A substantial and dangerous shift in U.S. policy in the Middle East took place this afternoon in the White House. US President George W. Bush explicitly endorsed Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s plans to permanently maintain major Israeli settlements in the West Bank (which are illegal under international law and comprise 15% of the whole territory), while denying 4.6 million Palestinians (refugees who were uprooted, dispossessed, and displaced in 1948) their right to return to their original homes in historical Palestine (Israel). Bush applauded Sharon’s moves as “historic and courageous actions,” giving his full backing to the “unilateral disengagement” plan and presenting Sharon with a letter of “assurances.”

The letter, signed by President Bush, awards retroactive legitimacy to Israel's illegal settlements by stating:

“As part of a final peace settlement, Israel must have secure and recognized borders, which should emerge from negotiations between the parties in accordance with UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338. In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949, and all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion. It is realistic to expect that any final status agreement will only be achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these realities.”

Further, and in violation of UN Resolution 194, the letter blatantly rejects the inalienable right of return for Palestinian refugees by stating:

“The United States is strongly committed to Israel's security and well-being as a Jewish state. It seems clear that an agreed, just, fair, and realistic framework for a solution to the Palestinian refugee issue as part of any final status agreement will need to be found through the establishment of a Palestinian state, and the settling of Palestinian refugees there, rather than in Israel.”

President Bush’s statement and letter trumps two pillars of US policy towards the Israeli – Palestinian conflict, namely that Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian land are an obstacle to peace and that the U.S. will not dictate the terms of a final peace settlement. Moreover, this shift in policy makes the US complicit in the Israeli occupation's lawlessness and violation of international law, ultimately disregarding essential legal foundations such as the 4th Geneva Convention of 1949, which strictly prohibits the occupying power from making demographic changes in, and moving parts of its population into, the territory it occupies.

By fully accommodating Sharon and his shortsighted extremist government, the US is preempting key issues intended for mutual agreement between the Palestinians and Israelis within the framework of the final status negotiations; the US has abandoned its very own “road map” to peace.

Sharon has undoubtedly exploited the US predicament in Iraq and Bush’s election drive to extort concessions and changes in US policy towards the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. More dangerously, the Bush administration’s publicly declared endorsement of Sharon’s plans is a clear demonstration of Washington’s willful neglect of the real causes of conflict (most notably Israel’s illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories).

The imminent and long term effects of such a negligent shift in policy will be destructive to the whole region; the results of today’s declarations will further inflame Arab and Islamic public opinion. It will most certainly undermine what is left of US standing in the region, destroying both its credibility and any chance it still has of playing a constructive role in peace-making.

The position adopted by the US this evening worryingly shows a complete disregard for the Palestinians in the negotiations concerning their future. America has forcefully assumed the position of deciding the fate of the Palestinian people during exclusive and secretive negotiations with Israel. Dispensing with Palestinian rights, Sharon’s plan received unfettered support from Bush, who foolishly expected Palestinians to embrace their new found “freedom,” despite the fact that Israel will maintain full control of airspace, territorial waters, and land passages of the West Bank and Gaza.

The US has effectively given Sharon a green light to retain at the very least six "large settlement blocs" in the West Bank, with a population of 92,500 Israeli settlers, if not more, as part of any final peace accord with the Palestinians. Sharon promised that the Jewish settlements inside Hebron and the nearby enclave of Kiryat Arba, as well as Maaleh Adumim, Givat Ze'ev, Ariel and Gush Etzion “will remain under Israeli control and that will continue to grow stronger and develop.”

Today, the prospects for a real peace settlement between the Palestinians and the Israelis seem more distant than ever.

WASHINGTON -- President Bush met Wednesday at the White House with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and praised Sharon's proposed withdrawal from Gaza and parts of the West Bank.

The Palestinians object to a provision in the plan, which would allow Israel to retain control of six blocs of Jewish settlements in the West Bank.

Following is a transcript of statements by Bush and Sharon after their meeting.

BUSH: I'm pleased to welcome Prime Minister Sharon back to the White House.

For more than 50 years, Israel has been a vital ally and a true friend of America. I've been proud to call the prime minister my friend. I really appreciate our discussions today.

The policy of the United States is to help bring peace to the Middle East and to bring hope to the people of that region.

On June 24, 2002, I laid out a vision to make this goal a reality. We then drafted the "road map" as the route to get us there.

The heart of this vision is the responsibility of all parties -- of Israel, of the Palestinian people, of the Arab states -- to fight terror, to embrace democracy and reform, and to take the necessary steps for peace.

Today, the prime minister told me of his decision to take such a step.

