November 2012 Archives

0

Press Release November 21, 2012

Gush Shalom welcomes the end of brutal warfare 

zope.gush-shalom.org…

Hebrew zope.gush-shalom.org… עברית

It is the second time that the Netanyahu government negotiated with Hamas and reached an agreement

This could be a precedent for peace negotiations with all Palestinian factions

Tonight’s ceasefire put an end to a week of brutal warfare which caused  suffering on both sides of the border.  At least, the Government of Israel was able to understand the limitations of power and stop the war before implementing the threatened ground invasion which would have multiplied the destruction and bloodshed and would have isolated Israel totally.

In spite of the government claims of “surgical bombing”,   the past few days saw already an enormous increase in the number of  civilians killed, among them many children. Photos of the dead children were spread all over the world – though not published by the Israeli media. PR efforts ( “Hasbara”) would not have stood a chance had the war continued.  

According to published details of the agreement reached in Cairo, there is a provision for some relief of Israel’s siege of the Gaza Strip. It is to be hoped that such would prove the case, and that it would be the first step to lifting the  siege altogether. Lifting the siege on the Gaza Strip is not only a Palestinian interest – it is also an Israeli interest. The siege, which is the continuation of the occupation by other means, has not prevented the mass accumulation of missiles in the Gaza Strip, as we all saw during the past week. But it did cause serious economic damage to the residents of the Gaza Strip, exacerbating poverty, suffering and hatred. The residents of Gaza have the right to free access to the outside world by land, sea, and air – just like the residents of Israel and of all countries.

Egyptian President Morsi played a positive and vital role. Now there is a chance to revitalize the peace with Egypt and to open channels to the rising forces of political Islam throughout the region. However, such a development requires first and foremost a progress toward peace with the Palestinians.

There are certainly valid grounds for the concerns of many in Israel, and of residents of the south in particular, that the ceasefire signed today would prove but a temporary intermission, and that sooner or later there will be a new outbreak of violence. Absent a real progress towards solving the fundamental issues between Israel and the Palestinian people, such apprehensions could well come true. But this is certainly not inevitable. A move forwards could and should be undertaken, from ceasefire towards full-fledged peace with the Palestinians, with all their parties and factions.

This is the second time that the Netanyahu government  negotiated and reached an agreement with Hamas. As in negotiations on the prisoner exchange last year, there was no meeting face to face – the Egyptians passing back and forth messages, proposals and counter proposals –  but Netanyahu knew full well with whom he was negotiating.

This could  work as a not unimportant  precedent towards political negotiations with all Palestinian factions, whose uniting would be in the true interest of Israel. But to actually go in such a direction requires an Israeli government willing to end also the occupation of the West Bank.

Contact: Adam Keller, Gush Shalom Spokesperson 054-2340749

0

This damning analysis was published in Haaretz by veteran reporter, Amira Hass.

Hass is the daughter of two Holocaust survivors. She is unique as an Israeli journalist reporting on the Palestinian situation as she has chosen to live in the West Bank and Gaza and do her reporting from there.

Her reporting of events, and her voicing of opinions that run counter to both official Israeli and Palestinian positions regularly exposes her to verbal attacks and opposition from both the Israeli and Palestinian authorities.

Amira Hass

Amira Hass

source: www.haaretz.com…

Israel’s ‘right to self-defense’ – a tremendous propaganda victory 

By Amira Hass 

By supporting Israel’s offensive on Gaza, Western leaders have given the Israelis carte blanche to do what they’re best at: Wallow in their sense of victimhood and ignore Palestinian suffering. Israels right to self defense a tremendous propaganda victory 

One of Israel’s tremendous propaganda victories is that it has been accepted as a victim of the Palestinians, both in the view of the Israeli public and that of Western leaders who hasten to speak of Israel’s right to defend itself. The propaganda is so effective that only the Palestinian rockets at the south of Israel, and now at Tel Aviv, are counted in the round of hostilities. The rockets, or damage to the holiest of holies – a military jeep – are always seen as a starting point, and together with the terrifying siren, as if taken from a World War II movie, build the meta-narrative of the victim entitled to defend itself. 

