Mid East | UnFox News - Not a Propaganda Arm of the Republican Party

Why do Egyptians love Avatar? | Joseph Mayton

Thu, 11 Mar 2010 01:00:04 -0600

Parallels between the Na'vi and oppressed people in the Arab world are flimsy – and imply the need for a foreign saviour

The gigantic blue Na'vi of Pandora have captured Egyptianand Arab minds over the past few months. When they were snubbed at Sunday's Oscar ceremony in favour of The Hurt Locker, the Twittersphere and blogs were ablaze with people crying foul. How, they cried, could a politicised movie glorifying war in Iraq win over a film, Avatar, which "so resembles the causes of struggling people"?

The battle between Avatar and The Hurt Locker has revealed a great divide in the culture of Egypt and the Arab world, where films that show brutal reality are often shunned in favour of the otherworldly tale of the Na'vi, which had made more than 8m Egyptian pounds (£1m) by mid-February. It is still number four in the Egyptian box office chart.

Egyptians usually dislike films that look into political situations in the region unless there is a direct anti-American angle. Body of Lies is the model for success in winning Egyptian and Arab support. Ridley Scott's film is weak and barely scrapes the surface of the harsh realities in the region, but many Egyptians thought it spoke to the wrongs of the American government's war on terror.

Consequently, there was little that Egyptians liked about The Hurt Locker. To their mind, it was an American pro-war film that did little more than show the greatness of the American soldier. Eman Hashem, an Egyptian women's activist, told me The Hurt Locker is a story that glorifies war and the "struggle" of the United States in the region against the "angry Arab". She was more partial to Avatar.

Others gave similar arguments. On Twitter, dozens of Avatar supporters claimed The Hurt Locker was only getting mentioned in the lead-up to the Oscars because it was about Iraq and "makes Arabs look like terrorists". Sure, there is the opening scene that shows an Iraqi man use his mobile phone to detonate an IED, but this happens in real life. What needs to be understood and what the anti-Hurt Locker camp seems unable to realise is that this is not a film about Iraq but a film that reveals the tragic side of soldierhood.

The Hurt Locker does not glorify war. It is a film about soldiers and the neurotic addiction that war can produce in them. It is essentially an anti-political movie about the hardships war brings on the individual and the family inside and outside the war theatre. Egyptians and Arabs should be commending the ugly truth portrayed by the writer Mark Boal and the director Kathryn Bigelow in their gutsy attempt to show the truth about war.

"Egyptians don't like to see reality on the big screen, this is why films such as Syriana and The Hurt Locker are not popular. Egyptians want an escape," said Mohsen Goma'a, an aspiring filmmaker. But their support for Avatar also misses the mark. They have escaped from reality only to enter a new imaginary world where a film speaks directly to their struggle. "Through Avatar I lived the story of the Palestinian, Iraqi, Afghan and Lebanese peoples and the wars waged against them; where the west treats these peoples as if they were the children of the Na'vi" wrote the blogger South Lebanon.

There are numerous short films on YouTube paralleling the stories of the Na'vi and the Palestinians. One Arabic blog argues that Avatar is delivering a message to Americans that is "optimistic and hopeful despite the current situation". What are Americans supposed to be optimistic about? That they are the holders of the world's destiny, much in the same manner that Jake Sully is with the Na'vi? Sully, not the Na'vi, is the hero of the film. He becomes their leader in order for the Na'vi to defend themselves from the vastly superior technology of his former brethren.

Egyptians want something to believe in and Avatar offers a vague picture that is being co-opted into something it isn't. These arguments that Pandora represents the modern Middle East are essentially people pulling an idea out of the sand in order to connect with a very entertaining film. One could see the struggle of the Palestinians and other occupied societies as akin to that of the Na'vi in Avatar, but why would we want to? If Palestinians are dressing in blue and going to the streets in protest to show how connected they are to the fictional people of Pandora, does it not also reveal a stark reality that they would deny: a foreign saviour is needed if they are realise their goal of throwing off the yoke of Israeli occupation?

Joseph Mayton

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Iran, Israel Spoiling for a Fight?

Thu, 11 Mar 2010 00:00:15 -0600

RAMALLAH — Iran and Israel appear to be spoiling for a fight, going by recent belligerent statements emanating from several regional capitals. Military movement on the ground is also lending credence to the idea that the mutual loathing and major ideological differences between the two countries could lead to a vortex of violence capable of sucking [...]

Rachel Corrie Family Finally Puts Israel in Dock

Thu, 11 Mar 2010 00:00:13 -0600

Seven years after Rachel Corrie, a US peace activist, was killed by an Israeli army bulldozer in Gaza, her family was to put the Israeli government in the dock today. A judge in the northern Israeli city of Haifa was due to be presented with evidence that 23-year-old Corrie was killed unlawfully as she stood in [...]

Indirect Israel talks 'called off'

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 22:31:35 -0600

Arab League chief conveys Palestinian decision after Israel unveils plan for 1,600 new settler homes.

Einstein's Theory of Relativity On Display

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:54:00 -0600

For the first time, the complete, original manuscript of the theory of relativity, profoundly human and surprisingly moving to examine, has been put on display in Jerusalem.

Australia says new Israel settlement 'not helpful' (AFP)

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:49:12 -0600

AFP - Australia joined international condemnation Thursday of Israel's plan to build 1,600 new homes in Jerusalem, saying the move was "not helpful" to building peace with the Palestinians.

US-Israel row highlights quandary over settlements (AP)

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:25:31 -0600

AP - An open diplomatic row during the visit of Vice President Joe Biden has shined a spotlight on the U.S. failure to rein in Israeli settlement ambitions and deepened Palestinian suspicions that the United States is too weak to broker a deal.

Palestinians snub peace talks because of Israeli homes expansion

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 19:19:23 -0600

Mahmoud Abbas 'not ready to negotiate' after Israel announces 1,600 new homes for East Jerusalem

The Palestinians pulled out of a new round of indirect peace talks last night, even before they had begun, as a protest at Israel's decision to announce approval for hundreds of new homes in a Jewish settlement in East Jerusalem.

