The encampment began on April 29 as protestors occupied the area beside Bell Tower. The movement was led by the university’s chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine.

Protestors demanded the university disclose its investments and funding and that it should divest from companies and institutions that are “complicit in the Israeli occupation, apartheid, and genocide” of Palestinians.

There were also calls for UCR to sever ties with Israeli universities, including student exchange programs, according to the Press-Enterprise.

A negotiation meeting took place on May 1 and a planned rally later that day drew several hundred participants to the campus.

On Friday, campus leaders and demonstrators successfully reached an agreement to end the encampment no later than Friday, May 3, by midnight, according to UCR officials.

“I am pleased to share that we have reached an agreement that will result in the peaceful conclusion of the encampment,” said UCR Chancellor Kim A. Wilcox. “It has been my goal to resolve this matter peacefully and I am encouraged by this outcome – which was generated through constructive dialogue.”

As part of the agreement, university officials settled on these terms:

• All currently public information on UC’s investments will be posted to the UCR campus website. It will continue to be updated as the UC releases more information. The goal is to get full disclosure of the list of companies in the portfolio and the size of the investments.
• The UCR Administration agrees to form a task force that includes students appointed by ASUCR’s Diversity Council and faculty appointed by the Academic Senate to explore the removal of UCR’s endowment from the management of the UC Investments Office, and the investment of said endowment in a manner that will be financially and ethically sound for the university with consideration to the companies involved in arms manufacturing and delivery.
• The goal of this task force is to produce a report to present to the UCR Foundation Board of Trustees by the end of Winter Quarter 2025. The task force will be formed by the end of the Spring 2024 quarter.
• Commitment to bimonthly meetings with the AVC of Auxiliary Services and an ongoing review of Sabra Hummus consistent with existing product review processes until we can find a resolution.
• The School of Business has discontinued Global Programs in Oxford, USA, Cuba, Vietnam, Brazil, China, Egypt, Jordan, and Israel.
• UCR will modify its approval process for all study abroad programs to ensure compliance with UC’s Anti-Discriminatory Policies.

The encampment at UC Riverside is one of many pro-Palestinian demonstrations taking place on college campuses across the country in response to the Israel-Hamas War that began on Oct. 7, 2023.

In Southern California, protests and rallies took place at USC, UCLA, UC Irvine, UC Berkeley, Cal State Long Beach, Pitzer College in Claremont and UC San Diego.

Most campus demonstrations remained peaceful despite violence breaking out at UCLA on April 30 when dozens of pro-Israeli protestors, many wearing white masks, swarmed the campus and attempted to dismantle the pro-Palestinian encampment that overtook Royce Quad since April 25.

The agitators threw fireworks at the encampment and attacked demonstrators with bear or pepper spray. Many people were seen punching and fist-fighting on the lawn during the late-night ambush.

The next day, a large police presence surrounded UCLA and declared the encampment an unlawful assembly. Officers worked overnight to eventually clear the massive encampment. Around 210 people were arrested or detained and hundreds more left the campus voluntarily.

Removal of the tents at the UC Riverside encampment have begun and will be cleared by Friday at midnight.

The post UC Riverside protestors reach agreement to end pro-Palestinian encampment appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu finally spoke Friday after a glaring, nearly four-week gap in direct communication during which fundamental differences have come into focus over a possible pathway to Palestinian statehood once the fighting in Gaza ends.

Biden and his top aides have all but smothered Netanyahu with robust support, even in the face of global condemnation over the mounting civilian death toll and humanitarian suffering in Gaza as the Israelis have carried out military operations in the aftermath of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel.

But the leaders’ relationship has increasingly shown signs of strain as Netanyahu has repeatedly rebuffed Biden’s calls for Palestinian sovereignty, gumming up what the U.S. president believes is the key to unlocking a durable peace in the Middle East — the oft-cited, elusive two-state solution.

Neither side shows signs of budging.

Friday’s phone call came one day after Netanyahu said that he has told U.S. officials in plain terms that he will not support a Palestinian state as part of any post-war plan. Biden, for his part, in Friday’s call reaffirmed his commitment to work toward helping the Palestinians move toward statehood.

“As we’re talking about post-conflict Gaza … you can’t do that without also talking about the aspirations of the Palestinian people and what that needs to look like for them,” said National Security Council spokesman John Kirby.

The leaders spoke frequently in the first weeks of the war. But the regular cadence of calls between Biden and Netanyahu, who have had a hot-and-cold relationship for over three decades, has slowed considerably. Their 30- to 40-minute call on Friday was their first conversation since Dec. 23.

Both sides are hemmed in by domestic political considerations.

The chasm between Biden, a center-left Democrat, and Netanyahu, who leads the most conservative government in Israel’s history, has expanded as pressure mounts on the United States to use its considerable leverage to press Israel to wind down a war that has already killed nearly 25,000 Palestinians.

There is also growing impatience with Netanyahu in Israel over the lack of progress in freeing dozens of hostages still held by Islamic militants in Gaza.