Israel plans to remove certain military installations and all settlements from Gaza and certain military installations and settlements from the West Bank.

These are historic and courageous actions. If all parties choose to embrace this moment, they can open the door to progress and put an end to one of the world's longest-running conflicts.

Success will require the active efforts of many nations. Two days ago I held important discussions with President [Hosni] Mubarak of Egypt, and I will soon meet with King Abdullah of Jordan. We're consulting closely with other key leaders in the region, in Europe and with our quartet partners: the E.U., Russia and the United Nations.

These steps can open the door to progress toward a peaceful, democratic, viable Palestinian state. Working together we can help build democratic Palestinian institution as well as strong capabilities dedicated to fighting terror so that the Palestinian people can meet their obligations under the road map on the path to peace.

This opportunity holds great promise for the Palestinian people to build a modern economy that will lift millions out of poverty, create the institutions and habits of liberty, and renounce the terror and violence that impede their aspirations and take a terrible toll on innocent life.

The Palestinian people must insist on change and on a leadership that is committed to reform and progress and peace.

We will help, but the most difficult work is theirs.

The United States is strongly committed and I am strongly committed to the security of Israel as a vibrant Jewish state. I reiterate our steadfast commitment to Israel's security and to preserving and strengthening Israel's self-defense capability, including its right to defend itself against terror.

The barrier being erected by Israel as a part of that security effort should, as your government has stated, be a security rather than political barrier. It should be temporary rather than permanent, and therefore not prejudice any final status issues, including final borders. And this route should take into account, consistent with security needs, its impact on Palestinians not engaged in terrorist activities.

In an exchange of letters today and in a statement I will release later today, I'm repeating to the prime minister my commitment to Israel's security.

The United States will not prejudice the outcome of final status negotiations and matters for the parties. But the realities on the ground and in the region have changed greatly over the last several decades, and any final settlement must take into account those realities and be agreeable to the parties.

The goal of two independent states has repeatedly been recognized in international resolutions and agreements, and it remains a key to resolving this conflict.

The United States is strongly committed to Israel's security and well-being as a Jewish state. It seems clear that an agreed, just, fair and realistic framework for a solution to the Palestinian refugee issue as part of any final status agreement will need to be found through the establishment of a Palestinian state and the settling of Palestinian refugees there rather than Israel.

As part of a final peace settlement, Israel must have secure and recognized borders which should emerge from negotiations between the parties in accordance with U.N. Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.

In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli population centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949, and all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion. It is realistic to expect that any final status agreement will only be achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these realities.

I commend Prime Minister Sharon for his bold and courageous decision to withdraw from Gaza and parts of the West Bank. I call on the Palestinians and their Arab neighbors to match that boldness and that courage. All of us must show the wisdom and the will to bring lasting peace to that region.

Mr. Prime Minister, welcome to the White House.

SHARON: Thank you.

I want to thank you, Mr. President, for your warm welcome and your strong support and friendship for the state of Israel.

I came to you from a peace-seeking country. Despite the repeated terror attacks against us, the people of Israel continue to wish for the achievement of a viable peace in accordance with our Jewish tradition, as outlined by Israel's prophets.

Our people desire to be known for its achievement in the fields of culture, science and technology, rather than in the battlefield.

We are committed to make any effort to develop our country and society for our own benefit and for the benefit of the peoples of the region.

In our meeting today, I presented to you the outlines of my disengagement plan. It will improve Israel's security and economy, and reduce friction and tension between Israelis and Palestinians.

My plan will create a new and better reality for the state of Israel. And it also has the potential to create the right conditions to resume negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.

I was encouraged by your positive response and your support for my plan.

In that context, you handed me a letter that includes very important statement regarding Israel security and its well-being as a Jewish state. You have proven, Mr. President, your ongoing, deep, and sincere friendship for the state of Israel and to the Jewish people.

I believe that my plan can be an important contribution to advancing your vision, which is the only viable way to achieve peace and security in the Middle East.

I wish to end with a personal note. I, myself have been fighting terror for many years, and understand the threats and cost of terrorism. In all these years, I have never met a leader as committed as you are, Mr. President, to the struggle for freedom and the need to confront terrorism wherever it exists.

I want to express my appreciation to you for your courageous leadership in the war against global terror, and your commitment and vision to bring peace to the Middle East.

Thank you, Mr. President.

BUSH: Thank you, Mr. Prime Minister. Good job, good job.

His Excellency
Ariel Sharon
Prime Minister of Israel

Dear Mr. Prime Minister:

Thank you for your letter setting out your disengagement plan.

The United States remains hopeful and determined to find a way forward toward a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. I remain committed to my June 24, 2002 vision of two states living side by side in peace and security as the key to peace, and to the roadmap as the route to get there.

