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



Uproar as Israeli ambassadors applaud criticism of settlements policy

UPDATE: the first article from Ynet has been added to the report of Shimon Peres’ gathering of diplomats.
See also Israel’s critics should get themselves organised

Yaakov Amidror, head of the National Security Council, tells his country’s ambassadors to rsign if they don’t like (can’t sell) government policy. Diplomats, unlike other government personnel, spend most of their time outside the closed room of Israeli propaganda and policy-makers. Photo by Amir Cohen.

Ambassadors protest Israel policy

UN Ambassador Prosor asks national security adviser about timing of construction in area E1, to general applause. Ambassadors then reproached for criticizing government policy

By Itamar Eichner, Ynet news
January 01, 2013

The Foreign Ministry’s ambassadors’ conference on Monday turned into a protest against government policy. Yaakov Amidror, head of the National Security Council, lost his patience after Ron Prosor, Israel’s ambassador to the UN, asked him a question. Amidror burst out at the diplomats: “If you do not agree with government policy, either go into politics or resign.”

Amidror was speaking before 160 ambassadors and heads of Israeli missions abroad. Following a scholarly survey of the political situation with regards to the Iranian threat, the Palestinian issue and international developments, Amidror took questions from the audience.

Prosor, one of the highest ranking Israeli diplomats in the world, asked Amidror what was the rationale behind timing the decision to promote construction in area E1 (between Jerusalem and Ma’aleh Adumim) after the UN resolution to upgrade the Palestinian Authority to an observer state status.

Prosor’s fellow ambassadors, who found it difficult to explain to the world the basis of Israel’s foreign policy on the matter, applauded Prosor. Amidror was not taken aback. “I don’t think that the British Foreign Office would have applauded a question which implies criticism of government policy,” he said.

“There is no way the State Department would have cheered a question which criticized President Obama’s policy.” Answering the question, Amidror said that there was a need to make it clear to the Palestinians that unilateral moves on their part come with a price.

“Unpleasant tones”
The reproach by Netanyahu’s adviser caused uproar, and Ran Curiel, Deputy Director of the Foreign Ministry, intervened, trying to calm the situation. “I want to say that the applause was not aimed against government policy but was an expression to our concern,” Curiel said. “It may be that a certain frustration was expressed because sometimes we are not given the tools needed to explain governmental policy.”

Amidror was not appeased: “Gentlemen, do no be confused. You are the government’s representatives. If that doesn’t suit you: either go into politics or resign. I’m a clerk in the State of Israel, the chief of staff is a clerk and you are all clerks. Our job is to advise, but in the end it is up to the political leaders to make the decisions. If you think there are problems with the policies you can express your concerns behind closed doors.”

Ambassadors left the conference feeling highly displeased. “It ended in unpleasant tones. Prosor asked a completely legitimate question and was rebuked. We don’t argue that our job is to represent the state, but those who do have to understand the logic behind its decisions.”

It should be noted that the Foreign Ministry recommended to the government to postpone any counter-measures to the Palestinian bid so as not to focus international attention on Israel, fearing it may be seen as vindictive. But the Prime Minister chose to ignore this recommendation. The result was that Israel was caught in an unprecedented storm of condemnation and many of its ambassadors were reprimanded.

President Shimon Peres also discussed the Palestinian issue on Monday, for the second time this week. A day after declaring Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to be a partner for peace and severely criticizing Netanyahu and Lieberman’s handling of diplomacy, the president said that “there is nothing wrong with talking to Hamas, as long as it accepts the terms of the Quartet. Hamas and Gaza have to decide what they want – peace or war.”

Israeli President Shimon Peres, not above politics

‘By picking sides, Peres harms prestige of the presidency’

At a diplomatic event at the President’s Residence, Peres says: Abbas is a man with whom we can reach an agreement • Likud-Beytenu lashes out against the president expressing personal political opinions in international forum • Netanyahu not surprised: I respect the president and I appreciate him. We meet often.

By Mati Tuchfeld, Yori Yallon, Shlomo Cesana and Gideon Allon, Israel Hayom
December 31, 2012

Coalition Chairman Zeev Elkin (Likud) harshly criticized President Shimon Peres on Monday, a day after Peres told a gathering of Israeli diplomats that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is a brave potential partner for peace.

“You can easily dig through the archives and find that Peres made the same statements about Yasser Arafat,” Elkin told the Kol Berama radio station.

Elkin said that the job of the president is to at least appear impartial.

“A few weeks before an election, [Peres] entered into the heart of the ideological political debate in Israel, saying very sharp things and taking a side,” Elkin said, adding that Peres had harmed the prestige of the presidency.

Peres made his statements about Abbas while addressing an event at the President’s Residence in Jerusalem on Sunday that was attended by 160 Israeli ambassadors and diplomatic representatives from around the world.

“I have known Abu Mazen [Abbas] for 30 years and no one will change my opinion about him, even if they say that I can’t express this opinion because I am president.” Peres said. “The president should be allowed to evaluate people according to his experience. [Abbas] is a man with whom we can reach an agreement.”

Peres was likely not surprised by the string of harsh reactions to his statements, just three weeks before national elections. Some believe that he even wanted to flare tempers.