The decision to pull out, announced in Cairo by Amr Moussa, head of the Arab League, represents a major setback to months of diplomacy by the US administration and comes after the US vice-president, Joe Biden, delivered an unusually strong rebuke to Israel.

Amr Moussa said he had been told by the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, that even this low-key process of so-called "proximity talks" could not start unless Israel stopped expanding its settlements.

"The Palestinian side is not ready to negotiate under the present circumstances," Moussa said.

Israeli and Palestinian leaders have not held direct negotiations since Israel's war in Gaza last year. The White House had won agreement on Monday from the two sides to begin the indirect talks, hoping they would lead to face-to-face meetings.

The Palestinians had insisted there would be no direct talks unless Israel halted all settlement expansion, in line with the demands of the US administration and the roadmap, which remains the framework of peace talks.

But Israel's prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, leading a rightwing coalition government, offered only a temporary, partial curb to new building.

Then, on Tuesday, hours after Biden met Israeli leaders, the Israeli interior ministry announced approval for 1,600 new apartments in Ramat Shlomo, an ultra-Orthodox Jewish settlement in East Jerusalem. All settlements on occupied land are illegal under international law.

Israel's opposition Kadima party said it is planning a no-confidence vote in the prime minister in parliament for "destroying" the Biden visit.

Yesterday, Biden emerged from talks with Abbas in Ramallah, on the occupied West Bank, and repeated his criticisms of the timing and substance of Israel's announcement. "It is incumbent on both parties to build an atmosphere of support for negotiations and not to complicate them," he said.

"The decision by the Israeli government to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem undermines that very trust, the trust that we need right now in order to begin … profitable negotiations."

Palestinian prime minister Salam Fayyad said the Palestinians appreciated "the strong statement of condemnation" by the US administration.

Eli Yishai, Israel's interior minister, apologised for the timing of the announcement, admitting that it had caused Biden "real embarrassment".

Rory McCarthy

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Israeli settlement plans give Obama little room to maneuver (McClatchy Newspapers)

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 18:21:00 -0600

McClatchy Newspapers - JERUSALEM — President Barack Obama faces what may be the biggest test to date of his credibility in the Middle East after Israel greeted Vice President Joe Biden's with an announcement that it will construct 1,600 new homes in disputed East Jerusalem, diplomats and analysts said Wednesday.

Letters: Up in arms over Brown and Iraq

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 18:05:02 -0600

The debate over resourcing the armed forces that has ensued from Gordon Brown's presence at the Chilcot inquiry (Editorial, 6 March) is put into perspective by the recent failure of the MoD to respond to MPs inquiries about "black holes" in defence procurement. Without wishing to let the PM off the hook, is it not time for those responsible to be held to account? There is a long history of complacent mismanagement that appears to go unpunished, and this becomes all the more pertinent when other sectors of the government are expending huge amounts of energy to defend budgets that are, by comparison, petty cash.

Jeremy Theophilus

Sudbury, Suffolk

• The Chilcot inquiry has given rise to many accusations that our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have been under funded and inadequately equipped. It could be argued that, whenever a soldier is killed or wounded in combat, he has been inadequately protected – so there is no easy answer. One thing is certain; our troops are infinitely better equipped than those they are fighting. Those of us who fought in Normandy were painfully aware that our Shermans were much inferior to the German tanks, but nobody made political capital out of it.

Harvey Quilliam

Maghull, Merseyside

• Timothy Robey (Letters, 8th March) states "Gordon Brown told the Iraq inquiry that no request by the military for equipment had been turned down when he was chancellor This is quite different from his saying the military had everything that it needed." Is he accepting that there were things the military needed that they didn't ask for? How likely is that? There is a difference between what the military needs and what it wants. Boys and their toys cost this country quite enough as it is without requiring a blank cheque of any government – Trident being the obvious, but not the only, example.

Iain Montgomery

Glasgow

• Your editorial once again pursues your self-justifying stance against the war in Iraq by criticising Gordon Brown. By implication this means that the many people who supported the fight to rid Iraq of its dictator are also maligned. Given the failure of the security council to relieve the subjugated majority in Iraq from their predicament is in itself an indictment of this less than effective body. Brown was honest enough to claim that to take action was the right decision, and to show remorse for those who lost their lives. Iraq would never have been freed without direct action.

Colin Bower

Chelmsford, Essex

• Chilcot's statement that "life in Iraq today is almost incomparably much improved from where it was under Saddam". must be challenged. Iraqi lives continue to be blighted by the violence unleashed by a senseless and bloody war. For the chairman of the inquiry to make such a contentious remark raises serious questions of judgment.

Laurence Rowe

Manchester

• A quick answer to your editorial question "Why on earth did [Gordon Brown] not take a stand against the war?" Because, with so many Blairites on one side and anti-invasionists on the other, Brown would have split the Labour party in two. Brown is both a statesman and a party loyalist. We should be thankful.

Dr Ian Flintoff

Oxford

• In his testimony before the Chilcot inquiry, Gordon Brown said he was not privy to crucial information concerning the buildup to the war. Clare Short told the inquiry that at the beginning of 2003 several Arab countries were negotiating exile with Saddam Hussein. The right question to ask those who will be heard should be: how would have you reacted had you known that there was a way, such as Saddam's exile, to avoid a war? The entire truth needs to emerge or we will have missed an opportunity to restore the west's credibility in the promotion of human rights and democracy.

Marco Perduca

Senator, Radical party, Italy

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Lebanon resumes defense talks on Hezbollah's military wing (The Christian Science Monitor)

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 17:44:27 -0600

The Christian Science Monitor - Lebanonâs top politicians have resumed a series of round-table discussions to devise a national defense strategy, at the heart of which is finding a compromise over the militant Shiite Hezbollahâs powerful military wing.

Israel-U.S. relations tense up as Biden visits (AP)

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 16:20:27 -0600

Arab League calls for ending support for talks (AP)

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 15:14:40 -0600

AP - The Arab League recommended on Wednesday to withdraw its support for indirect talks between Palestinians and Israelis due to recent announcements of new settlement building in east Jerusalem.

