Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Israel Grows Ever-Harsher in Treatment of Migrants

Israel’s growing migrant population has spurred the rightwing Likud government to pursue increasingly harsh detention and deportation policies, which could further complicate the country’s relationships with its neighbors and the international community.

Inter Press Service

A new report from the Global Detention Project (GDP) on Israel's immigration detention policies reveals the tough reality behind the feel-good story offered in the Academy Award-winning "Strangers No More", an inspirational documentary about students from migrant families who attend the Bialik-Rogozin school in Tel Aviv.

The film focuses on the exceptional work of Bailik-Rogozin's teachers in providing education for children who have escaped political instability – even genocide – in their own countries in Africa and elsewhere.

But "Strangers No More" fails to highlight the threat of detention and deportation faced by many young immigrants and asylum seekers.

The New York Times reported early this week that "there is an ominous subtext to the story that was not explored in the movie. Of the school's 828 pupils & 120 are facing deportation with their families" because they can't get legal status.

In its new report, the GDP, a research initiative based at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva, details the policies pursued by Israel's rightwing Likud government aimed at restricting the ability of asylum seekers to enter Israel and apply for asylum while at the same time boosting the country's detention and deportation efforts.

In early 2010, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced plans to build a wall along Israel's border with Egypt, saying the country "cannot let tens of thousands of illegal workers infiltrate into Israel through the southern border and inundate our country with illegal aliens."

Several months later, in November, Netanyahu announced that the government would build a massive new detention facility to confine up to 10,000 so-called infiltrators – unauthorized non-citizens – in order to reduce the incentive for migrants.

In February, the Israeli media reported that the government intended to expand the use of a small detention facility in Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion Airport to hold children and families as they await deportation. One activist quoted in the GDP report called the plan "a moral stain that will not be erased".

Earlier, in 2009, the country set up a special police force called the Oz Unit ("oz" means strength in Hebrew) with the goal of apprehending the estimated 280,000 undocumented foreigners in Israel by 2013. The unit has been plagued with controversy, including mistreatment of migrants.

"Many countries have adopted harsh migrant detention policies in recent years," says Michael Flynn, the GDP's lead researcher. "But the Israeli government's policies stand out."

According to Flynn, the government's reaction appears to be spurred by several factors.

"On the one hand, Israeli officials appear to be acutely sensitive to ethnic differences because of the country's preoccupation with remaining a Jewish state," he said. "Also, the country has had antagonistic relations with many of its neighbors, making it particularly obsessive when it comes to border security."

Evidence of Israel's preoccupation with its growing migrant population is its hardening asylum policies. Since signing the U.N. Refugee Convention in 1954, Israel has granted refugee status to less than 200 people, even though UNCHR has registered several thousand asylum claims in the last two years alone.

The Israeli government has recently made it even harder to apply for asylum, according to the GDP. In January, new guidelines went into effect that shifted the responsibility for assessing asylum claims from UNHCR to Israel's Interior Ministry.

According to an Israeli lawyer interviewed by the GDP, this change in policy has been "simply a disaster". People who apply for asylum at the Interior Ministry tend to have their claims summarily rejected and then they are taken into custody at the ministry, which has had a "chilling effect" on asylum.

Often, asylum seekers are not even allowed to enter the country. Many of the people who are detained by the Israeli Defense Forces at the border are forcibly returned to Egypt, sometimes disappearing altogether, according to reports cited by the GDP.

UNHCR and other groups have severely criticized this "Hot Returns" policy. In 2007, the Israeli NGO Hotline for Migrant Workers filed suit in the High Court of Justice to fight the policy. The case is still pending.

Most asylum seekers and irregular migrants – who come from a number of African and East Asian countries – traverse Egypt's Sinai Peninsula to Israel, where they are initially apprehended by the IDF, which then turns them over to the custody of the Interior Ministry for detention in one of several detention centers.

Statistics cited by the GDP indicate that as of August 2010, 1,042 unauthorized residents had been held without criminal charge for more than the recommended 60 days. Some of these detainees had been in detention for years: a Congolese and a Kenyan had been in detention since 2004; an Ethiopian since 2005; and two Guineans since 2006.

A key facility is the Saharonim Detention Centre. Located near Israel's southern border, the facility confines entire families. According to information provided by Hotline for Migrant Workers to the GDP, fathers are detained separately from mothers and children, many of whom are confined for months in cloth tents and not provided proper schooling.

As of August 2010, there were 206 women and children in Saharonim, including families from Eritrea, Ethiopia, Sudan, and several other African countries.

Children have also been detained at Givon Prison located near Ramla. Their situation was so dire that it spurred one Likud party member to say during a 2009 Knesset hearing that the treatment of detained minors was "twisted and inhumane".

While the issue of the return of Palestinian refugees remains a major stumbling block to Israeli-Palestinian peace, Israel's treatment of its non-Palestinian migrant population has been largely off the media radar.

However, the growing criticism of Israeli policies promises to further complicate the country's relations with its neighbors and the international community.

"Israel has long been criticized for its treatment of Palestinians," says Flynn. "But now, awareness is growing of the plight of other migrants in the country, and with the recent tumult in Egypt, it is likely that the government's fears of 'infiltrators' is only growing."

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is one of the Senate’s more vocal hawks, and one of the prime vacillators among Republicans between objecting to and supporting Donald Trump.


Ron Dermer is the Israeli ambassador to the United States and has deep connections to the Republican Party and the neoconservative movement.


The Washington-based American Enterprise Institute is a rightist think tank with a broad mandate covering a range of foreign and domestic policy issues that is known for its strong connections to neoconservatism and overseas debacles like the Iraq War.


Max Boot, neoconservative military historian at the Council on Foreign Relations, on Trump and Russia: “At every turn Trump is undercutting the ‘get tough on Russia’ message because he just can’t help himself, he just loves Putin too much.”


Since taking office Donald Trump has revealed an erratic and extremely hawkish approach to U.S. foreign affairs, which has been marked by controversial actions like dropping out of the Iran nuclear agreement that have raised tensions across much of the world and threatened relations with key allies.


Mike Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas and an evangelical pastor, is a far-right pundit known for his hawkish policies and opposition to an Israeli peace deal with the Palestinians.


Nikki Haley, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, is known for her lock-step support for Israel and considered by some to be a future presidential candidate.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

The Trumpian new regional order in the Middle East is predicated on strongman rule, disregard for human rights, Sunni primacy over Iran and other Shia centers of power, continued military support for pro-American warring parties regardless of the unlawfulness of such wars, and Israeli hegemony.


A comparison of U.S. nuclear diplomacy with Iran and the current version with North Korea puts the former in a good light and makes the latter look disappointing. Those with an interest in curbing the dangers of proliferating nuclear weapons should hope that the North Korea picture will improve with time. But whether it does or not, the process has put into perspective how badly mistaken was the Trump administration’s trashing of the Iran nuclear agreement.


Numerous high profile Trump administration officials maintain close ties with anti-Muslim conspiracy theorists. In today’s America, disparaging Islam is acceptable in ways that disparaging other religions is not. Given the continuing well-funded campaigns by the Islamophobes and continuing support from their enablers in the Trump administration, starting with the president himself, it seems unlikely that this trend will be reversed any time soon.


The Trump administration’s nuclear proliferation policy is now in meltdown, one which no threat of “steely resolve”—in Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s words—will easily contain. It is hemorrhaging in part because the administration has yet to forge a strategy that consistently and credibly signals a feasible bottom line that includes living with—rather than destroying—regimes it despises or fears. Political leaders on both sides of the aisle must call for a new model that has some reasonable hope of restraining America’s foes and bringing security to its Middle East allies.


Congressional midterm elections are just months away and another presidential election already looms. Who will be the political leader with the courage and presence of mind to declare: “Enough! Stop this madness!” Man or woman, straight or gay, black, brown, or white, that person will deserve the nation’s gratitude and the support of the electorate. Until that occurs, however, the American penchant for war will stretch on toward infinity.


To bolster the president’s arguments for cutting back immigration, the administration recently released a fear-mongering report about future terrorist threats. Among the potential threats: a Sudanese national who, in 2016, “pleaded guilty to attempting to provide material support to ISIS”; an Uzbek who “posted a threat on an Uzbek-language website to kill President Obama in an act of martyrdom on behalf of ISIS”; a Syrian who, in a plea agreement, “admitted that he knew a member of ISIS and that while in Syria he participated in a battle against the Syrian regime, including shooting at others, in coordination with Al Nusrah,” an al-Qaeda offshoot.


The recent appointment of purveyors of anti-Muslim rhetoric to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom exposes the cynical approach Republicans have taken in promoting religious freedom.


RightWeb
share