Every day, indeed every moment, this meta-narrative allows Israel to add another link to the chain of dispossession of a nation as old as the state itself, while at the same time managing to hide the fact that one continuous thread runs from the 1948 refusal to allow Palestinian refugees to return to their homes, the early 1950s expulsion of Bedouin from the Negev desert, the current expulsion of Bedouin from the Jordan Valley, ranches for Jews in the Negev, discrimination in budgets in Israel, and shooting at Gazan fishermen to keep them from earning a respectable living. Millions of such continuous threads link 1948 to the present. They are the fabric of life for the Palestinian nation, as divided as it may be in isolated pockets. They are the fabric of life of Palestinian citizens of Israel and of those who live in their lands of exile. 

But these threads are not the entire fabric of life. The resistance to the threads that we, the Israelis, endlessly spin is also part of the fabric of life for Palestinians. The word resistance has been debased to mean the very masculine competition of whose missile will explode furthest away (a competition among Palestinian organizations, and between them and the established Israeli army ). It does not invalidate the fact that, in essence, resistance to the injustice inherent in Israeli domination is an inseparable part of life for each and every Palestinian. 

The foreign and international development ministries in the West and in the United States knowingly collaborate with the mendacious representation of Israel as victim, if only because every week they receive reports from their representatives in the West Bank and Gaza Strip about yet another link of dispossession and oppression that Israel has added to the chain, or because their own taxpayers’ money make up for some of the humanitarian disasters, large and small, inflicted by Israel. 

On November 8, two days before the attack on the holiest of holies – soldiers in a military jeep – they could have read about IDF soldiers killing 13-year old Ahmad Abu Daqqa, who was playing soccer with his friends in the village of Abassan, east of Khan Yunis. The soldiers were 1.5 kilometers from the kids, inside the Gaza Strip area, busy with “exposing” (a whitewashed word for destroying ) agricultural land. So why shouldn’t the count of aggression start with a child? On November 10, after the attack on the jeep, the IDF killed another four civilians, aged 16 to 19. 

Wallowing in ignorance 

Leaders of the West could have known that, before the IDF’s exercise last week in the Jordan Valley, dozens of Bedouin families were told to evacuate their homes. How extraordinary that IDF training always occurs where Bedouin live, not Israeli settlers, and that it constitutes a reason to expel them. Another reason. Another expulsion. The leaders of the West could also have known, based on the full-color, chrome-paper reports their countries finance, that since the beginning of 2012, Israel has destroyed 569 Palestinian buildings and structures, including wells and 178 residences. In all, 1,014 people were affected by those demolitions. 

We haven’t heard masses of Tel Aviv and southern residents warning the stewards of the state about the ramifications of this destruction on the civilian population. The Israelis cheerfully wallow in their ignorance. This information and other similar facts are available and accessible to anyone who’s really interested. But Israelis choose not to know. This willed ignorance is a foundation stone in the building of Israel’s sense of victimization. But ignorance is ignorance: The fact that Israelis don’t want to know what they are doing as an occupying power doesn’t negate their deeds or Palestinian resistance. 

In 1993, the Palestinians gave Israel a gift, a golden opportunity to cut the threads tying 1948 to the present, to abandon the country’s characteristics of colonial dispossession, and together plan a different future for the two peoples in the region. The Palestinian generation that accepted the Oslo Accords (full of traps laid by smart Israeli lawyers ) is the generation that got to know a multifaceted, even normal, Israeli society because the 1967 occupation allowed it (for the purpose of supplying cheap labor ) almost full freedom of movement. The Palestinians agreed to a settlement based on their minimum demands. One of the pillars of these minimum demands was treating the Gaza Strip and West Bank as a single territorial entity. 

But once the implementation of Oslo started, Israel systematically did everything it could to make the Gaza Strip into a separate, disconnected entity, as part of Israel’s insistence on maintaining the threads of 1948 and extending them. Since the rise of Hamas, it has done everything to back up the impression Hamas prefers – that the Gaza Strip is a separate political entity where there is no occupation. If that is so, why not look at things as follows: As a separate political entity, any incursion into Gazan territory is an infringement of its sovereignty, and Israel does this all the time. Does the government of the state of Gaza not have the right to respond, to deter, or at least the masculine right – a twin of the IDF’s masculine right – to scare the Israelis just as Israel scares the Palestinians? 

But Gaza is not a state. Gaza is under Israeli occupation, despite all the verbal acrobatics of both Hamas and Israel. The Palestinians who live there are part of a people whose DNA contains resistance to oppression. 