Biden Israel Trip: Apology for Timing of Settlement News (Time.com)

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 14:00:00 -0600

Time.com - Vice President Joe Biden was publicly humiliated by the Israeli announcement of a controversial settlement project, and said it undermined trust in a new U.S. peace effort. But Israel has no plans to shelve the project

Partial Iraq Vote Results Expected Thursday

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:58:36 -0600

The incomplete results will offer an incomplete picture of the vote but will provide the broad outlines of the country’s political landscape.

Meeting With Biden, Palestinians Stick to Plan for Talks

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:40:45 -0600

Palestinian leaders meeting with Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. condemned a decision by Israel on new housing, but still spoke of participating in peace talks.

Joe Biden, in Ramallah, stymied by new settlement construction (The Christian Science Monitor)

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:03:56 -0600

The Christian Science Monitor - Vice President Joe Biden embarked on the Palestinian leg of his Middle East trip on Wednesday with tensions still high over Israelâs surprise announcement of new settlement construction in East Jerusalem.

David Kimche obituary

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 12:50:40 -0600

Israeli spymaster with a key role in Africa and the Middle East

Known as "the man with the suitcase" and a master of disguise, the British-born Israeli spy-master and diplomat David Kimche, who has died aged 82 of cancer, was renowned in clandestine circles from Zanzibar to Tehran. He often slipped in and out of countries, leaving profound political changes in his wake, and more recently became active in Israeli-Palestinian peace initiatives.

Officially Kimche was deputy head of the Israeli intelligence and counterterrorism agency, the Mossad, until 1980, then director-general of Israel's foreign ministry for seven years. Yet this only hints at his influence. He was largely responsible for Israel's diplomatic and military overtures to Africa from the late 1950s, nurtured the young Idi Amin and secretly visited Arab leaders in Morocco and Egypt. He prepared the groundwork for the Camp David accords (1978) and the Egypt-Israel peace treaty of the following year. Other involvements included Israel's ill-fated plan to install a Christian potentate in Beirut in 1982, and the Iran-Contra scandal of 1985.

Kimche was born in London to a Swiss family. After reputedly working for British intelligence during the second world war, he emigrated to Palestine in 1946 and fought in the 1948 war of independence. He then took a PhD in international relations from Jerusalem's Hebrew University.

In 1953 he was invited to join the Mossad. Brilliant and urbane, if somewhat detached, he was posted to Africa and Asia, where he masqueraded as a British businessman.

When Egyptian pressure barred Israel from the conference of non-aligned nations in Bandung, Indonesia, in 1955, Kimche and his colleagues responded by cultivating ties with non-Arab states bordering the Middle East. He compared Israel's struggle against imperialism with Africa's yearning for freedom. Yet sentiment and idealism were not his only weapons. He brought Kenyan Mau Mau rebels to Israel for military training, established national security agencies across the continent and helped Ghana spy on its ally, Egypt. He also located Mossad listening stations in the Horn of Africa and allegedly backed coups, including the overthrow of the Sultan of Zanzibar in 1964.

Numbered among Kimche's presidential allies, and often friends, were Ivory Coast's Félix Houphouët-Boigny, Chad's Ngarta Tombalbaye, Nigeria's Ibrahim Babangida and Ethiopia's Mengistu Haile Mariam, enabling thousands of Israeli kibbutz workers to initiate medical, agricultural and environmental projects across Africa. Thousands more Africans studied at Israeli educational institutions. Israel in turn won blocking votes in the UN.

Kimche was disappointed when 34 African nations cut relations after the 1967 six-day war and the 1973 Yom Kippur war. He nonetheless maintained unofficial channels that served Israel well when the diplomatic tide turned after 1991.

As the Mossad's chief recruiting officer, Kimche trained agents, and he retained a proactive approach when invited by Yitzhak Shamir, then foreign minister, to become director-general of his department. He armed Maronite clans in Lebanon's escalating civil war in the 1970s, helped engineer Yasser Arafat's departure from Beirut in 1982, and supplied Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala with captured PLO weapons later that year.

But his masterplan began to go awry in September 1982, with the assassination of the newly elected Maronite president of Lebanon, Bashir Gemayel, and the Sabra and Chatilla massacre that took place shortly afterwards. He negotiated a US-mediated treaty with Lebanon, signed in May 1983, although Beirut abrogated the agreement within a year.

In 1985 he told the US national security adviser Robert McFarlane that moderate elements in Iran might help free Americans captured in Lebanon. To encourage this process, Israel agreed to sell arms to Ayatollah Khomeini's Iran. The profits would sponsor CIA-backed Contra guerrillas in Nicaragua.

Initially Iran received hundreds of anti-tank missiles, and one of the hostages, the Rev Benjamin Weir, was freed. Further deliveries were botched, however, and another hostage, the CIA agent William Buckley, was killed. Kimche was blamed and relieved of involvement. He was also implicated in "running" Jonathan Pollard, a US naval officer arrested in 1985 for spying on America.

After leaving the ministry in 1987, Kimche pursued business interests but maintained a public role. In 1997 he co-founded the International Alliance for Arab-Israeli Peace, known as the Copenhagen group. The following year he protested against the slowing down of the peace process by the prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu. He berated Israeli leaders for treating Arab citizens unequally and particularly criticised his former protege Ariel Sharon. In 2003 he co-launched a campaign promoting Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories and later that year was revealed as a key architect of the Geneva accords, the unofficial Israeli-Palestinian peace initiative.

Kimche chaired the Glocal Forum, a Zurich-based institute that addresses the challenges of globalisation, and was president of the Israel Council for Foreign Relations. His books include The Six-Day War: Prologue and Aftermath (1971), and The Last Option: The Quest for Peace in the Middle East (1988, updated 1992). To the end, he remained devoted to the belief that Israelis and Palestinians could co-exist peacefully. He is survived by his wife, Ruth, and four children.

• David Kimche, intelligence executive and diplomat, born 1928; died 8 March 2010

Lawrence Joffe

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Wednesday: 8 Iraqis Wounded

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 12:34:27 -0600

Updated at 8:04 p.m. EST, March 10, 2010 At least eight Iraqis were wounded in light violence. Attacks are perhaps on hold until election results, which are expected tomorrow at the earliest, are released. In the north, U.N. figures show that at least 800 Christians have left Mosul since the beginning of March.

