Website policy

We provide links to articles we think will be of interest to our supporters. We are sympathetic to much of the content of what we post, but not to everything. The fact that something has been linked to here does not necessarily mean that we endorse the views expressed in it.


BSST is the leading charity focusing on small-scale grass roots cross community, anti poverty and humanitarian projects in Israel/Palestine

JfJfP comments


06 May: Tair Kaminer starts her fifth spell in gaol. Send messages of support via Reuven Kaminer

04 May: Against the resort to denigration of Israel’s critics


23 Dec: JfJfP policy statement on BDS

14 Nov: Letter to the Guardian about the Board of Deputies

11 Nov: UK ban on visiting Palestinian mental health workers

20 Oct: letter in the Guardian

13 Sep: Rosh Hashanah greetings

21 Aug: JfJfP on Jeremy Corbyn

29 July: Letter to Evening Standard about its shoddy reporting

24 April: Letter to FIFA about Israeli football

15 April: Letter re Ed Miliband and Israel

11 Jan: Letter to the Guardian in response to Jonathan Freedland on Charlie Hebdo


15 Dec: Chanukah: Celebrating the miracle of holy oil not military power

1 Dec: Executive statement on bill to make Israel the nation state of the Jewish people

25 Nov: Submission to All-Party Parliamentary Group Against Antisemitism

7 Sept: JfJfP Executive statement on Antisemitism

3 Aug: Urgent disclaimer

19 June Statement on the three kidnapped teenagers

25 April: Exec statement on Yarmouk

28 Mar: EJJP letter in support of Dutch pension fund PGGM's decision to divest from Israeli banks

24 Jan: Support for Riba resolution

16 Jan: EJJP lobbies EU in support of the EU Commission Guidelines, Aug 2013–Jan 2014


29 November: JfJfP, with many others, signs a "UK must protest at Bedouin expulsion" letter

November: Press release, letter to the Times and advert in the Independent on the Prawer Plan

September: Briefing note and leaflet on the Prawer Plan

September: JfJfP/EJJP on the EU guidelines with regard to Israel

14th June: JfJfP joins other organisations in protest to BBC

2nd June: A light unto nations? - a leaflet for distribution at the "Closer to Israel" rally in London

24 Jan: Letter re the 1923 San Remo convention

18 Jan: In Support of Bab al-Shams

17 Jan: Letter to Camden New Journal about Veolia

11 Jan: JfJfP supports public letter to President Obama

Comments in 2012 and 2011



EU moves to secure itself inside a ‘separation wall’

The Occupation and Fortress Europe
How Israel’s wall helps construct the new Fortress Europe.
By Jimmy Johnson for JNews Blog
Tuesday, 3 May, 2011 London, UK