In the West Bank, Palestinian activists try to develop a type of resistance different from the masculine, armed resistance. But the IDF puts down all popular resistance with zeal and resolve. We haven’t heard of residents of Tel Aviv and the south complaining about the balance of deterrence the IDF is building against the civilian Palestinian population.  

And so Israel again provides reasons for more young Palestinians, for whom Israel is an abnormal society of army and settlers, to conclude that the only rational resistance is spilled blood and counter-terrorizing. And so every Israeli link of oppression and all Israeli disregard of the oppression’s existence drags us further down the slope of masculine competition. 

1

Professor Ilan Pappe – the author of this list of ‘Mythologies’ – is one of those extraordinary characters whose convictions have led him to take a stand against his own community.

He is a Jewish man and was lecturing at an Israeli university, but his research into the history of the modern state of Israel led him to question the publicly accepted narrative – that his homeland had been a ‘land without a people’ when the state was formed in 1948.

Professor Pappe subsequently went on to uncover and publish truths about the ethnic cleansing of Palestine that politicians had tried to keep from the rest of the world (including from the Israeli public).

Dr Ilan Pappe

Dr Ilan Pappe

The Ten Mythologies of Israel

Ilan Pappé

November 2012

Any attempt to solve a conflict has to touch upon the very core of this conflict and the core more often than not lies in its history. A distorted or manipulated history can explain quite well a failure to end a conflict whereas a truthful and comprehensive look at the past can facilitate a lasting peace and solution. A distorted history can in fact do more harm, as the particular case study of Israel and Palestine shows: it can protect oppression, colonization and occupation. The wide acceptance in the world of the Zionist narrative is based on a cluster of mythologies that, in the end, cast doubt on the Palestinian moral right, ethical behavior and chances for any just peace in the future. The reason for this is that these mythologies are accepted by the mainstream media in the West, and by the political elites there as truth. Once accepted as a truth, these mythologies become a justification, not so much for the Israeli actions, but for the West’s inclination to interfere.

Listed below are these ten common myths that provided an immunity shield for impunity and inhumanity in the land of Palestine.

Myth 1: Palestine was a land without people, waiting for the people without a land The first is that Palestine was a land without people waiting for the people without land. The first part was successfully proved to be false by a number of excellent historians who showed that before the arrival of the early Zionists, Palestine had a thriving society, mostly rural, but with a very vibrant urban center. It was a society like all the other Arab societies around it, held under Ottoman rule and part of the empire, but nonetheless one which witnessed the emergence of a nascent national movement. The movement would probably have turned Palestine into a nationstate, like Iraq or Syria, had Zionism not arrived on its shores.

The second part of this mythology is also doubtful, but less significant. Several scholars, among them Israelis, doubted the genetic connection between the Zionist settlers and the Jews who lived the Roman time in Palestine or were exiled at the time. This is really less important, as many national movements create artificially their story of birth and plant it in the distant past. The important issue, however, is what you do in the name of this narrative. Do you justify colonization, expulsion and killing in the name of that story, or do you seek peace and reconciliation on its basis? It does not matter whether the narrative is true or not. What matters is that it is vile if, in its name, you colonize, dispossess and in some cases even commit acts of genocide against indigenous and native people.

Myth 2: Palestinians resorted to acts of terror against Jewish settlers prior to the creation of Israel The second foundational mythology was that the Palestinians from early on resorted to an anti-Semitic campaign of terror when the first settlers arrived, and until the creation of the state of Israel. As the diaries of the early Zionists show, they were well received by the Palestinians who offered them abode and taught them in many cases how to cultivate the land. It was only when it became clear that these settlers did not come to live next to or with the native population, but instead of it, that the Palestinian resistance began. And when that resistance started it was not different from any other anti-colonialist struggle.

Myth 3: Myths around the creation of Israel The third myth is set of Israeli fables about the 1948 war. There were four foundational mythologies connected to this year.

3.1 The Palestinians are to be blamed for what happened to them because they rejected the UN Partition Plan of 1947 The first was that the Palestinians are to be blamed for what occurred to them since they rejected the UN partition plan of November 1947. This allegation ignores the colonialist nature of the Zionist movement. It would have been unlikely that the Algerians, for instance, would have accepted the partition of Algeria with the French settlers – and such a refusal would not be deemed unreasonable or irrational. What is morally clear is that such an objection, in the case of any other Arab country, should not have justified the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians as a ‘punishment’ for rejecting a UN peace plan that was devised without any consultation with them.