Corrie 'died under Israeli bulldozer'

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 12:01:00 -0600

Richard Purssell describes 'shocking event' in Haifa court on first day of civil suit brought by Corrie family against Israel

A British witness told a court today about how he had watched an Israeli military bulldozer run over and kill the American activist Rachel Corrie while she was trying to stop Palestinians' homes being demolished in Gaza.

Richard Purssell, who was also a volunteer activist in Rafah at the time, seven years ago, described the "shocking and dramatic event" in an Israeli court in Haifa on the first day of a civil suit brought by Corrie's family against the Israeli state.

Twenty-three-year-old Corrie, from Olympia, Washington, in the US, went to Gaza for peace activism reasons at a time when there was intense conflict between the Israeli military and the Palestinians.

The Corrie family lawyer, Hussein Abu Hussein, said he would argue that her death was due either to gross negligence by the Israeli military or that it was intended. If the Israeli state were found responsible, the family would press for damages.

Purssell, a Briton, now working as a landscape gardener, said he volunteered with the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) to witness events in the occupied Palestinian territories for himself. In Rafah he had been hoping to prevent the Israeli military from demolishing Palestinian homes. The organisation was strictly non violent, he said. "Our role was to support Palestinian non-violent resistance."

On the day of her death, 16 March 2003, Corrie was with seven other activists, including Purssell, in Rafah, close to the Israeli-guarded border with Egypt. They saw an Israeli military armoured Caterpillar D9 bulldozer approaching the house of a Palestinian doctor.

Purssell described how the bulldozer approached at a fast walking pace, its blade down and gathering a pile of soil in its path. When the bulldozer was 20 metres from the house Corrie, who like the others was wearing an orange fluorescent jacket, climbed on to the soil in front of it and stood "looking into the cab of the bulldozer".

"The bulldozer continued to move forward," Purssell said. "Rachel turned to come back down the slope. The earth is still moving and as she nears the bottom of the pile something happened which causes her to fall forward. The bulldozer continued to move forward and Rachel disappeared from view under the moving earth."

The bulldozer continued forward four metres as the activists began to run forward and shout at the driver.

"It passed the point where Rachel fell, it stopped and reversed back along the track it first made. Rachel was lying on the earth," Purssell said. "She was still breathing." Corrie was severely injured and died shortly afterwards.

The Israeli military says it bears no responsibility for Corrie's death. A month after her death the military said an investigation had determined its troops were not to blame; the driver of the bulldozer had not seen her and had not intentionally run her over. It accused Corrie and the ISM of behaviour that was "illegal, irresponsible and dangerous".

Hussein will argue at the Haifa district court that witness evidence shows that the soldiers did see Corrie at the scene, with other activists well before the incident, and that they could have arrested her or removed her from the area before there was any risk of injury.

Before the hearing began, Craig Corrie, Rachel's father, said the family had been on a "seven-year search for justice in Rachel's name". He added: "I think when the truth comes out about Rachel the truth will not wound Israel, the truth is the start of making us heal."

Cindy Corrie, Rachel's mother, said the family was still waiting for the credible, transparent investigation Israel first promised regarding her daughter's death. "I just want to say to Rachel that our family is here today trying to just do right by her and I hope that she will be very proud of the effort we are making," she said. She said the family had met the staff of US vice-president Joe Biden on Tuesday to talk about the case.

Three other witnesses, two more Britons and an American, who were all at the scene in Rafah when Corrie was killed will give evidence at the Israeli court. It is not clear if any Israeli military officials will speak.

The hearing is scheduled to run for at least two weeks.

Rory McCarthy

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

British activist saw Rachel Corrie die under Israeli bulldozer, court hears

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 12:01:00 -0600

Richard Purssell describes 'shocking event' in Haifa court on first day of civil suit brought by Corrie family against Israel

Twenty-three-year-old Corrie, from Olympia, Washington, in the US, went to Gaza for peace activism reasons at a time when there was intense conflict between the Israeli military and the Palestinians.

The bulldozer continued forward four metres as the activists began to run forward and shout at the driver.

The hearing is scheduled to run for at least two weeks.

Rory McCarthy

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

What and when MI5 knew about torture

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 11:48:56 -0600

Timeline of what the former MI5 chief Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller and her colleagues knew

Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller, the head of MI5 throughout most of the years of the so-called war on terror, insisted yesterday that she had not known that Khalid Shiekh Mohammed was being waterboarded.

In a response to the appeal court's judgment that MI5 officers had a "dubious record" on torture, she sought to blame the US and maintained that only after she retired in 2007 did she discover that the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks had been waterboarded 160 times.

"The Americans were very keen that people like us did not discover what they were doing," she said. Critics, though, said the former head of the security service was stretching credulity by claiming the matter had come as such a surprise.

10 January 2002 An MI6 officer, carrying out one of the first British interrogations in Afghanistan after 9/11, reports back to London that the individual was mistreated by Americans before the questioning began. The incident is reported by the Intelligence and Security committee (ISC) , the group of MPs and peers that is supposed to provide oversight of MI5 and MI6.

11 January 2002 Every MI6 and MI5 officer in Afghanistan is issued with legal advice stating that they are under no obligation to intervene to prevent torture, as long as the victim is not in UK "custody or control", but that British intelligence officers "cannot be party to such ill treatment nor can we be seen to condone it". Critics of MI5 say this advice failed to meet its obligations under international law, and was subsequently used to facilitate torture. Later in the month, the Pentagon releases pictures taken by US navy photographers, showing hooded and shackled detainees being dragged across the ground at the newly opened detention centre at Guantánamo Bay.

April 2002 The CIA hands MI5 more than 50 classified documents that detail the mistreatment of Binyam Mohamed, a British resident detained at Karachi airport in Pakistan on 10 April. A judicial summary of those documents – released by the court of appeal last month after an 18-month battle by the government to conceal it from the public – shows that MI5 knew Mohamed was being "continuously deprived of sleep", threatened with being "disappeared", and that this was "having a marked effect upon him and causing him significant mental stress and suffering".