We welcome the disengagement plan you have prepared, under which Israel would withdraw certain military installations and all settlements from Gaza, and withdraw certain military installations and settlements in the West Bank. These steps described in the plan will mark real progress toward realizing my June 24, 2002 vision, and make a real contribution towards peace. We also understand that, in this context, Israel believes it is important to bring new opportunities to the Negev and the Galilee. We are hopeful that steps pursuant to this plan, consistent with my vision, will remind all states and parties of their own obligations under the roadmap.

The United States appreciates the risks such an undertaking represents. I therefore want to reassure you on several points.

First, the United States remains committed to my vision and to its implementation as described in the roadmap. The United States will do its utmost to prevent any attempt by anyone to impose any other plan. Under the roadmap, Palestinians must undertake an immediate cessation of armed activity and all acts of violence against Israelis anywhere, and all official Palestinian institutions must end incitement against Israel. The Palestinian leadership must act decisively against terror, including sustained, targeted, and effective operations to stop terrorism and dismantle terrorist capabilities and infrastructure. Palestinians must undertake a comprehensive and fundamental political reform that includes a strong parliamentary democracy and an empowered prime minister.

Second, there will be no security for Israelis or Palestinians until they and all states, in the region and beyond, join together to fight terrorism and dismantle terrorist organizations. The United States reiterates its steadfast commitment to Israel's security, including secure, defensible borders, and to preserve and strengthen Israel's capability to deter and defend itself, by itself, against any threat or possible combination of threats.

Third, Israel will retain its right to defend itself against terrorism, including to take actions against terrorist organizations. The United States will lead efforts, working together with Jordan, Egypt, and others in the international community, to build the capacity and will of Palestinian institutions to fight terrorism, dismantle terrorist organizations, and prevent the areas from which Israel has withdrawn from posing a threat that would have to be addressed by any other means. The United States understands that after Israel withdraws from Gaza and/or parts of the West Bank, and pending agreements on other arrangements, existing arrangements regarding control of airspace, territorial waters, and land passages of the West Bank and Gaza will continue. The United States is strongly committed to Israel's security and well-being as a Jewish state. It seems clear that an agreed, just, fair, and realistic framework for a solution to the Palestinian refugee issue as part of any final status agreement will need to be found through the establishment of a Palestinian state, and the settling of Palestinian refugees there, rather than in Israel.

As part of a final peace settlement, Israel must have secure and recognized borders, which should emerge from negotiations between the parties in accordance with UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338. In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949, and all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion. It is realistic to expect that any final status agreement will only be achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these realities.

I know that, as you state in your letter, you are aware that certain responsibilities face the State of Israel. Among these, your government has stated that the barrier being erected by Israel should be a security rather than political barrier, should be temporary rather than permanent, and therefore not prejudice any final status issues including final borders, and its route should take into account, consistent with security needs, its impact on Palestinians not engaged in terrorist activities.

As you know, the United States supports the establishment of a Palestinian state that is viable, contiguous, sovereign, and independent, so that the Palestinian people can build their own future in accordance with my vision set forth in June 2002 and with the path set forth in the roadmap. The United States will join with others in the international community to foster the development of democratic political institutions and new leadership committed to those institutions, the reconstruction of civic institutions, the growth of a free and prosperous economy, and the building of capable security institutions dedicated to maintaining law and order and dismantling terrorist organizations.

A peace settlement negotiated between Israelis and Palestinians would be a great boon not only to those peoples but to the peoples of the entire region. Accordingly, the United States believes that all states in the region have special responsibilities: to support the building of the institutions of a Palestinian state; to fight terrorism, and cut off all forms of assistance to individuals and groups engaged in terrorism; and to begin now to move toward more normal relations with the State of Israel. These actions would be true contributions to building peace in the region.

Mr. Prime Minister, you have described a bold and historic initiative that can make an important contribution to peace. I commend your efforts and your courageous decision which I support. As a close friend and ally, the United States intends to work closely with you to help make it a success.

Sincerely,
George W. Bush

Abir Dandis, the mother of the two girls who were murdered in the Negev town of Al-Fura’a last week, couldn't find a police officer to listen to her warnings, neither in Arad nor in Ma’ale Adumim. Both police stations operate in areas where Israel wants to gather the Bedouin into permanent communities, against their will, in order to clear more land for Jewish communities. The dismissive treatment Dandis received shows how the Bedouin are considered simply to be lawbreakers by their very nature. But as a resident of the West Bank asking for help for her daughters, whose father was Israeli, Dandis faced the legal-bureaucratic maze created by the Oslo Accords.