3.2 The Palestinians left their home voluntarily or as a result of a call by their leaders Similarly absurd is the myth that the Palestinians left their homes voluntarily or as a result of a call by their leaders and those of the neighboring Arab states, supposedly to make way for the invading Arab armies that would come to liberate Palestine. There was no such call – this myth was invented by the Israeli foreign minister in the early 1950s. Later on Israeli historians changed the mythology and claimed that the Palestinians left, or fled, because of the war. But the truth of the matter is that already half of those who became refugees in 1948 were expelled before the war commenced, on May 15, 1948.

3.3 Israel was a David fighting an Arab Goliath The research proved that the Palestinians had no military power whatsoever. On the second point, the Arab states sent only a relatively small contingent of troops to Palestine, and they were smaller in size, and far less equipped or trained than the Jewish forces. Moreover, and highly significant, is the fact that these troops were sent into Palestine after May 15, 1948 when Israel had already been declared as a state, as a response to an ethnic cleansing operation that the Zionist forces had begun in February 1948.

3.4 After its war of creation, Israel extended its hand for peace to its Palestinian and Arab neighbors As for the myth of the extended hand of peace, the documents show clearly an intransigent Israeli leadership that refused to open up negotiations over the future of post-Mandatory Palestine, or consider the return of the people who had been expelled or fled. While Arab governments and Palestinian leaders were willing to participate in a new and more reasonable UN peace initiative in 1948, the Israelis assassinated the UN peace mediator, Count Bernadotte, and rejected the suggestion by the Palestine Conciliation Commission (PCC), a UN body, to reopen negotiations. This intransigent view would continue and as Avi Shlaim has shown in The Iron Wall that, contrary to the myth that the Palestinians never missed an opportunity to miss peace, it was Israel that constantly rejected the peace offers that were on the table.

Myth 4: Israel was a benign democratic state prior to 1967 The fourth mythology is that Israel was a benign democratic state, seeing peace with its neighbors, and offering equality to all its citizens before the June 1967 war. This is a myth propagated alas by some notable Palestinian and pro-Palestinian scholars – but it has no historical foundation in facts. One fifth of the Israeli citizenship was subjected to a ruthless military rule based on draconian British mandatory emergency regulations that denied them any basic human and civil rights. Within this period more than fifty Palestinian citizens were killed by the Israeli security forces. At the same time, Israel pursued aggressive policies towards its Arab neighbors, attacking them for allowing refugees to try and return, or at least retrieve their lost property and husbandry. In collusion with Britain and France, Israel also tried to topple Gamal Abdul Nasser’s legitimate regime in Egypt.

Myth 5: The Palestinian struggle has no aim other than Terror The fifth myth is that the Palestinian struggle is that of terrorism and nothing more. The struggle led by the PLO was a liberation struggle against a colonialist project. Somehow the world finds it difficult to grant legitimacy to anti-colonialist struggle when most of the oppressed are Muslims and the oppressor is Jewish.

Myth 6: Israel was forced to occupy the West Bank and Gaza in 1967, ad must hold these territories until others are ready for peace The sixth myth is that the 1967 war forced Israel to occupy the West Bank and the Gaza strip and keep them in custody until the Arab world, or the Palestinians, are willing to make peace with the Jewish State. The Israeli political and military elite regarded the 1948 war as a missed opportunity: a historical moment in which Israeli could have occupied the whole of historical Palestine (from the river Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea). The only reason they did not do it was because of a tacit agreement with the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan: in return for Jordan’s limited participation in the general Arab war effort, Jordan would be allowed to annex the West Bank. Following 1948, the Israeli elite were looking for an opportunity and planned carefully from the mid-1960s how to implement a plan to have it all. There were several historical junctures in which the Israelis nearly did it – but held back at the last moment. The most famous instances were in 1958 and 1960. In 1958, the leader of the state and its first Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion, aborted plans at the last moment due to fears of international reaction. In 1960, Ben-Gurion held back because of his demographic fears –thinking that Israel cannot incorporate such a large number of Palestinians. The best opportunity came in 1967, regardless of the Israeli mythology of not wishing to go to war against Jordan, but being forced to react to Jordanian aggression. There was no need for Israel to remain in the West Bank, if this were just another round of tension between the two states. Incorporating the West Bank and the Gaza Strip within Israel was an Israeli plan since 1948 that was implemented in 1967.