Manningham-Buller was deputy director general of MI5 at the time the agency received these CIA documents. Having learned the details of Mohamed's mistreatment, MI5 sends one of its officers, a man known as Witness B, to Karachi to question Mohamed. The high court later concludes: "The probability is that Witness B read the reports either before he left for Karachi or before he conducted the interview ... a briefing document was prepared for sending to him." Witness B is now the subject of a Scotland Yard investigation.

September 2002 MI5 knows that Binyam Mohamed is no longer in Pakistan, having been "rendered" elsewhere, but, the high court later concludes, continues to supply "information as well as questions which they knew were to be used in interview of [Mohamed] from the time of his arrest whilst he was held incommunicado and without access to a lawyer or review by a court or tribunal".

October 2002 Eliza Manningham-Buller is appointed director general of the Security Service.

4 April 2004 Salahuddin Amin, a terrorism suspect from Luton, is questioned by MI5 officers 11 times after surrendering to a Pakistani intelligence agency whose use of torture is widely documented. An Old Bailey judge later says Amin's treatment in Pakistan was "physically oppressive" and unlawful, but fell short of torture. Pakistani intelligence officers told Human Rights Watch last year that Amin's account of being tortured before being questioned by MI5 was "essentially accurate", and that both British and American officials were "perfectly aware that we were using all means possible to extract information from him and were grateful that we were doing so".

27 April 2004 Pictures of US troops abusing inmates at Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad are broadcast on the US television news programme 60 Minutes.

13 May 2004 The New York Times reports that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was subjected to waterboarding by the CIA. The newspaper says it learned this from current and former counter-terrorism officials, and says the FBI has warned its officers not to become involved in interrogations during which waterboarding was employed, after the bureau's director, Robert Mueller, was warned they could face prosecution. The newspaper adds: "These techniques were authorised by a set of secret rules for the interrogation of high-level Qaeda prisoners, none known to be housed in Iraq, that were endorsed by the Justice Department and the CIA."

24 May 2004 In an apparent response to the release of the Abu Ghraib pictures, Tony Blair writes to the ISC to tell the committee of changes to the UK interrogation policy that was passed to MI5 officers and MI6 officers in January 2002. One change is that MI5 and MI6 officers are told to inform London whenever they see US counterparts mistreating inmates. They are also told they must not return to question detainees who complain they are being tortured. In practice, according to several torture victims, UK intelligence officers hand over to US interrogators after hearing such a complaint. Other changes to the interrogation policy remain secret. The government refuses to publish the policy, with David Miliband, the foreign secretary, saying that to do so could "give succour" to the UK's enemies.

22 June 2004 The White House counsel Alberto Gonzalez and the Pentagon general counsel, Jim Haynes, hold a press conference at which they release a series of documents setting out the legal advice justifying the use of abusive interrogation techniques employed at Guantánamo.

15 May 2005 Zeeshan Siddiqui, a terrorism suspect from west London, is arrested in Pakistan, tortured, and then questioned by British intelligence officers. Pakistani intelligence officer later tell Human Rights Watch that these were MI6 officers, who were aware at all times that Siddiqui was being "processed in the traditional way", and that the British were "effectively" interrogating Siddiqui. When Siddiqui is brought before court, the magistrate orders his immediate hospitalisation. He is eventually deported to the UK and subjected to a control order.

20 August 2005 A medical student from west London is held in a building opposite the British deputy high commission offices in Karachi and tortured, for two months, before being questioned by British intelligence officers. Pakistani agents later tell Human Rights Watch that British officials across the road knew the student was being mistreated and were "breathing down our necks for information". The student is later released without charge.

7 August 2006 Rashid Rauf, from Birmingham, is arrested in Pakistan for questioning over an alleged plot to blow up several airliners over the Atlantic. He later tells his lawyer he was tortured before being questioned by men with both British and American accents. Human Rights Watch says that both British and Pakistani intelligence officers have told them that he was mistreated.

20 August 2006 An MI6 officer suggests to Pakistani intelligence officers that they might want to detain a British terrorism suspect, Rangzieb Ahmed, after police in Manchester decide to let him leave the UK on a flight to Islamabad. According to statements made in the Commons, Manchester crown court – sitting in secret – learned that UK intelligence officers knew that those Pakistani officials tortured terrorism suspects. MI5 and Greater Manchester police draw up questions to be put to Ahmed, who is beaten, deprived of sleep, and has three of his fingernails removed with pliers.

When Ahmed is deported to the UK to be put on trial, on the basis of evidence largely gathered before he flew to Pakistan, prosecutors attempt to claim that his fingernails were removed before he went to Pakistan. The crown's own pathologist says the injuries show this is impossible. The judge rules that UK complicity in Ahmed's torture is not so great that his trial cannot go ahead. The judge's full ruling on Ahmed's torture is being kept secret, at the request of the Crown Prosecution Service, following representations by MI5 and Greater Manchester police. Ahmed is now launching an appeal, on the basis of what the judge said in his secret ruling.

23 November 2006 Manningham-Buller tells the ISC that she regrets not asking the CIA for more information about the whereabouts of Binyam Mohamed after he was rendered from Pakistan to Morocco in July 2002. It is a case "where, with hindsight, we would regret not seeking proper full assurances," she says. In a report published in July 2007, the committee concludes: "Whilst no assurances were sought, this is understandable given the lack of knowledge, at the time, of any possible consequences of US custody of detainees."

However, almost five years before Manningham-Buller gave evidence to the ISC, MI5 had given its officers legal advice that facilitated the questioning of people being tortured. This was done after the service had been made aware, by an MI6 officer, that detainees were being mistreated. The ISC had been told about this legal advice – and the reasons it was issued – in September 2004, almost three years before it reported that a lack of knowledge of the mistreatment of detainees by the US authorities was understandable.

27 October 2006 The US vice-president, Dick Cheney, confirms that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was subjected to waterboarding, telling an interviewer that the use of the technique was a "no-brainer", and that "our ability to interrogate high-value detainees like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed – that's been a very important tool that we've had to be able to secure the nation." This is widely reported on both sides of the Atlantic.

