In a few months' time, we mark another such anniversary: 70 years since the Palestinian Nakba of 1948, the catastrophic destruction of the Palestinian polity; the violent dispossession of most of its people with their forced conversion into disenfranchised refugees; the colonial occupation, annexation and control of their land; and the imposition of martial law over those who managed to remain.

The current US president's recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel bookends a century of such events: from the Balfour declaration in November 1917 to the partition plan of 1947; from the Nakba of 1948 to the Naksa of 1967 - with its annexation of Jerusalem, the occupation of the rest of Palestine, further mass expulsions of Palestinians including from East and West Jerusalem, and the invaders' razing of entire ancient neighbourhoods in the city.

Donald Trump's declaration could easily be read as one more outrage in his growing collection of chaotic and destructive policies, this one perhaps designed to distract from his more prosaic, personal problems with the law.

It is viewed as the act of a volatile superpower haplessly endorsing illegal military conquest and consolidating the "acquisition of territory by force" (a practice prohibited and rejected by the UN and the basic tenets of international law). And it is seen alongside a long list of domestic and international blunders.

However, this analysis obscures what happens each day in occupied Palestine, and hides what will surely happen next - unless governments, parliaments, institutions, unions and, most of all, citizens take measures to actively resist it. Continue reading

• Karma Nabulsi is fellow in politics at St Edmund Hall, and teaches at Oxford University.

"It has been the capital of the Israeli people since ancient times," said the President. "It's undeniable, it's just a fact."

Christians in Bethlehem responded to the news by burning photos of the American president. They held signs saying: "Jerusalem, Palestine's heart, is not up to negotiations."

This may come as a surprise to many in the West. We probably assume that Palestine's Christians prefer the democratic Israelis to their Islamist-heavy countrymen. Sadly, that's not the case.

In 2003, Israel began enclosing Bethlehem behind a 23-foot concrete wall. Its purpose was to keep suicide bombers from crossing out of the West Bank and into Israel during the Intifada.

But even after the worst unrest settled, the wall kept growing. And Christians living in the town, who have never taken up arms against Israel, are suffering for it.

As Hanan Nasrallah, a Palestinian employee of the Catholic Relief Services, put it: "The separation wall… cuts family from each other.

"People get humiliated at checkpoints. People do not have many opportunities to improve their living standards. So, therefore, Christians who can afford to, are trying to leave this country."

It's not just families that are being split up, either. The wall also runs through the neighbouring village of Beit Jala, which is 80 percent Christian.

Upon completion, it will cut off a Salesian monastery from its sister-convent and the rest of the local Christian community.

The plight of Beit Jala's Christians prompted Cardinal Vincent Nichols to write a letter to William Hague in 2012, asking him to appeal to Tel Aviv directly.

And this doesn't even touch on those Palestinian Christians displaced from their historic homes by encroaching settlements, or those terrorised by "price tag attacks" carried out by radical Israeli nationalists.

These are not acts of the Israeli government, though it is the government's responsibility - both morally and under international law - to respect the rights of Palestinians, whatever their religion. Continue reading

• Michael Davis is the Catholic Herald's US editor

At the same time, President Trump announced plans to eventually relocate the US Embassy to the holy city.

Pope Francis responded to the change in US policy, saying he wants the "status quo" to remain.

He says he is "profoundly concerned" about recent developments concerning Jerusalem.

He declared the city a unique and sacred place for Christians, Jews and Muslims and that it has a "special vocation for peace."

He appealed "that everyone respects the status quo of the city," according to UN resolutions.

"I pray to the Lord that its identity is preserved and strengthened for the benefit of the Holy Land, the Middle East and the whole world ...

"... and that wisdom and prudence prevail to prevent new elements of tension from being added to a global context already convulsed by so many cruel conflicts," he said on Wednesday.

Others have expressed concern about Trump's decision.

The Middle East has strongly objected to the move.

Carefully worded rebukes have also flowed in from US allies.

The US position in 1947 held that Jerusalem was a corpus seperatum: an internationally controlled entity that belonged to neither Arab nor Jew.