Myth 7: Israel occupied the West Bank and Gaza with benevolent intentions, but was forced to respond to Palestinian violence The seventh myth was that Israel intended to conduct a benevolent occupation but was forced to take a tougher attitude because of Palestinian violence. Israel regarded from the very beginning any wish to end the occupation – whether expressed peacefully or through a struggle – as terrorism. From the beginning, it reacted brutally by collectively punishing the population for any demonstration of resistance.

The Palestinians were offered two options: 1) to accept life in an Israeli open prison, enjoy limited autonomy, and the right to work as underpaid labor in Israel, bereft of any workers’ rights, or 2) resist, even mildly, and risk living in a maximum security prison subjected to instruments of collective punishment, including house demolitions, arrests without trial, expulsions, and in severe cases, assassinations and murder.

The major reality change that Palestinians had to accept – or risk enduring punishment – was that Israeli would unilaterally decide which part of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip will be taken from them forever and annexed to Israel. At this point in time, more than half of the West Bank has been annexed in one way or another, while the Gaza strip has been left alone eventually as an area over which Israel wishes to exercise a direct rule.

Part of this myth related to assertions about the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) – assertions promoted by liberal Zionists both in the USA and Israel, and shared with the rest of the political forces in Israel about the PLO’s struggle. The allegation was that the PLO – inside and outside of Palestine – was conducting a war of terror for the sake of terror. Unfortunately, this demonization is still very prevalent in the West and has been accentuated after 2001 by the attempt to equate Islam, terrorism and Palestine. The PLO was, in fact, recognized as the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people by more states than have recognized Israel. It is noteworthy that this demonization continued even after the Oslo Accords of 1993, through which Israel supposedly recognized the PLO as a legitimate partner. Even the Palestine Authority is still depicted by Israel as an outfit that supports terror. The worst kind of demonization, which convinced the Western world to resort to political boycott, was directed at the Hamas. While international civil society continues to question such a characterization, mainstream media and politicians still fall foul to this slander.

Myth 8: The Oslo Accords reflected a desire on both sides to reach a solution The eighth myth is that the Oslo Accords were a peace process that was born out the wish of both sides to reach a solution. The idea of partitioning Palestine already back in the 1930s was a Zionist concept that the Palestinians refused to cave in to until the late 1980s. In the meantime, the share of the land the Israelis were willing to offer the Palestinians went down from half of the land to 15 percent of it. The willingness to call this 15 percent a state could not hide the fact that the Oslo process, devised solely by Israelis, offered only a fragmented Bantustan for the Palestinians, and no “right of return” or other solution for the millions of Palestinian refugees.

Oslo was the result of a matrix of events that had disempowered the PLO and its leader, Yasser Arafat, to such an extent that against the advice of his best friends, he went into this process hoping to gain independence in at least part of Palestine. The end result was an almost total destruction of Palestine and the Palestinians.

Myth 9: The Second Intifada was a mass terror attack orchestrated by Arafat The ninth myth is that the Second Intifada was a mega terrorist attack sponsored and, in a way, planned by Arafat. The truth is, it was a mass demonstration of dissatisfaction with the betrayal of Oslo, compounded by the provocative action of Ariel Sharon and his likes around the holy places for Islam in Palestine. This nonviolent protest was crushed by brutal force by Israel, which led to a more desperate Palestinian response: the expanded use of suicide bombs as a last resort against Israel’s overwhelming military power. There is telling evidence by Israeli newspaper correspondents how their reporting on the early stages of the Intifada – as a nonviolent movement that was crushed violently – was shelved by the editors so as to fit the narrative of the government.

That narrative of the Palestinians aborting the peace process by force, and thus “reaffirming” what Israel has always said about them – i.e. that they do not miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity for peace and that ‘there is no one to talk to on the Palestinian side’ – is particularly cynical. The Israeli government and army had tried by force to impose its own version of Oslo – one which was meant to perpetuate the occupation forever but with Palestinian consent – and even a feeble Arafat could not accept it. He and so many other leaders who could have led the Palestinians to reconciliation were targeted by the Israelis; and most of them, perhaps even Arafat as well, were assassinated.