21 April 2007 Manningham-Buller steps down as director-general of the Security Service.

15 October 2009 Manningham-Buller's successor, Jonathan Evans, defends MI5's co-operation with intelligence agencies known to use torture, saying that it thwarted many terrorist attacks after 9/11 and saved British lives. "In my view we would have been derelict in our duty if we had not worked, circumspectly, with overseas liaisons who were in a position to provide intelligence that could safeguard this country from attack," he says.

Ian Cobain

Richard Norton-Taylor

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Israeli supermarket ad inspired by Hamas slaying (AP)

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:21:54 -0600

AP - An Israeli supermarket commercial is looking to cash in on the infamous surveillance footage of an assassination team killing a Hamas commander in Dubai.

US: Israel undermining peace effort

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 08:56:47 -0600

Vice-president condemns Israel for plan to construct 1,600 new homes in East Jerusalem.

First Iraqi vote results likely on Thursday (AP)

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:55:22 -0600

AP - The top United Nations envoy in Iraq urged election officials Wednesday to release the results of this week's historic vote as quickly as possible, saying Iraqis "have the right to know as soon as possible what is the outcome of their choice."

Bibi's snub to Biden may backfire | Simon Tisdall

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:07:21 -0600

Intentional or not, the announcement of new settlements in East Jerusalem may push the US into a tougher stance towards Israel

It's not the first time that Israel has stiffed Barack Obama over his attempts to kick-start Middle East peace negotiations. But the sudden, highly inflammatory announcement of plans to build an additional 1,600 homes in occupied East Jerusalem, in the midst of a visit to Israel of US vice-president Joe Biden, was certainly the most brutally contemptuous rebuff so far to American peacemaking.

It may be that Binyamin Netanyahu, Israel's rightwing prime minister, was unaware in advance of the provisional decision by a Jerusalem district planning committee, as he claims. But the announcement was promulgated by his interior ministry, which thereby gave it an official stamp of approval. If Netanyahu did not know, then why not?

Despite the evident embarrassment and considerable political damage caused by the decision, Netanyahu has so far made no move to repudiate it. Lesser figures, such as welfare minister Isaac Herzog and Israeli government spokesman Mark Regev were deployed on firefighting duties on Wednesday, dutifully uttering conditional words of contrition. "We have to express our apologies for this serious blunder," Herzog said.

But protestations of innocence by interior minister Eli Yishai, head of the Shas religious party in Netanyahu's coalition and no great advocate of American attempts to forge a two-state peace settlement with the Palestinians, are hard to credit.

"There was certainly no intention to provoke anyone, and certainly not to come along and hurt the vice-president of the United States," Yishai said.

These are weasel words. Is it to be believed that Yishai, like Netanyahu, was unaware of what his own ministry was doing? Did he have no idea the planning decision was pending? Did he, as an experienced politician, not foresee the destructive political implications of this ambush? Like Netanyahu, Yishai presumably regards Jerusalem as Israel's eternal and indivisible capital. Another day on, it seems he was determined to rub Biden's nose in that insupportable idea.

The Americans, until now, have been too polite, or too weak, to say it, but Netanyahu spent most last year deliberately frustrating Obama's pledge to mediate a resolution of the Israel-Palestine conflict and with it, an end to the Israel-Arab confrontation that has scarred the region for generations. Netanyahu resisted direct talks, rejected a full settlement freeze, flaunted his uncompromising views on Jerusalem, pooh-poohed a Syria opening, and, at the same time, endlessly reiterated his supposed willingness to talk to the Palestinians "without conditions".

Simultaneously, Israel's leader tried, with some success, to shift the US conversation on to Iran, which he says poses an existential threat to his country and the region. All in all, it was an Oscar-standard performance in obfuscation, prevarication and disingenuousness. To the achingly smart, but politically less pugnacious Obama, Netanyahu's behaviour was intellectually insulting. The fact he has put up with it until now may be a measure of Israel's clout in Washington, especially on Capitol Hill.

This could change. Obama's problem, and not just in the Middle East, is that he is liked but not feared. After a first year in office devoid of substantive achievement, Washington insiders say the president must show he is ready to fight, to get down and dirty, to drop his professorial aloofness and get publicly passionate and angry about the things he believes in. At home, this could apply to healthcare reform. Abroad, the new approach may single out Israel-Palestine.

Biden's visit, though reassuring and conciliatory on the surface until the east Jerusalem bombshell dropped, may mark the start of this tougher approach. Many Obama supporters in the US and Europe, and in the post-Cairo Muslim world, will wish it so. The vice-president, whose attack dog qualities were unleashed on the subjects of Russia and Ukraine last year, certainly did not mince his words, once he realised the extent of the insult.

"I condemn the decision by the government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units in east Jerusalem," Biden said. "The announcement ... is precisely the kind of step that undermines the trust we need right now and runs counter to the constructive discussions that I've had here in Israel." In the last part of this sentence Biden seems to be suggesting that Netanyahu told him one thing to his face and did another behind his back. Little wonder he kept Israel's first couple waiting for dinner.

It doesn't seem to realise it, but Israel cannot afford to keep on behaving in this disobliging manner towards its friends. Whether it is blatant disregard for international rules concerning the protection of civilian life, as in Gaza; whether it is calculated insults aimed at neighbours, as with Turkey; or whether it is the theft of passports and identities from friendly countries and the lawless assassination of its enemies, as in Dubai, it goes too far.

Now, Netanyahu has deeply angered his country's best and most powerful friend – again. The coming message to Bibi: don't over-reach.

• Comments on this article will remain open for 24 hours from the time of publication but may be closed overnight

Simon Tisdall

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Bibi's snub to Biden may backfire | Simon Tisdall

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:07:21 -0600

Intentional or not, the announcement of new settlements in East Jerusalem may push the US into a tougher stance towards Israel

"There was certainly no intention to provoke anyone, and certainly not to come along and hurt the vice-president of the United States," Yishai said.

Now, Netanyahu has deeply angered his country's best and most powerful friend – again. The coming message to Bibi: don't over-reach.