Bit by bit this view has altered. Firstly it adopted a policy of "limited internationalisation", while still opposing both Arabs and Israelis claiming Jerusalem as their capital.

Nonetheless, Israel has sought to claim Jerusalem as its capital.

Following the six-day war in 1967, a new policy was adopted.

This held that neither Israelis nor Arabs could claim Jerusalem as their capital.

The Vatican has long sought an internationally guaranteed status for Jerusalem that safeguards its sacred character for Jews, Muslims and Christians.

Francis spoke by telephone on Tuesday with Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, after President Donald Trump forewarned Abbas of his decision to recognise Jerusalem as Israel's capital.

The Vatican said the call with Francis was made at Abbas's initiative.

Source

• The Washington Post
• The Washington Post
• National Catholic Register
• La Croix
• Zenit
• JSTOR
• Image: Time Magazine

Image:

Since the 1967 Arab-Israeli War when Israel captured and occupied the Palestinian territories of East Jerusalem, the remaining part of the West Bank and Gaza, the Palestinian people have lived under the heavy yoke of Israeli military occupation.

According to Human Rights Watch's Middle East Director Sarah Leah Whitson, "Whether it's a child imprisoned by a military court or shot unjustifiably, or a house demolished for lack of an elusive permit, or checkpoints where only settlers are allowed to pass, few Palestinians have escaped serious rights abuses during this 50-year occupation" (see: http://bit.ly/2s9rc5n).

In an audio response to questions I emailed to the former Patriarchal Vicar for Jerusalem and Palestine Bishop William Shomali (presently Patriarchal Vicar for Jordan), he said one of the most pressing problems facing Palestinians is the Israeli imposed restrictions on movement.

For example, he noted that Palestinians living in Bethlehem or Ramallah need to obtain a permit to go just six miles to Jerusalem. And permits are only given during principle feasts.

He said the ongoing illegal building of Israeli settlements on Palestinian land in the Occupied Palestinian Territories is an extremely serious roadblock to a peaceful solution.

According to Amnesty International "Swimming pools, well-watered lawns and large irrigated farms in Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories stand in stark contrast next to Palestinian villages whose inhabitants struggle to meet their essential domestic water needs. … In many places Palestinians receive water only one day per week or every few weeks, in some areas not for months at a time" (see: http://bit.ly/2vftctE).

Bishop Shomali told me that "Gaza is the worst case. It's an open-air prison." With the blockade, Israel completely controls who and what comes and goes in Gaza.

Bishop Shomali said that Hamas' tunnel building in preparation for war against Israel and their numerous attacks against Israelis is also morally wrong. The many violent Israeli injustices against Palestinians, and Hamas' violent attacks upon Israelis, is a vicious cycle that can only be broken with peace, he said.

To correct these injustices, Bishop Shomali said Israel needs to participate in good-faith negotiations toward the two-state solution: the establishment of an independent viable Palestinian nation coexisting peacefully with a fully recognized state of Israel.

He emphasized the two-state solution continues to be firmly supported by the Holy See (see: http://bit.ly/2yiABHl).

Churches for Middle East Peace (see: http://www.cmep.org/) Director for Communications Jessica Pollock-Kim said to me "Beyond all the tangible impacts of ongoing occupation that I've witnessed in person and from a distance over almost 20 years is something equally, if not more damaging, the eroding of hope."

To help restore the priceless gift of hope for our Palestinian brothers and sisters let's take to heart the words of Pope Francis: "We must regain the conviction that we need one another, that we have a shared responsibility for others and the world, and that being good and decent are worth it."

• Tony Magliano is an internationally syndicated social justice and peace columnist. He is available to speak at diocesan or parish gatherings about Catholic social teaching. His keynote address, "Advancing the Kingdom of God in the 21st Century," has been well received by diocesan and parish gatherings from Santa Clara, Calif. to Baltimore, Md. Tony can be reached at tmag@zoominternet.net

Francis says it is with "trepidation" he is following the "grave tensions and violence" that erupted at the holy site on 14 July.

The tensions started after three Israeli Arabs opened fire at Temple Mount. Three people died, including two Israeli police officers. About 300 others were injured.

Israel increased security measures in the area before the Temple Mount entrances; these included installing metal detectors.