The Palestinian police is not allowed to arrest Israeli civilians. It must hand suspects over to the Israel Police. The Palestinian police complain that in cases of Israelis suspected of committing crimes against Palestinian residents, the Israel Police tend not to investigate or prosecute them.

In addition, the town of Al-Azaria, where Dandis lives, is in Area B, under Palestinian civilian authority and Israeli security authority. According to the testimony of Palestinian residents, neither the IDF nor the Israel Police has any interest in internal Palestinian crime even though they have both the authority and the obligation to act in Area B.

The Palestinian police are limited in what it can do in Area B. Bringing in reinforcements or carrying weapons in emergency situations requires coordination with, and obtaining permission from, the IDF. If Dandis fears that the man who murdered her daughters is going to attack her as well, she has plenty of reason to fear that she will not receive appropriate, immediate police protection from either the Israelis or the Palestinians.

Dandis told Jack Khoury of Haaretz that the Ma’ale Adumim police referred her to the Palestinian Civil Affairs Coordination and Liaison Committee. Theoretically, this committee (which is subordinate to the Civil Affairs Ministry) is the logical place to go for such matters. Its parallel agency in Israel is the Civilian Liaison Committee (which is part of the Coordination and Liaison Administration - a part of the Civil Administration under the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories).

In their meetings, they are supposed to discuss matters such as settlers’ complaints about the high volume of the loudspeakers at mosques or Palestinians’ complaints about attacks by settlers. But the Palestinians see the Liaison Committee as a place to submit requests for permission to travel to Israel, and get the impression that its clerks do not have much power when faced with their Israeli counterparts. In any case, the coordination process is cumbersome and long.

The Palestinian police has a family welfare unit, and activists in Palestinian women’s organizations say that in recent years, its performance has improved. But, as stated, it has no authority over Israeli civilians and residents. Several non-governmental women’s groups also operate in the West Bank and in East Jerusalem, and women in similar situations approach them for help. The manager of one such organization told Haaretz that Dandis also fell victim to this confusing duplication of procedures and laws. Had Dandis approached her, she said, she would have referred her to Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, which has expertise in navigating Israel’s laws and authorities.

John Kerry revealed his long-awaited plan for peace in the Middle East on Sunday, hinging on a $4bn (£2.6bn) investment in the Palestinian private sector.

The US secretary of state, speaking at the World Economic Forum on the Jordanian shores of the Dead Sea, told an audience including Israeli president Shimon Peres and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas that an independent Palestinian economy is essential to achieving a sustainable peace.

Speaking under the conference banner "Breaking the Impasse", Kerry announced a plan that he promised would be "bigger, bolder and more ambitious" than anything since the Oslo accords, more than 20 years ago.

Tony Blair is to lead a group of private sector leaders in devising a plan to release the Palestinian economy from its dependence on international donors. The initial findings of Blair's taskforce, Kerry boasted, were "stunning", predicting a 50% increase in Palestinian GDP over three years, a cut of two-thirds in unemployment rates and almost double the Palestinian median wage. Currently, 40% of the Palestinian economy is supplied by donor aid.

Kerry assured Abbas that the economic plan was not a substitute for a political solution, which remains the US's "top priority".

Peres, who had taken the stage just minutes before, also issued a personal plea to his Palestinian counterpart to return to the negotiations.

"Let me say to my dear friend President Abbas," Peres said, "Should we really dance around the table? Lets sit together. You'll be surprised how much can be achieved in open, direct and organised meetings."

Thick locks hug the front gates of shuttered shops, now covered in graffiti and dust from lack of use. Only a handful of customers pass along the dimly lit road, sometimes stopping to check the ripeness of fruits and vegetables, or ordering meat in near-empty butcher shops.

“All the shops are closed. I’m the only one open. This used to be the best place,” said 64-year-old Mustafa Sunocret, selling vegetables out of a small storefront in the marketplace near his family’s home in the Muslim quarter of Jerusalem’s Old City.

Amidst the brightly coloured scarves, clothes and carpets, ceramic pottery and religious souvenirs filling the shops of Jerusalem’s historic Old City, Palestinian merchants are struggling to keep their businesses alive.

Faced with worsening health problems, Sunocret told IPS that he cannot work outside of the Old City, even as the cost of maintaining his shop, with high electricity, water and municipal tax bills to pay, weighs on him.

“I only have this shop,” he said. “There is no other work. I’m tired.”

Abed Ajloni, the owner of an antiques shop in the Old City, owes the Jerusalem municipality 250,000 Israeli shekels (68,300 U.S. dollars) in taxes. He told IPS that almost every day, the city’s tax collectors come into the Old City, accompanied by Israeli police and soldiers, to pressure people there to pay.