• Comments on this article will remain open for 24 hours from the time of publication but may be closed overnight

Simon Tisdall

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Video: Rachel Corrie's parents take fight for justice to Israel

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:01:27 -0600

Court begins hearing civil suit brought against Israeli government over death of US activist killed by Israeli army bulldozer in Gaza

Video: Rachel Corrie's parents take fight for justice to Israel

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:01:27 -0600

Court begins hearing civil suit brought against Israeli government over death of US activist killed by Israeli army bulldozer in Gaza

US family seeks Israeli damages

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 05:50:37 -0600

Case concerns Rachel Corrie's death during protest against Palestinian home demolitions.

Israel allows UN bomb squad into Gaza (AP)

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 05:37:38 -0600

AP - Israel has allowed a U.N. bomb disposal unit into the Gaza Strip to defuse unexploded munitions left over from last year's fighting.

The Hebronisation of Jerusalem | Mick Dumper

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 05:06:55 -0600

Growing Israeli and settler control has set Jerusalem on the same path as the West Bank's most divided city

The recent escalation of tensions in Jerusalem with clashes between Palestinian demonstrators and Israeli police in and around the Old City appear to signify the emergence of a disturbing new trend: the Hebronisation of Jerusalem. This presages not only the triumph of the radical settler groups in taking over culturally sensitive parts of the city, but also further violence and turmoil. More importantly it also interrupts the delicate moves towards the resumption of negotiations between the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority/PLO.

Why Hebronisation? Hebron, just south of Jerusalem and Bethlehem, is a city – despite pockets of wealth – characterised by poverty, lack of investment, increasing criminality, the breakdown of municipal services and the absence of any recognised national and local leadership. Since the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, Israeli settler groups in Hebron have acted with increasing impunity in a city with an overwhelming Palestinian majority. This is largely due to restrictions imposed by the Israeli government to promote the settler presence in the heart of Hebron's Old City. The declaration last week that the Tomb of the Patriarchs (the presumed site of Abraham's burial place) located in the al-Ibrahimi mosque has been added to a list of protected Jewish sites has underlined this projection of Israeli power into the planned Palestinian state.

The acceptance of the Israeli settlement movement in Jerusalem into the Israeli political mainstream, its capture of some of the city's key institutions and geographical locations, its support from the highest echelons of the Israeli bureaucracy, judiciary and army, its funding by wealthy US and other external sources all point to a culture of impunity that suggests more than a passing resemblance to Hebron. The creation of no-go areas for Palestinians in parts of Jerusalem and the closing of market streets as a result of settler harassment has not occurred to the same extent as in Hebron, but the signs that this can happen all too easily are already discernible in areas targeted by the settlers.

A recent report published by Chatham House – Jerusalem: The Cost of Failure – argued that this Hebronisation of Jerusalem also comprised a mixture of exclusion, unilateral withdrawal from certain peripheral areas by Israel and the so-called "warehousing" of the remainder of the Palestinian residents in East Jerusalem. Current trends, it suggested, would result in the physical removal of much of the Palestinian population from the central parts of East Jerusalem.

Despite this dire scenario, the report also held that for the foreseeable future the Israeli government was in a strong enough position to contain the negative impact of these developments. The chief result has been to deprive the Palestinians of East Jerusalem of any effective and coordinated resistance to the settler activity. Consequently, in the short-to-medium term (two to five years) the Israeli government will have an almost free rein in the city to complete the Hebronisation process.

There are two caveats to this prognosis. The first is the challenge to Israeli authority in the city from the Islamic Movement, a group based in northern Israel. Its present community action, based around efforts to bring Palestinian Muslims from Israel into Jerusalem to "protect" their heritage, is just about tolerable to the Israeli government. When and if it is able to transform itself into a force that threatens Israeli hegemony in the city, more drastic action may be taken. As the movement is based within Israeli itself, it is not something that Israel can suppress in the same way as it has acted against Hamas in the occupied territories.

The second caveat is the role of the Jewish, Christian and Muslim religious sites in the area referred to as the Holy Basin. A critical issue that will provoke reaction in the streets of East Jerusalem is an Israeli infringement of the Islamic rights to the Haram al-Sharif and associated places. As seen last weekend and also in October 2009, street protests and rioting have already broken out over perceived threats to the Haram al-Sharif, partially, but not exclusively, mobilised by the Islamic movement from inside Israel. A miscalculation by the Israeli government, or the flexing of muscles by a settler group, could provoke a furious and possibly uncontrollable response.

This bleak prognosis can to some extent be avoided. By reaffirming the illegality of Israeli policy in East Jerusalem, the recommendations put forward in a recent leaked EU heads of mission report would go a long way towards halting the slide to both consolidating the Israeli presence and the further fragmentation of East Jerusalem. The recommendations include promoting the establishment of a PLO representative in East Jerusalem, the prevention of financial transactions by EU member states that support settlement activity or the export of products from settlements to the EU member states and the support of Palestinian civil society. Nevertheless, by themselves, it is unlikely that these actions would be sufficient in the time available to prevent the scenarios outlined above.

The focus of diplomatic activity should be on two key areas. First, the seriousness of the situation should be impressed upon the US and the president's special envoy to the Middle East, Senator George Mitchell (as the key actors with any leverage on the Israeli government) and the Quartet. A significant point that could be made is that until the concerns of all those living in Jerusalem are addressed, Israel's security is as much at risk as the livelihood and well-being of the Palestinians. Second, the international community needs to convince the current Israeli government that the activities of radical settlers in destabilising the status quo of the religious sites and acquiring strategic tracts of land will lead to further violence not only in Jerusalem but across the region. Israeli policies in support of returning to a negotiated peace process and support for such groups are contradictory.

• Comments on this article will remain open for 24 hours from the time of publication but may be closed overnight

Mick Dumper

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

US condemns Israeli expansion

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 05:04:41 -0600

Biden denounces move to build 1,600 illegal homes that could derail talks with Palestinians.

Biden calls for 'viable' Palestinian state

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 04:12:45 -0600

Visiting vice-president seeks to keep peace process on rails after Israel says it will expand East Jerusalem settlement

The US vice-president, Joe Biden, has said the Palestinians deserve a "viable" independent state with contiguous territory, hoping to reassure them of America's support after Israel announced plans to expand a Jewish neighbourhood on occupied Palestinian land in East Jerusalem.