Muslim leaders have rejected the new measures. Israel has refused to removed the metal detectors.

In response, a 19-year-old Palestinian, stabbed three members of one family to death on Friday evening during their Shabbat meal. They were celebrating the birth of a grandchild who had been born that morning.

Although a number of family members including children were at the meal, most were not injured.

The 19-year old responsible for the stabbing was shot during the attack. He has now been released from hospital and is being questioned by Israel's security services. It has been revealed he identifies with Hamas

Journalists have been temporarily banned from Temple Mount while investigations continue.

Source

• Jewish Telegraphic Agency
• Haaretz
• Haaretz
• Times of Israel
• Image: The Economist
  

Having just guided legislation through the Knesset ‘legalising' the illegal: settler outposts on private Palestinian land; he has seemingly set in motion an unstoppable movement which, taken to its ultimate conclusion, could deprive Palestinians of every inch of their ancestral land and establish Israel, a state devoid of morality or conscience.

No wonder his President and Attorney General advised against it!

How does one get into the mind of the most extreme right wing figure ever to hold the reins of power in the State of Israel?

Born in 1949 he is the first Israeli Prime Minister to have been born in the State of Israel. Aged 17, in 1967 he fought in the six day war and was involved in many subsequent Israeli military operations.

Clearly this experience has formed the person we see today.

He believes in pre-emptive strikes. He looks upon negotiation as weakness. He understands military force to be the primary mark of the nation's strength. He appears not to trust anyone or rely on anyone.

It appears he uses military force as a political tool and relies upon the inculcation of fear in an ‘existential threat' to gain the support and ongoing loyalty of his citizens for the extreme measures he takes. (see speeches in the lead up to the 2015 Israeli elections).

What are the outcomes?

Peace talks

Peace talks since the 1990's have as their foundation the Oslo Accords of 1993 and 1995, based on UN Security Council resolutions 242 and 338.

These talks set the rough parameters for an eventual settlement of difference, outlined the issues that needed to be resolved and established a tentative timeframe. Netanyahu opposed the Oslo accords from the outset.

While it is true that Palestinians shared misgivings about some of the details, Netanyahu was and remains trenchantly opposed to an outcome which cedes to Palestinians territory which might resemble autonomous statehood. He has said he supports a ‘two-state' solution but refuses to enter talks in good faith that could bring about a just and peaceful solution.

The pro-Israel lobby continually bleats that the Palestinians have been offered peace but have never accepted it. While it is true that Palestinian leadership has let opportunities for progress slip, Netanyahu's attitude to the Oslo Accords makes clear that this accusation is false.

Under Netanyahu's leadership (he will soon become the longest serving Israeli Prime Minister in the nation's history) there has never been open good will shown towards a just outcome.

This situation also makes nonsense of insistence by the Australian government that the only way forward is for the two parties to enter direct negotiation.

How can the Palestinians, conflicted as they are in their own political leadership, negotiate with an oppressor who views negotiation as weakness? Continue reading

• George Browning is President, Australia Palestine Advocacy Network. He was formerly Anglican Bishop of Canberra and Goulburn.

And although there is no official State of Palestine, Issa Kassissieh, the Palestinian ambassador to the Holy See, said the new embassy is "a significant achievement for the Palestinian people."

The Holy See's diplomatic representative (known as the apostolic delegation) said the new embassy is "a natural consequence" of the Global Agreement the Vatican signed in 2015.

In this, the Vatican acknowledged the "State of Palestine" as an official entity.

"It is an effective juridical instrument that assures legal recognition and guarantees to the Catholic Church, its institutions and its communities in Palestine."

The new embassy offers opportunities for formalising communications and providing a direct communication channel between Palestine and the Holy See.

The apostolic delegation said mutual cooperation will be therefore be able to be "activated and developed."

After a meeting with Pope Francis in January, Palestine's President Abbas said Palestinians are "very grateful about the role that the Holy See has played for a just and lasting peace in the Holy Land, and for having opened an embassy of Palestine in the Vatican for the first time."