“It feels like they’re coming again to occupy the city, with the soldiers and police,” Ajloni, who has owned the same shop for 35 years, told IPS. “But where can I go? What can I do? All my life I was in this place.”

He added, “Does Jerusalem belong to us, or to someone else? Who’s responsible for Jerusalem? Who?”

Illegal annexation

Israel occupied East Jerusalem, including the Old City, in 1967. In July 1980, it passed a law stating that “Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel”. But Israel’s annexation of East Jerusalem and subsequent application of Israeli laws over the entire city remain unrecognised by the international community.

Under international law, East Jerusalem is considered occupied territory – along with the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Syrian Golan Heights – and Palestinian residents of the city are protected under the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Jerusalem has historically been the economic, political and cultural centre of life for the entire Palestinian population. But after decades languishing under destructive Israeli policies meant to isolate the city from the rest of the Occupied Territories and a lack of municipal services and investment, East Jerusalem has slipped into a state of poverty and neglect.

“After some 45 years of occupation, Arab Jerusalemites suffer from political and cultural schizophrenia, simultaneously connected with and isolated from their two hinterlands: Ramallah and the West Bank to their east, West Jerusalem and Israel to the west,” the International Crisis Group recently wrote.

Israeli restrictions on planning and building, home demolitions, lack of investment in education and jobs, construction of an eight-foot-high separation barrier between and around Palestinian neighbourhoods and the creation of a permit system to enter Jerusalem have all contributed to the city’s isolation.

Formal Palestinian political groups have also been banned from the city, and between 2001-2009, Israel closed an estimated 26 organisations, including the former Palestinian Liberation Organisation headquarters in Jerusalem, the Orient House and the Jerusalem Chamber of Commerce.

Extreme poverty

Israel’s policies have also led to higher prices for basic goods and services and forced many Palestinian business owners to close shop and move to Ramallah or other Palestinian neighbourhoods on the other side of the wall. Many Palestinian Jerusalemites also prefer to do their shopping in the West Bank, or in West Jerusalem, where prices are lower.

While Palestinians constitute 39 percent of the city’s population today, almost 80 percent of East Jerusalem residents, including 85 percent of children, live below the poverty line.

“How could you develop [an] economy if you don’t control your resources? How could you develop [an] economy if you don’t have any control of your borders?” said Zakaria Odeh, director of the Civic Coalition for Palestinian Rights in Jerusalem, of “this kind of fragmentation, checkpoints, closure”.

“Without freedom of movement of goods and human beings, how could you develop an economy?” he asked.

“You can’t talk about independent economy in Jerusalem or the West Bank or in all of Palestine without a political solution. We don’t have a Palestinian economy; we have economic activities. That’s all we have,” Odeh told IPS.

Israel’s separation barrier alone, according to a new report by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTD), has caused a direct loss of over one billion dollars to Palestinians in Jerusalem, and continues to incur 200 million dollars per year in lost opportunities.

Israel’s severing and control over the Jerusalem-Jericho road – the historical trade route that connected Jerusalem to the rest of the West Bank and Middle East – has also contributed to the city’s economic downturn.

Separation of Jerusalem from West Bank

Before the First Intifada (Arabic for “uprising”) began in the late 1980s, East Jerusalem contributed approximately 14 to 15 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP) in the Occupied Palestinian territories (OPT). By 2000, that number had dropped to less than eight percent; in 2010, the East Jerusalem economy, compared to the rest of the OPT, was estimated at only seven percent.

“Economic separation resulted in the contraction in the relative size of the East Jerusalem economy, its detachment from the remaining OPT and the gradual redirection of East Jerusalem employment towards the Israeli labour market,” the U.N. report found.

Decades ago, Israel adopted a policy to maintain a so-called “demographic balance” in Jerusalem and attempt to limit Palestinian residents of the city to 26.5 percent or less of the total population.

To maintain this composition, Israel built numerous Jewish-Israeli settlements inside and in a ring around Jerusalem and changed the municipal boundaries to encompass Jewish neighbourhoods while excluding Palestinian ones.

It is now estimated that 90,000 Palestinians holding Jerusalem residency rights live on the other side of the separation barrier and must cross through Israeli checkpoints in order to reach Jerusalem for school, medical treatment, work, and other services.

“Israel is using all kinds of tools to push the Palestinians to leave; sometimes they are visible, and sometimes invisible tools,” explained Ziad al-Hammouri, director of the Jerusalem Centre for Social and Economic Rights (JCSER).