After a day of meetings with Palestinian leaders, Biden repeated his strong condemnation of the plan and said the US was committed to brokering a final peace deal in the Middle East – something that has eluded successive American presidents.

"The United States pledges to play an active as well as a sustainable role in these talks," Biden said. He stressed the Palestinians needed an independent state that is "viable and contiguous", meaning the territory should not be broken up by Israeli settlements and sending a signal that the US expects Israel to withdrawal from the West Bank as part of a deal.

Standing alongside the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, Biden urged both sides to not to act in a way "that inflame tensions or prejudice the outcome of talks".

"It's incumbent on both parties to build an atmosphere of support for negotiations and not to complicate them," he said.

Abbas said Israel's continued expansion of settlements, especially in Jerusalem, threatened the negotiations before they got off the ground.

"We call on Israel to cancel these decisions," Abbas said. "I call on the Israeli government not to lose a chance to make peace. I call on them to halt settlement building and to stop imposing facts on the ground, and to give the efforts of the Obama administration and Senator Mitchell the chance to succeed."

Earlier an Israeli cabinet minister apologised for the timing of the settlement announcement but not for its substance. "This should not have happened during a visit by the US vice-president," the welfare minister, Isaac Herzog, told Army Radio. "This is a real embarrassment and now we have to express our apologies for this serious blunder."

Aides to the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu said he had been blindsided by the project's announcement by the interior ministry, run by Shas, an ultra-orthodox nationalist party that is a key member of his governing coalition.

The approval of the plan cast a cloud over Biden's visit, just hours after he pledged strong support for the Israeli government.

It was announced a day after the Israeli defence ministry confirmed 112 apartments would be built in Beitar Illit, a settlement on the occupied West Bank.

Ramat Shlomo, built 15 years ago, is on land captured in the West Bank in 1967 and annexed to Israel in a move not recognised by the international community.

Israel's interior minister, Eli Yishai, who heads the Shas, said the timing was coincidental. "There was certainly no intention to provoke anyone and certainly not to come along and hurt the vice-president of the United States," Yishai told Israel's Channel One television.

"Final approval [for the project] will take another few months. I agree that the timing [of the announcement] should have been in another two or three weeks."

Rory McCarthy

Haroon Siddique

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Israel sorry for timing of homes speech

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 04:12:45 -0600

Minister apologises for timing of statement, but not for the plan itself – to build 1,600 homes on occupied Palestinian land

Israel apologised to Joe Biden today for announcing a plan to build 1,600 homes on occupied Palestinian land during his visit, after the US vice-president launched a strongly worded attack on the planned construction in an East Jerusalem settlement.

An Israeli cabinet minister apologised for the timing of the announcement but not for its substance. "This should not have happened during a visit by the US vice-president," the welfare minister, Isaac Herzog, told Army Radio. "This is a real embarrassment and now we have to express our apologies for this serious blunder."

The Israeli interior ministry's approval of the plan cast a cloud over a visit to the country by Biden just hours after he pledged strong support for the Israeli government.

In a statement issued after he arrived 90 minutes late for a dinner with the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, Biden said: "I condemn the decision by the government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units."

He said the blueprint for Ramat Shlomo, an ultra-Orthodox settlement in an area of the West Bank annexed to Jerusalem, "undermines the trust we need right now and runs counter to the constructive discussions I've had in Israel".

The approvals came just a day after the Israeli defence ministry announced that 112 apartments would be built in Beitar Illit, a settlement on the occupied West Bank. The new building comes at a delicate moment in the long-stalled peace process after Israeli and Palestinian leaders agreed to start indirect negotiations.

The interior ministry said the Ramat Shlomo approvals had been passed by the Jerusalem district planning committee. A spokeswoman said there were 60 days to appeal against the decision. Ramat Shlomo, built 15 years ago, is on land captured in the West Bank in 1967 and annexed to Israel in a move not recognised by the international community.

Israel's interior minister, Eli Yishai, who heads a religious party in Netanyahu's governing coalition, said the timing of the plan's approval was coincidental. "There was certainly no intention to provoke anyone and certainly not to come along and hurt the vice-president of the United States," Yishai told Israel's Channel One television.

"Final approval [for the project] will take another few months. I agree that the timing [of the announcement] should have been in another two or three weeks."

Two years ago, when the Israeli government approved 1,300 homes in the same settlement, then US secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, criticised the move as having a "negative effect" on peace talks.

Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, said the announcements were "destroying our efforts" in peace negotiations.

"With such an announcement, how can you build trust?" he said. "It's a disastrous situation." He said that the settlement project would top the agenda of Biden's planned meeting with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas later today, during which Abbas will ask Biden to press Israel to revoke the decision.

Earlier in the day, Biden said Israel and the Palestinians needed to "take risks for peace". But his talk of a "moment of opportunity" obscures a reality in which the two sides are a long way apart. Although the peace process has been under way for nearly two decades, there have been no direct negotiations between Israeli and Palestinian leaders since Israel's war in Gaza a year ago.

Palestinian officials refused to hold direct talks unless Israel halted all settlement construction, in line with the demands of the US administration and of the US road map. But Netanyahu, agreed only to a temporary, partial curb to settlement building. It did not include East Jerusalem, or public buildings, or homes where construction had already started.

In talks with Netanyahu, Biden appeared to focus not on the struggling peace process but on Iran, saying Washington was committed to preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. "There is no space between the US and Israel when it comes to Israel's security," Biden said after their meeting.

"We are determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons," Biden said.

In private, he is also believed to have cautioned the Israeli government against any unilateral military strike on Iran, and to have tried to win Israeli support for the US administration's policy, which is moving towards sanctions against Iran.

Netanyahu made clear the Israeli government hoped for a tougher sanction regime against Iran. "The stronger those sanctions are, the more likely it will be that the Iranian regime will have to chose between advancing its nuclear programme and advancing the future of its own permanence," he said. Netanyahu frequently cites the need to address Iran's nuclear ambitions as his priority in government and Israeli leaders have pointedly not ruled out a military option.

Rory McCarthy

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds