If the South African model is followed and the distinct qualities of Israeli apartheid not recognised, Palestinians will not develop effective means of gaining their freedom says Samer Abdelnour. He cites such defining issues as Israel’s massive military production, subsidies from the US, the fact it does not depend on Palestinian labour, the sophisticated physical and bureaucratic paraphernalia of occupation and its foreign lobbies.

It may seem ridiculous to be discussing whether, ideally, Israelis and Palestinians should live together in one state or two. It’s pie in the sky while the occupation intensifies. But the idea of what could succeed colonialist Israel is vital in providing something to work for, and work on, to overcome the inertia, go beyond mere resistance , however vital that is. Which means the debate on one secular democratic state, a binational or a federal state or two states has to continue. Here Uri Avnery returns to his argument for two states. Like his critics, he says it depends on what models you generalise from.

Zvi Bar’el writes: “The nakba terrifies Israel. We cannot forgive the Arabs for exiling themselves from Palestine, for destroying their own villages, for becoming refugees and for causing the cleansing of the War of Independence. Neither can we forgive them for the fact that many of them remained in Israel, destroying its aspiration to be a pure Jewish state, not only a state for Jews… We may one day have “peaceful coexistence” with the Arabs of the West Bank and Gaza. With the Arabs of Israel, it will take much more. We need sincere reconciliation.”

The Palestinian town of Nazareth is, in terms of amenities and facilities, ‘a village with work camps’ says Sami Abu Shehadeh. The Israeli districts in which Palestinians live are sharply marked off from Jewish ones by poorer amenities, services and infrastructure. But Palestinians in Israel do not get the outside attention of those in the oPt.

In our last pre-election posting we offer a selection of comments on how social democrats are too weak and divided to prevent a victory for the ultra-right. All the articles suggest neither Israelis nor Palestinians have embraced active political participation; there is not an article outside Israel which views more years of a Netanyahu government with anything other than dismay.

It’s not news that an intelligent man thinks Israel has a system of apartheid which is both like S. Africa’s and has its own features. Nor new to comment on the growing international opposition to Israel’s version. But that this article comes from a long-time CIA analyst, published in the magazine of a conservative American thinktank does make Paul R. Pillar’s views noteworthy.

Apartheid is the Afrikaans word for ‘separateness’. Even ‘liberal’ Israelis protest if critics say Israel has apartheid policies. Yet, as Ben White writes, the High Court has recently upheld a decision not to allow four young women from Gaza to study in the West Bank because this would breach the lawful ‘separation policy’. Given how many decisions inimical to Palestinian rights the Court has made, why is it regarded as leftist?

Philip Weiss films the ‘staggering’ West Bank apartheid of roads and land visible from the back of a cab. This is a blatant denial of Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states ‘Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each State’. He refers to a B’Tselem report, updated last month, on how freedom of movement for Palestinians is restricted.

The integration of American and Israeli military and technological systems, the enforcement of the status quo in Israel, the rules and walls separating Jews and Arabs — these are not news. We post this take on these features of the US/Israel alliance because it comes from Netanyahu’s refusenik nephew who went to prison for his beliefs before going to study in the USA. He is now at Cambridge University, UK.

The apartheid between Jews and Arabs in Israel stares visitors in the face – on transport, on the streets, everywhere you look. But American Jews can’t, or won’t see it so blinded are they by the joy of the power they have in Israel. A powerful denunciation by Philip Weiss.

For people who are appalled by Israel’s impunity in breaking international human rights laws a campaign of boycott is harder than it was against S. African apartheid if only because Israel has far more extensive trade links, especially in arms and ‘security’. Yet the campaign is picking up more and more supporters, especially in the arts. Jonathan Owen reports.

The logic of the Israeli aim to make all land from the Jordan to the Mediterranean into Israel is that Palestinians will either be forced out or corralled into densely populated enclaves – known in South Africa as bantustans. This will, argues Jonny Rafferty, make apartheid an enforced reality, in relationships, in political and economic systems, on the land, and in law. Who will then support Israel?

This is less a review than a push by David Shulman for what Peter Beinart ignores: that the Israeli state is wholly geared to getting all the land, Jewish-settled. As a generous Arab resister says: “The Jews are not my enemy; their fear is my enemy…but I refuse to be a victim of Jewish fear anymore.”

Extract from a lengthy report on racial discrimination in Israel (not included here) and the occupied territories. Although critical of racism in Israel toward Bedouin and Palestinians, the UN body, CERD, reserves the designation ‘apartheid’ to describe how the occupied territories function, and urges Israel to make substantive and legal changes by changing domestic legislation and acknowledging international law.

The window for a 2-state solution is definitively closed and we should all stop talking about it. No international body helps. Israel will force the growing number of Arabs into PA-controlled areas. While arguing that only Palestinians can create thier own agency, Jeff Halper insists that nothing good for Palestiians can emerge as long as effort is put into maintaining the current unjust rules and delusory ambitions.

Israel’s former ambassador to S.Africa recalls its laws designed to disable civil society, destroy community organizations and stamp out human rights. But, unlike the ‘strikingly similar’ laws being proposed in Israel, at least there was due process in the apartheid state.

Carlo Strenger, liberal commentator on Haaretz, declares 2011 the year the two-state solution died. He takes hope from the community who share his values and will continue, at least, to stand for civil and human rights and stop their further erosion in Israel

What are pro-Israeli groups afraid of? Asa WInstanley is barred from the(ironically named) Big Tent in Manchester. At Birmingham University, where last year the Students’ Guild endorsed the EUMC “Working Definition of Antisemitism”, the chair of the debating society said she had been instructed not to accept a question with the term “apartheid” in relation to Israel-Palestine. Speaker Ben White was earlier told he was not allowed to sell his book , “Israeli Apartheid: a Beginner’s Guide”.

Haaretz publisher Amos Schocken deplores the influence of Gush Emunim in driving Israeli policy towards the destruction of the institutions of democracy; 2, the Knesset’s guide to Gush Emunim; 3, extract from a paper on how this group moved itself and others towards terrorism and religious fundamentalism

No apology for another posting on ‘apartheid’ this week – it’s a defining question in how the status of Paletinians under the authority of the Israeli state is to be judged. Lev Luis Ginsberg rejects the term; the RToP in Cape Town give extensive reasons for how they judged the Israelis’ treatment of Palestinians under their rule. It’s not South Africa. It is separate and unequal treatment and is thus apartheid.