Al-Hammouri told IPS that at least 25 percent of the 1,000 Palestinian shops in the Old City were closed in recent years as a result of high municipal taxes and a lack of customers. “Taxation is an invisible tool…as dangerous as revoking ID cards and demolishing houses,” he said. “Israel will use this as pressure and as a tool in the future to confiscate these shops and properties.”

Israel has a new reason to be concerned about is image abroad, if the official travel advisories issued to tourists by governments from Australia and Japan to the US are anything to go by.

Extracts from the stark warnings issued to would-be visitors compiled by the liberal daily Haaretz last week paint an unflattering picture which the paper summarizes as that of "a primitive crime-ridden country, full of bad drivers, religious extremists and even undrinkable water."

The US State Department in its advice to would-be travellers to the Holy Land lays heavy but - for now at least - arguably somewhat out of date emphasis on the need for its citizens to "use good judgment and exercise caution when visiting public areas and using transportation facilities in order to minimize exposure to possible terrorist attacks." Austria even advises against using public transport throughout the country.

More immediately pertinent may be the warning that Americans arriving at Ben-Gurion airport and other crossings, "have been subjected to prolonged questioning and thorough searches… detained and/or arrested on suspicion of security-related offences" and had "laptops and other electronic equipment confiscated" in a minority of cases without being returned.

The US advisory adds: "Israeli security officials have also requested access to travellers’ personal e-mail… or other social media accounts as a condition of entry."

Unsurprisingly, in view of the discovery that replicas of UK passports were used by the assassins of Hamas operative Mahmoud al-Mabouh in Dubai in 2010, Britain warns: "Only hand your passport over to third parties including Israeli officials when absolutely necessary." The US underpins Israel’s unenviable record of traffic accidents by warning – accurately - that "aggressive driving is commonplace and that many drivers fail to maintain safe following distances or signal before changing lanes…" Australia warns that residents “may stone your car” if you drive it into ultra-orthodox Jewish neighbourhoods during the Sabbath.

Such warnings may be well founded. But it is hard not to feel that Japan, which also paints a somewhat melodramatic picture of crime in Tel Aviv, has gone over the top when, along with Canada and Austria, it advises against drinking Israeli tap water.

Barber Mohammed Hamad was in no doubt about the reasons for Yasser Arafat's death just under eight years ago. As he trimmed a customer's hair in his shop in the Amari refugee camp yesterday, he welcomed the news that French prosecutors have opened a murder investigation. And he insisted that "99.9 per cent of people" in the city where the previous Palestinian President was confined in his sandbagged headquarters for the final two years of his life "believe Abu Ammar" – he uses Arafat's nom de guerre – "was murdered, poisoned".

While strongly suspecting that the actual deed was perpetrated by a Palestinian with regular access to Arafat, Mr Hamad, 44, was equally certain that Israel and its then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon were behind it. "Arafat refused at Camp David [in 2000] to sign a peace agreement which left [Jerusalem's] al-Aqsa [mosque] under the control of Israel. Sharon wants to control Jerusalem, East and West. He wants to get rid of Abu Ammar. He accused him of starting the intifada and controlling the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades."

Just one barber's view, of course. But what is disconcerting for all those who regard the accusation that Israel covertly assassinated Arafat as belonging on the wilder shores of conspiracy theory is how widely it is shared among level-headed Palestinians, from the West Bank streets to some of the upper reaches of their leadership.

Qaddoura Fares, the respected senior Fatah official now responsible for the welfare of the 4,500 Palestinian prisoners in Israeli prisons, is a long-time advocate of peace negotiations on a two-state solution.

Yet, he too appears convinced, in the face of repeated denials by Israel, that a President he knew well was murdered on the orders of a Prime Minister who had a personal history of enmity with him going back more than 20 years, and who persistently depicted him as an "obstacle to peace".

Sharon, he says, understood well that Arafat was a uniquely unifying leader for the Palestinians and as a "militant leader" himself "the Israeli PM knew that the [second] intifada would not have happened without a green light from [Arafat]".

Now that the suspicion that he was poisoned has been revived by the identification of traces of deadly polonium on the clothes handed to investigators from the Al Jazeera TV channel by Arafat's widow, Suha, Mr Fares says the Israeli authorities had every reason to ensure that he died as if from natural causes.

"They didn't want him to die as a symbol. They didn't want to make him a martyr. They could easily have shot him if they wanted to."

Around the time in September 2003 when, in the aftermath of a double suicide bombing on a single day, Israel's cabinet took a non-specific, and apparently unfulfilled decision to "remove" Arafat from his Muqata compound in Ramallah, Mr Fares thinks Israel considered a number of options: continued isolation, deportation, arrest and arraignment before a military court – and assassination.