“There is certainly a reason to be concerned,” says Eytan Gilboa, an expert on U.S.-Israeli relations at Israel’s Bar-Ilan University, “The more and more we see political considerations dominating the relationship between Biden and Netanyahu, which is likely to continue because of the upcoming presidential election and the weakness of both leaders, the more we will see them pulling apart.”

In their most recent calls, Biden’s frustration with Netanyahu has grown more evident, even though the U.S. leader has been careful to reaffirm his support for Israel at each step, according to U.S. officials who requested anonymity to discuss the leaders’ private interactions.

Yet, Biden, at least publicly, has not given up on the idea of winning over Netanyahu. Asked by a reporter on Friday if a two-state solution is impossible while Netanyahu is in office, Biden replied, “No, it’s not.”

Aides insist Biden understands the political box Netanyahu finds himself in with his hard-right coalition and as he deals with ongoing corruption charges that have left the prime minister fighting for his freedom, not just his political future.

Biden, meanwhile, faces American voters in November, in a likely rematch with former President Donald Trump. Netanyahu and Trump forged a close relationship during the Republican’s term in office. Biden faces criticism from some on his left who believe he hasn’t pushed the Israelis hard enough to demonstrate restraint as it carries out military operations.

Key Democratic lawmakers, including Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy, this week warned that Netanyahu’s position on statehood could complicate negotiations in the Senate on a spending package that includes military aid for Israel.

Expect Netanyahu to “use every trick that he has to keep his coalition together and avoid elections and play out the clock,” said Michael Koplow, chief policy officer at the Israel Policy Forum. ”And I’m sure that part of it is a conviction that if he waits until November, he may end up with Donald Trump back in the Oval Office.”

In recent weeks, some of the more difficult conversations have been left to Ron Dermer, a top aide to Netanyahu and former Israeli ambassador to the U.S., and Biden’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan. The two top aides talk almost daily — sometimes multiple times during a day, according to a U.S. and an Israeli official, who were not authorized to comment publicly and spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Other senior Biden administration officials including Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, as well as senior advisers Brett McGurk and Amos Hochstein have been at the forefront of the administration’s push to engage the Israelis, and other Middle East allies, as the Biden-Netanyahu dialogue has become less constructive.

Netanyahu, who has opposed calls for a two-state solution throughout his political career, told reporters this week that he flatly told U.S. officials he remains opposed to any post-war plan that includes establishment of a Palestinian state.

The prime minister’s latest rejection of Biden’s push in that direction came after Blinken this week said at the World Economic Forum in Davos that Israel and its Middle East neighbors had “a profound opportunity” to solve the generational Israel-Palestinian conflict. Asked if he thought Netanyahu was up to making the most of the moment, Blinken demurred.

“Look, these are decisions for Israelis to make,” Blinken said. “This is a profound decision for the country as a whole to make: What direction does it want to take? Does it see – can it seize – the opportunity that we believe is there?”

The Biden-Netanyahu relationship has seen no shortage of peaks and valleys over the years. As vice president, Biden privately criticized Netanyahu after the the Israeli leader embarrassed President Barack Obama by approving the construction of 1,600 new apartments in disputed East Jerusalem in the middle of Biden’s 2010 visit to Israel.

Netanyahu publicly resisted, before eventually relenting to, Biden’s calls on the Israelis to wind down a May 2021 military operation in Gaza. And in late 2019, during a question and answer session with voters on the campaign trail, Biden called Netanyahu an “extreme right” leader.

The path to a two-state solution — one in which Israel would co-exist with an independent Palestinian state — has eluded U.S. presidents and Middle East diplomats for decades.

But as the war grinds on, Biden and his team have pressed the notion that there is a new dynamic in the Middle East in which Israel’s Arab and Muslim neighbors stand ready to integrate Israel into the region once the war ends but only if Israel commits to a pathway to a Palestinian state.

Biden has proposed that a “revitalized” Palestinian Authority, which is based in the West Bank, could run Gaza once combat ends. Netanyahu has roundly rejected the idea of putting the Palestinian Authority, which is beset by corruption, in charge of the territory.

Netanyahu argues that a Palestinian state would become a launchpad for attacks on Israel. So Israel “must have security control over the entire territory west of the Jordan River,” Netanyahu said. “That collides with the idea of sovereignty. What can we do?”

White House officials have sought to play down Netanyahu’s public rejection of Biden’s call for a two-state solution, noting that the prime minister’s rhetoric is not new.

They hold out hope Israel could eventually come around to accepting a Palestinian state that comes with strong security guarantees for Israel.

“I don’t think Biden has any illusions about Netanyahu,” said Daniel Kurtzer, who served as U.S. ambassador to Egypt during the Bill Clinton administration and to Israel under George W. Bush. “But I don’t think he’s ready to slam the door on him. And that’s because he gets the intersection between the policy and the politics.”

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Biden and Netanyahu have finally talked, but their visions still clash for ending Israel-Hamas war appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Russia has issued carefully calibrated criticism of both sides in the war between Israel and Hamas. But the conflict also is giving Moscow bold new opportunities — to advance its role as a global power broker and challenge Western efforts to isolate it over Ukraine.