Israel’s policies against Palestinians and the political doctrine of ‘Fortress Europe’bear surprising resemblances. The military and security technologies involved share several producers. Israeli companies involved in the enforcement of European exclusion policies provide equipment developed for Israel’s surveillance and control regime over the Palestinian population.
European states have, beginning with the Schengen Agreement in 1985 and continuing with the European Neighbourhood Policy and the Barcelona Process undertaken a process of erasing borders between European nations while further solidifying borders with non-European countries. A central component of this effort has been the control of the common ‘external’ borders of member states to restrict undocumented immigration, asylum seekers and smuggling, primarily from African, Middle Eastern, Asian and some Eastern European states. The attempts to make these common borders impermeable have given renewed life to the Second World War term ‘Fortress Europe’.
In April 2010, Ra’anana-based NICE Systemswas awarded a contract as part of a new surveillance system for Poland’s eastern border. The project was co-financed by the European Union’s External Borders Fund (EBF). The EBF’s 2010 Annual Work Programme notes that “the management of the external borders [is] one of the cornerstones of the progressive establishment of the European Union as an area of freedom, security and justice.” Alternately put, for Europeans to have justice, freedom and security, non-European access to the continent must be restricted. This mirrors Israeli policies of ‘separation as security’.
In addition to Poland, several other EU nations are investing in militarized Israeli security and surveillance technologies for their borders. Greece bought naval craft from Israel Shipyards in 2004 “to patrol the long stretch of the southern sea border, where smuggling and illegal immigration are frequent.” The Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary purchased Skylark drones from the Haifa-based Elbit Systems in 2009. Elbit is also the contractor for Lithuania’s coastal surveillance system, delivered in 2007. The system was also EU-funded and Elbit’s press release at the time noted the system’s target to be “illegal border activities.” Elbit Security’s Uri Dobkin said that “the system employs field proven technologies,” a major selling point for Israeli military and security technologies.
Elbit’s surveillance technology, including both the perimeter detection systems and drones, has a long history of use in the occupied Palestinian territory and in Israel’s Lebanon wars. Elbit is one of the key contractors for Israel’s separation barrier. Its “field proven” technology was constructed on the backs of Palestinians.
The EBF also funded the 2009 installation of a command and control system to assist Malta with ship interdiction. The system was purchased from Aeronautics Defense Systems, an Israeli firm better-known for its UAVs, or drones. The list of Israeli technologies used to filter out undesirables from Europe is long; it ranges from On Track Innovations passport control systems used in social sorting to Magal Security Systems’ surveillance and sensor systems for border monitoring. Each of these technologies was engendered by the occupation.
Israel’s infamous separation barrier in the West Bank and East Jerusalem is just the latest set of walls and fences it has built to separate Israelis from Palestinians, and Palestinian communities from each other. There has been a wall around Gaza for years and numerous illegal Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem are surrounded by fences and surveillance networks. These barriers involve land confiscation and severe restrictions on freedom of movement of Palestinians living near them. Their primary purpose is to further the general policy of hafrada, separation. They physically distinguish ‘Us’ from ‘Them’ and can enforce such categories where they do not yet appear to exist. This is why, in addition to a wall around Gaza, there is a wall built between (Palestinian) Pardes Snir and (Jewish) Nir Tzvi, two neighborhoods of Lydd/Lod, even though the residents of both neighborhoods are Israeli citizens. Tellingly, the West Bank wall is referred to in Hebrew as the ‘separation fence’ (Gader HaHafrada), the official English name of “security fence” notwithstanding. A common refrain in Israeli political discussion and a key articulation of the “demographic bomb” is that hafrada is needed in order to maintain a Jewish majority (Note that hafrada can be accurately translated into a well-known Afrikaans word…). Even when the term “security fence” is used, the “security” in question is never that of Palestinians.
The EBF’s Annual Work Programme, too, relies on the language of ‘Us’ vs. ‘Them.’ The EBF was created as part of the “Solidarity and Management of Migrations Flows” programme. The programme has four dimensions.

The first concerns ‘integrated management of external borders’ and the development of a uniform European border regime.
The second concerns asylum policy. Part of the ‘solidarity’ element is the development of a standard policy of allowable asylum. Alternatively put, it is Europeans who will determine the validity of suffering and persecution.
The third concerns ‘the social, civic and cultural integration of Non-EU Member Country Nationals’. How this fits in with recent declarations by David Cameron and Angela Merkel regarding the failure of multiculturalism remains to be seen. The rising tide of European anti-immigrant fervor suggest that it doesn’t.
The fourth concerns ‘the fight against illegal immigration and the return of Non-EU Member Country nationals residing illegally in the EU’. This is, in effect, a variant on Israel’s policies of hafrada.
There are clear differences between the political structures of Israel’s dispossession of Palestinians and the EU’s racist anti-immigrant policing. Israel’s policies are part of an ethnocratic settler-colonial regime, whereas the essence of EU policy socio-economic and ethno-nationalist exclusion.
Irrespective of the ideologies that drive them, the two systems overlap in their attempt to monitor and control populations seen as hostile or undesirable, populations to be filtered out before entering the sovereign space of either the EU or Israel. Israel has decades of experience developing surveillance and social sorting systems to monitor Palestinians. For this reason it is a go-to destination for these “field proven” technologies. So long as the occupation continues, Israel will continue to produce and export tools from its real-life battlefield laboratory. And some of these will be deployed to support anti-immigrant policies in the EU.
Jimmy Johnson enjoys tap-dancing and is the founder of Neged Neshek, a project documenting Israeli arms exports. He is former International Coordinator for the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions and can be reached at

Print Friendly

Comments are closed.