Dismissive of the Palestinian Authority's ability to investigate the death itself, Mr Fares says that the French investigation certainly looks more "credible" and that it will at least ensure that "the issue will be alive, and that it will go on chasing the Israelis".

Still in the coma triggered by the massive stroke which felled him in early 2006, Mr Sharon cannot answer the charges himself.

But while acknowledging Arafat's status as "one of Israel's worst enemies", Mr Sharon's closest lieutenant and former bureau chief Dov Weisglass rebutted them in some detail on Army Radio yesterday.

"We did not physically hurt him when Arafat was in his prime... so all the more so we had no interest in this kind of activity when he was politically sidelined," he said.

Mr Weisglass described having dinner with Javier Solana when the-then EU foreign policy chief took a call from Ahmed Qureia, the Palestinian Prime Minister, asking if Israel would allow the ailing President to be transferred to a Ramallah hospital, Mr Weisglass called Mr Sharon who immediately granted the request. He did the same following day when Mr Solana told Mr Weisglass that Palestinian doctors now said Arafat was very ill and needed treatment in Europe.

And Raanan Gissin, Mr Sharon's long-standing spokesman told the Associated Press that, as the intifada continued, Israeli officials repeatedly raised the option of assassinating Arafat but Sharon always rejected it. Israel "never touched a hair on his head," he said. "The idea was not to kill Arafat, but to change the Palestinian leadership."

But this is anyway not just about Israel. Even many Palestinians believe that if it is ever established that Arafat was assassinated, the truth could make uncomfortable reading in sections of the Palestinian leadership, given that inside help would almost certainly have been needed to reach a heavily guarded President whose food was always prudently shared with others.

Mr Fares, for his part, is certainly not attributing blame to anyone while soberly accepting that any inquiry would have to consider – among much else – the possibility that a Palestinian or Palestinians might have been involved.

Saying that all Palestinians need to give the French prosecutors whatever help they request, he points out the incriminating consequences of not doing so.

"If I am asked to go to Paris and be questioned, and I refuse, then I might as well kill myself," he says. Mr Fares's hope is that the French investigation will somehow begin to find real answers to the questions still swirling here about Arafat's final, fatal illness.

"Ninety per cent of Palestinians believe he was murdered, and 10 per cent that he died of natural causes," he says. "Even if the 10 per cent are right, we need to get to the truth."

Q&A: Polonium

Q. What is it?

Discovered by Marie Curie in the 19th century, polonium is a highly radioactive element, rarely found outside the military and scientific establishment. The particular isotope detected on Yasser Arafat's personal belongings – polonium 210 – occurs naturally in small concentrations in the environment. But high doses of the radioactive substance, which emits radiation in the form of alpha particles, can damage tissues and organs. These cannot pass through the skin, and to pose a danger polonium must be taken into the body, for example by eating it or breathing its radiation.

Q. Has it been used to poison people before?

Polonium hit the headlines in 2006, when it was used to kill the former Russian spy turned Kremlin critic Alexander Litvinenko. He died in November that year after falling suddenly ill in London. Subsequent tests found traces of radiation at various locations in London, and eventually linked Litvinenko's death to the presence of a large dose of polonium 210 in his body.

Q. How was Yasser Arafat linked to polonium?

Samples of clothes worn by the late Palestinian leader shortly before he fell ill were sent to a Swiss laboratory this year by the Al Jazeera television network, in co-operation with his widow and daughter. Scientists at the lab in Lausanne went on to discover significant traces of the radioactive element on his belongings.

Israel has failed to carry out the "thorough, credible and transparent investigation" it had promised into the death of American activist Rachel Corrie in Gaza nine years ago, the US ambassador in Tel Aviv has reiterated to her family.

The Haifa district court is expected to deliver a verdict next Tuesday in the civil action brought against the State of Israel by the bereaved family of Ms Corrie, who was crushed to death by a military bulldozer while part of a group seeking to prevent the destruction of Palestinian homes in the southern Gaza border town of Rafah.

US ambassador Dan Shapiro's comments, in a meeting with Ms Corrie's parents Craig and Cindy, and her sister Sarah, reflect earlier public stances of the US government. But the family said yesterday it had been "encouraged" that coming so soon before the hearing they indicated an "ongoing" demand by the US government for such an investigation irrespective of next week's verdict.

The family opened the civil suit in 2005, two years after Ms Corrie's death at the age of 23, when the military prosecutor closed the file on the case after an internal enquiry.

The suit charged that the Israeli military had been responsible for the International Solidarity Movement activist's death and failed to conduct a full and open investigation.