Source

• National Catholic Register
• Christian Today
• Image: BBC

At once it became tangible: anyone, in Israel or abroad, could see the manner in which Netanyahu gazes, when all is said and done - only internally, only within himself.

Anyone who listened to his speech about Hitler and the mufti - in which he essentially acquitted Hitler of hatching the notion of the Final Solution and laid the blame at the feet of the Arab leader Haj Amin al-Husseini - could discern, in a way that was naked of obstruction, the things that Netanyahu sees within himself: the virtually mechanical apparatus that enables him to erase the facts in order to change - with one quick cartwheel of the consciousness - the condition of occupation and oppression to one of persecution and victimhood.

Revealed, too, was the manner in which he casts his victimhood on reality, like one who casts a dense and hermetic net that offers no way out, no escape, not even to Netanyahu himself.

But this time, more so than in the past, it has become clear to what extent we, the citizens of Israel, are trapped, flailing, in this net of his.

For many years now, ever since he embarked on his journey to the prime minister's office, he has masterfully mixed and stirred the true dangers facing Israel with the echoes of Holocaust trauma.

Skilfully, with sharp flashes of rhetoric and overwhelming powers of persuasion, he has learned how to ensnare the majority of the Israeli population within a labyrinth constructed of echoes and the true facts of reality. Continue reading

• David Grossman is the author of Death as a Way of Life: Israel Ten Years After Oslo.

Well that's the impression I get here in Palestine, where I work at Bethlehem University.

Bethlehem University is home to over 3300 students and 400 employees and over the past two weeks it has been closed for seven days due to the worsening situation here on the West Bank, in Jerusalem and parts of Israel.

The closure of the University means that our students' education is being continually disrupted.

At the moment it is too worrying for our students to come to the University from Hebron and Jerusalem (40% come from Jerusalem) due to the increased scrutiny at checkpoints by the army and the possibility of revenge attacks brought about by the random stabbing attacks that have occurred particularly in Jerusalem.

Two of these closures were brought about by a general strike that was called by the Governor of the Bethlehem region in protest over the shooting and killing of two young Palestinians, one thirteen and the other 26.

The thirteen year old came from the Aida refugee camp about ten minutes walk from the University. It seems he was shot by mistake by an Israeli sniper.

The twenty-six year old from the Duheisha refugee camp was shot during a protest on the Bethlehem side of Rachel's Tomb on Tuesday. Today marks the twelfth day in a row there have been protests here in Bethlehem.

Normally on a Friday the young people gather and throw rocks at the surveillance tower in Bethlehem and the Israeli army responds by entering the northern end of Bethlehem, firing tear gas, stun grenades and rubber bullets.

Due to the escalating violence the IDF have been given permission to fire live bullets.

It broke my heart the other day to learn that a 13 year old Palestinian boy had stabbed a 13 year old Israeli boy who was out riding his bike.

There is no rationale that can excuse these random acts of violence just as there is no rationale to excuse the disproportionate response of the Israeli forces.

• The majority of the Palestinian attackers have been shot and killed.
• Palestinians and Israelis are living in fear.
• Children are living in fear.

While this is happening those in authority on either side are apportioning blame to the other.

I cannot help thinking that the Israeli security responses, that include the destruction of the family homes of those Palestinians who attack and kill Israelis, the blocking off of neighbourhoods in East Jerusalem, the refusal to return the bodies of alleged attackers to their Palestinian families for burial will only further inflame the situation.

Yet there are signs of hope.

Yesterday I read of a gathering of Israelis and Palestinians who gathered for a vigil for peace.

It would seem that the Palestinian fight for statehood has gone off the radar of most people outside of the Middle East.

The fact remains that Palestine is still occupied by Israel.

It also seems that Palestine will continue to be occupied into the future, particularly if more Israeli illegal settlements are allowed to be built in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

It is a complicated situation here with no easy solutions.

Bethlehem University is the only Catholic University in the Holy Land and commenced in 1973 under the direction of the De La Salle Brothers.

The current Vice Chancellor is Br Peter Bray, originally from Taranaki.

We are grateful here for the 3000 pilgrims that visit us here at Bethlehem University and listen to the heartfelt stories of our students for whom the occupation is a daily reality.