“It is truly unfortunate that the president would choose to express his personal political opinions, which are so disconnected from the Israeli public’s with respect to Abu Mazen, a denier of peace,” said Environmental Protection Minister Gilad Erdan, head of the Likud party’s election campaign.

Vice Prime Minister Moshe (Bogie) Ya’alon (Likud) said: “The president does not need to get into political issues, thus I don’t want to have to debate with him over politics. But I can already see other parties taking advantage of his sentiments, of course to attack us, as they often do in the international arena. The prime minister has tried from the outset of his government to get a diplomatic process moving; he was even ready to do a 10-month settlement freeze. But we are not ready to kowtow to Palestinian demands which they call ‘preconditions.’ From this perspective, I think we proved to have a thoughtful, responsible and uncompromising policy with respect to the Palestinians. Unfortunately, they are manipulating the Israeli public.”

Ayala Hason, a political commentator for Channel 1, summarized on Sunday night reactions from officials in the Labor party. They believe that Peres is trying to promote Hatnuah (“The Movement”) leader Tzipi Livni in the upcoming elections.

Peres also clarified that he doesn’t agree with Abbas’ every word and every action, but he also said: “I know the reality that Abu Mazen is the only Arab leader who got up and publicly said that he supports peace and opposes terror. Abu Mazen’s actions to prevent terror are brave to the extent of endangering his own life. Put yourselves in his shoes; you will discover that his recognition of a solution to the right of return and the fact that he will not return to Safed, the city he was born in, were important and brave statements. There is little time. In terms of likelihood, this is the process that we can carry out today.”

Peres also clarified: “We need to directly say that anyone who doesn’t want a solution involving two states for two peoples must offer an alternative solution. What can happen instead? What will Israel’s future be? Otherwise, the reality will determine the solution, instead of us. A binational state endangers Zionism, Judaism and democracy in the State of Israel. I would like to live together as twins, but in such a small land deeply rooted in hatred, suspicion and cultural gaps it is impossible.”

Regarding Israel’s status in the world, Peres said: “Our diplomatic goal has always been to recruit friends and not more enemies. My life experiences have taught me that diplomacy is an art and that it is possible. We must shift away from the militant approach to the approach of moderate dialogue. What appears to be impossible will be possible if we act with intelligence.”

The fact that Peres spoke to ambassadors particularly angered some members of the Likud-Beytenu faction. One official said: “It is gravely unfortunate that the president would choose to present these political opinions to a group of ambassadors, encouraging denunciation of Israel in the international arena. The prime minister has called on Abu Mazen ten times to return to the negotiating table and even worked hard for it; but Abu Mazen, who refused even [former Prime Minister Ehud] Olmert’s offers, prefers to connect with Hamas and act against Israel in any arena possible. It is unfortunate that the president of this country did not explain to these diplomats how inconsistent Abu Mazen is and that he didn’t even condemn the firing of rockets on Israeli civilians.”

In contrast to the Likud party’s strong response, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu chose to express an official position, speaking at a dedication ceremony for the new train station in Beit Shean on Sunday evening. “I respect the president and I appreciate him. We meet often, including on Fridays. There are a range of opinions, and we exchange our opinions on many relevant current issues. This is how it has always been and this is how it will continue to be.”

On Sunday night, the Prime Minister’s Office issued an official statement saying the prime minister is “aware that the president has a desire to express his opinions on political issues and is not surprised by them. But the prime minister believes that the president, especially just before elections, is not supposed to say such things.”

Meanwhile, parties on the Left expressed their support for the president’s sentiments, and used the comment as a platform for criticism of the Likud.

“The Likud lashing out at the president, one of the symbols of the State of Israel, is aggressive and despicable,” said Labor Chairwoman Shelly Yachimovich. “Even under pressure, following a decline in the polls, does not give the Likud the legitimacy to damage the presidency.”

In response to Likud’s claims that Peres’ comments encourage international condemnation, Yachimovich said, “It is a contemptible statement. Peres stops attacks on Israel with his own person and he is our best ambassador.”

Labor MK Isaac (Buji) Herzog added his support as well: “President Peres decisively and clearly expressed the need for diplomatic action, rather than declarations and words. The Netanyahu-Lieberman government has brought us to new heights of international isolation and stagnation that threatens the future of Israel as a state for the Jewish people.”

Hatnuah Chairwoman Tzipi Livni praised Peres. “The president of Israel acted with appropriate responsibility and told the public the truth about Israel’s situation and its position. This is how anyone who cares for Israel, certainly the president, should act. Netanyahu must immediately stop his bullying and the insolent attack by the Likud on the president. Those who attack the president have not done even a tenth of what he has for Israel’s security, and have only isolated and harmed Israel’s security.”

Kadima Chairman Shaul Mofaz said: “We must condemn the Likud’s attack on the president, which is based on electoral considerations. Likud-Beytenu, with respect to policy, is leading Israel toward a Third Intifada or an arrangement contrary to Israel’s interests. Israel must go back and lead the diplomatic process, to create our future with our own hands.”

Print Friendly

Comments are closed.