The state argued in response to the family's suit that Ms Corrie and her fellow activists should not have been in a military zone and that the driver of the D9 military bulldozer did not see her. Witnesses called by the plaintiffs, however, said that Ms Corrie, who was wearing an orange fluorescent jacket, was clearly visible before she was killed.

At a hearing in the court in 2010 Richard Purssell, a British activist in the pro-Palestinian ISM, described how he had watched in horror as Ms Corrie was dragged four metres by the bulldozer moving forward at a "fast walking pace".

The full investigation was promised in a telephone call to the then US President George W Bush by Ariel Sharon, who was Israeli Prime Minister at the time, in the immediate aftermath of Ms Corrie's death. But no action was taken against the bulldozer driver or any other military personnel present at the time.

The US embassy said yesterday it would not comment on what was said at a private meeting held by the ambassador. But his remarks appear to reaffirm the letter written to the family in 2004 by Lawrence Wilkerson, an aide to then Secretary of State, Colin Powell, saying that Israel had failed to carry out the "thorough, credible, and transparent" investigation promised by Mr Sharon.

Ms Corrie's sister, Sarah Simpson Corrie, said yesterday that the lack of such an investigation had caused a "mounting battle" for the family in bringing the civil suit. Saying that she continued to look to the US government to press the case for a transparent investigation, she added: "You can't really expect the family to resolve the issue of a diplomatic promise. That is a matter for the governments – our's and Israel's."

Israel's Defence minister Ehud Barak has given Army chiefs one month to draw up a plan to enlist around 60,000 ultra-orthodox young men who were legally exempted from compulsory military service while they pursued religious studies.

But the move, which follows the expiry yesterday of the law providing for the exemptions, seems unlikely to enact the early mass enlistment of the students at yeshivas or religious colleges that many secular Israelis would like to see.

The so-called "Tal law" fell after being struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court earlier this year. The centrist Kadima party walked out of the governing coalition last month when it failed to secure Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's agreement to a successor law which would have phased in enlistment of steadily growing numbers of young ultra-orthodox men.

Instead Mr Netanyahu infuriated many secular critics by siding with his ultra-orthodox coalition allies and favouring a much more modest stance, which Kadima calculated would leave the long standing regime of exemptions broadly in place.

Until a new law can be passed, the government is – at least in theory – bound by the old 1949 Military Service Law, subsequently amended in 1986, which requires the drafting of all Jewish citizens reaching the age of 18.

But the difficulties for the Israel Defence Forces in rapidly absorbing large numbers of ultra-orthodox men, the length of time – around a year – it takes to conscript a soldier from the time of issuing an initial warrant, and the dangers of a wholesale revolt by potential ultra-orthodox conscripts, will render such enlistment unlikely before a new law is put before the Knesset.

That is despite doubts that Mr Netanyahu will have a majority ahead of fresh elections next year for a new law reflecting what Knesset member Yohanan Plesner, the author of the rejected Kadima proposal, said yesterday would be a "sell-out to the ultra-orthodox parties".

The coalition's majority (65 out of 120 Knesset seats) includes 15 members of the secular Yisrael Beiteinu party who are adamantly in favour of recruiting both ultra-orthodox and Arab citizens.

Mr Plesner said: "We are now entering a period of constitutional, legal and social crisis until there is new legislation." Adding that the total number of ultra-orthodox affected would also including 8,000 reaching the age of 18 this year, he said he did not envisage legislation passing in the current Knesset.

"There's no way the military can absorb 68,000 yeshiva students at a moment's notice. And much as he might like to, the Prime Minister cannot outsource the problem to the military. It needs to be resolved at the level of government and parliament," he added. But Mr Plesner also said the current vacuum could expose the government to High court petitions challenging its failure to enact the 1949 law.

The Ministry of Defence said the IDF would take into account "the requirements and values of the IDF, and the principle of levelling the playing field/'burden sharing'" as well as "the suitability of individuals for military service". In the long run, recruitment would contribute to "vocational training and important integration of the ultra-orthodox community into Israel's labour market".

The exemptions have grown massively from around 400 granted to rabbinical students after the foundation of the state to rebuild religious scholarship destroyed by the Holocaust.

'Time running out' for nuclear deal

Time for a peaceful solution to Iran's nuclear ambitions is "running out", the Israeli Prime Minister told US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta yesterday during talks on differences between the two governments on the issue.

They came the day after Mr Netanyahu had done nothing in a series of television interviews to defuse speculation that Israel is contemplating a possible unilateral strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.

Mr Panetta sought to reassure Israel that the US had "options that we are prepared to implement", but Mr Netanyahu said the Iranian regime "believes the international community does not have the will to stop its nuclear program. This must change quickly because time to resolve this issue peacefully is running out."