While Moscow lacks leverage to mediate a settlement in the Middle East, it could try to play on some perceived credibility problems with the West’s response to the crisis.

It also expects the Israel-Hamas war to distract attention from the fighting in Ukraine and erode support for Kyiv.

There are risks for Moscow, however. It could damage its relationship with Israel, which until now has kept it from sending weapons to Ukraine.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has condemned the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas militants on towns in southern Israel. At the same time, he warned Israel against blockading the Gaza Strip, likening it to Nazi Germany’s siege of Leningrad during World War II.

He has cast the war as a failure of U.S. diplomacy, charging that Washington has opted for economic “handouts” to the Palestinians and abandoned efforts to help create a Palestinian state.

Putin declared earlier this month that Moscow could play the role of mediator, thanks to its friendly ties with both Israel and the Palestinians, adding that “no one could suspect us of playing up to one party.”

Despite that claim of even-handedness, a U.N. Security Council resolution that Russia submitted last week condemning violence against civilians made no mention of Hamas. It was rejected by the council.

China was among a few countries that backed the Russian draft, reflecting a shared stance by Moscow and Beijing. Chinese and Russian Middle East envoys met last week to discuss working together to help cool the situation, noting their adherence to a two-state solution for Israel and the Palestinians.

While U.S. President Joe Biden, British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and other Western leaders visited Israel to show support, Putin waited for nine days before calling Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, even though they previously had developed warm personal ties. Putin also discussed the war in calls with the leaders of Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Syria and the head of the Palestinian Authority.

Putin offered Netanyahu condolences to the families of Israelis killed by Hamas and emphasized “his strong rejection and condemnation of any actions that victimize the civilian population, including women and children,” according to a Kremlin readout of the call. He also emphasized the need for a “peaceful settlement through political and diplomatic means,” it added. Netanyahu’s office said he told Putin that Israel would not stop until it had eliminated Hamas.

Unlike Putin, who carefully balanced his statements, other Russian officials were more blunt in their criticism of Israeli strikes on Gaza.

Konstantin Kosachev, deputy speaker of the upper house of Russian parliament, said that while Hamas unleashed the war, Israel’s response was “disproportionate” and “inhumane.”

The Kremlin’s maneuvering may reflect domestic politics, with Muslims making up about 15% of the its population. The Moscow-backed leader of Chechnya, Ramzan Kadyrov, spoke strongly in support of the Palestinians, assailing Israel for capturing their lands and establishing blockades.

Moscow’s stance won quick praise from Hamas, which said it appreciates Russia’s call for a cease-fire. Russia’s statements also play well in the Arab world, where many have accused the U.S. and its allies of squarely supporting Israel while turning a blind eye to the rising civilian death toll in Gaza.

But this position also threatens Russia’s friendly ties with Israel, which hasn’t joined Western sanctions against Moscow or given weapons to Ukraine.

“There is a real threat of exacerbation of our ties with Israel in the current situation,” said Andrei Kortunov, academic director of the Russian International Affairs Council.

The Times of Israel reported Tuesday an Israeli diplomat expressed “displeasure with the role Russia is playing” to Moscow’s diplomatic officials, voicing hope the Kremlin will take “more balanced” positions.

Amir Weitmann, a leading member of Netanyahu’s Likud party, accused Russia of supporting Hamas. Speaking on Kremlin-funded broadcaster RT, he warned that after Israel defeats Hamas, “we will make sure that Ukraine wins, we will make sure that you pay the price for what you have done.”

Asked about Israeli criticism of Moscow’s stance on the war, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov emphasized Russia’s condemnation of terrorism and reaffirmed its push for a quick cease-fire and the need for a Palestinian state.

Amid what Israel sees as Moscow’s pro-Palestinian stance, some prominent Russian voices have backed Israel.

In a sign of the split sympathies, the head of the most popular political talk show on Russian state TV, Vladimir Solovyov, fired one expert on his televised panel who alleged in an online interview that two of Moscow’s top diplomats have anti-Israeli sentiments.

Yevgeny Satanovsky, a pro-Kremlin foreign policy expert, described Russia’s Middle East envoy, Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov, as leaning toward Arab countries and alleged that Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova detests Israel. He later apologized.

Some commentators described the anti-Israeli sentiments as a throwback to Soviet times.

“Friendship with the Arabs against Israel and the West is an important part of that legacy,” Alexander Baunov of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center said in an analysis. “A global rebellion against the Western order to a certain extent makes Russia and Hamas natural allies and certainly prevents them from being enemies.”

Kortunov of the Russian International Affairs Council argued that Russia could use its strong contacts with Iran and Syria to help negotiate a settlement.

“Russia could be part of a multilateral coalition that would offer security guarantees,” he said. “It’s very important to maintain a well-balanced, delicate approach that wouldn’t alienate either party.”

Izabella Tabarovsky, senior adviser at the Kennan Institute, noted that for Putin, Hamas’ “attack and the anticipated ground invasion of the Gaza Strip present an opportunity to shed his pariah status and elevate his profile as the Middle East faces its most dangerous crisis in years.”

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Russia maneuvers carefully over the Israel-Hamas war as it seeks to expand its global clout appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.