Myth 10: A solution in Israel and Palestine is just around the corner The last and tenth myth is that there is a solution in Israel and Palestine just around the corner: the “two state solution” will fall into place, and the conflict will be nearly over. This corner is definitely not upon this earth, maybe somewhere in the universe. The reality on the ground, that of a massive colonization and direct annexation of vast part of the West Bank to Israel, would render any resulting state a sad Bantustan. If such a state is ever agreed to, it would be a Bantustan without any proper sovereignty. Even worse, Palestine would be defined as only 20 percent of what it actually is, and the Palestinians would be defined only as those who live in the West Bank. (Significantly, the Gaza strip seems to have been excluded from discussions of a future state, and many parts of Jerusalem are also not included in the envisaged state).

The “two state solution,” as mentioned above, is an Israeli invention that was meant to allow it to square a circle: to include the West Bank within Israel’s control without incorporating the population that lives there. Thus, it was suggested that part of the West Bank would be autonomous and maybe even a “state” in return for the Palestinians giving up all their hopes: hopes for the return of refugees, for equal rights for the Palestinians in Israel, for the fate of Jerusalem, and for a normal life as human beings in their homeland.

Any criticism to this mythology is branded as anti-Semitism. But in fact, this policy and mythology is the main reason why anti-Semitism is still exists. Israel insists that what it does, it does in the name of Judaism. Hence it creates an association between the Zionist colonization and Jewish religion in the minds of twisted people. This association should be rejected in the name of Judaism.

Indeed, for the sake of universal values, the right of everyone who lives in Palestine (or was expelled) should be respected. The right for all peoples in Israel and Palestine to live as equals should top the agenda of all efforts for peace and reconciliation in the region.

0

Anonymous

This is potentially one of the most significant developments to come out of this latest assault on Gaza – that international group of hacktivists known as ‘Anonymous‘ have weighed into the conflict on the side of Palestine!

“For far too long Anonymous has stood by with the rest of the world and watched in despair the barbaric, brutal and despicable treatment of the Palestinian people in the so-called Occupied Territories by the Israel Defense Force. Like so many around the globe we have felt helpless in the face of such implacable evil, and today’s insane attack and threatened invasion of Gaza was more of the same, but when the government of Israel threatened to sever all Internet and public communications into and out of Gaza, they crossed a line in the sand!”

This is not something that the state of Israel should take lightly. This year Time Magazine in American named Anonymous as one of the most influential groups of people in the world! While nuclear weapons and Apache helicopters can accomplish a lot in terms of keeping regular hostiles at bay, they can accomplish nothing against cyber-combatants! Anonymous has an amazing record of both tracking down Internet pedophiles and executing denial of service attacks against major government and corporate websites!  Apparently the attacks on Israeli government websites have already begun!

Embed...

Can’t see the video? Try this link.

Anonymous‘ asks that a series of URL’s be distributed with the above broadcast that will help people stay staying connected to the Internet even when governments try to close off their communications:

 

0

Below is the unedited text of the ceasefire agreement reached between Israel and Hamas on Wednesday, courtesy of “Information Clearing House“. It was originally distributed by the Egyptian presidency.

Unfortunately the agreement was violated almost immediately when Israeli forces killed a Palestinian man, Anwar Qdeih, (a 23 year-old), on the border. He was apparently shot through the head while trying to place a Hamas flag on the fence near Khan Younis, in southern Gaza.

Lord, have mercy!

Father Dave

File:Small hamas logo.gif

Text of Israel-Hamas Peace Agreement

November 22, 2012 CAIRO

Agreement of Understanding For a Ceasefire in the Gaza Strip

1: (no title given for this section)

A. Israel should stop all hostilities in the Gaza Strip land, sea and air including incursions and targeting of individuals.

B. All Palestinian factions shall stop all hostilities from the Gaza Strip against Israel including rocket attacks and all attacks along the border.

C. Opening the crossings and facilitating the movements of people and transfer of goods and refraining from restricting residents’ free movements and targeting residents in border areas and procedures of implementation shall be dealt with after 24 hours from the start of the ceasefire.

D. Other matters as may be requested shall be addressed.

2: Implementation mechanisms:

A. Setting up the zero hour for the ceasefire understanding to enter into effect.

B. Egypt shall receive assurances from each party that the party commits to what was agreed upon.

C. Each party shall commit itself not to perform any acts that would breach this understanding. In case of any observations Egypt as the sponsor of this understanding shall be informed to follow up.