Please hold the Holy Land in your prayers.

• Br Mark McKeon is De La Salle Brother from Australia who before coming to Bethlehem taught in Australia, New Zealand and Papua New Guinea. He is currently working at Bethlehem University as the Vice President for Human Resources and Administrative Affairs.

The treaty is an agreement on Catholic Church activities in areas controlled by the Palestinian Authority.

The agreement will be signed by representatives from both entities in the near future.

Vatican officials stressed that although the agreement was significant, it did not constitute the Holy See's first recognition of the State of Palestine.

"We have recognised the State of Palestine ever since it was given recognition by the United Nations and it is already listed as the State of Palestine in our official yearbook," said Vatican spokesman Fr Federico Lombardi.

On November 29, 2012, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution recognising Palestine as an observer non-member state.

Continue reading

Born in 1947 in Nazareth, Shoufani was driven out of his family village the following year by the Israelis who killed his grandfather and uncle.

He was reared by his grandmother, who taught him to appreciate the value of forgiveness.

When entered the priesthood in 1966, he was sent to a seminary in Issy-les-Moulineaux, France.

He discovered Dachau, the Holocaust and anti-Semitism during a trip to Germany.

He became principal of St.-Joseph de Nazareth middle school in 1976, where he initiated his Christian and Muslim students to dialogue with the Jews, taking them to the Yad Vashem Memorial.

He also brought young Jews, Muslims and Christians to visit Auschwitz and was awarded the UNESCO prize for peace education in 2003.

In 2010, his superiors removed him from his position as middle school principal because of his divergent views, but he remains the parish priest of Nazareth.

As the situation in Israel once again becomes unstable, he continues to call for dialogue and peace.

The situation between Israelis and Palestinians appears to be on the verge of a third Intifada. After more than 30 years of commitment to dialogue, haven't you lost hope?

Fr. Émile Shoufani: Not at all. The media do not provide us with an in-depth understanding of the situation.

There are incidents that take place, movements involving a few people and demagoguery used by a handful of politicians to establish their power.

But there is a way out of this situation if we are honest enough to start from the interest of our two peoples and support projects for peace and reconciliation. Continue reading

Sources

• Global Pulse
• Image: Toothless & Hiccup

"We join with our leaders and with all people of faith in Fiji to pray for our soldiers who have been held captive," Archbishop Winston said in a statement.

"We pray also for the families and communities whose loved ones are victims of violence in the Middle East."

"This situation of crisis for Fijians serving in the UN Peace Keeping Force brings home to us strongly our deep connections with many other victims of violence."

"It brings home to us the need to work and pray for peace in our communities, our countries and our world."

Archbishop Winston called on all parishes in Polynesia to pray intentionally this Sunday and the week following:

• for the well-being and the release of those held captive,
• for families and friends of Fiji soldiers,
• for the UN Peace Keeping Force and its mission.

Fijian Army Commander Brigadier General Mosese Tikoitoga said they "are continuing negotiations at all levels".

He said they had been assured that the men were being treated well and had come to no harm.

"However, we are still very concerned that we cannot confirm at this stage their exact location, whether they are still in Syria or whether they have been moved to neighbouring countries," he said.

On Monday afternoon Tikoitoga said the situation surrounding the detained Fijian peacekeepers remained unchanged.

In a statement, he said the Fijian army is coordinating closely with the United Nations team for the safe release of the 45 Fijian troops.

He emphasised that despite the situation, the troops have access to food, water and medical supplies and all are reported to be in good health.

The U.N. peacekeepers from Fiji were seized by Islamist militants on Thursday, one of several groups attacked in the volatile frontier between Syria and Israel. U.N. officials told Reuters on condition of anonymity that they were now treating it as a case of kidnapping.

Archbishop Winston encouraged parishes to use this prayer for peace from the NZ Prayer Book:

O God,
it is your will to hold both heaven and earth
in a single peace.
Let the design of your great love
shine on the waste of our wraths and sorrows,
and give peace to your Church,
peace among nations,
peace in our homes and peace in our hearts.

Source

• Anglican Taonga
• Reuters.com
• ABC.net.au
• Fiji Times
• Image: Twitter