Welcome!
My most recent postings are below. Access others at Current Postings. Check out informational resources: Background Info, The Other Face of Israel , Useful Websites, and more.
Key Postings brings you previous postings on themes that merit on-going consideration.
If you have questions, or wish to be on my list, contact me, Arlene Kushner: akushner@netvision.net.il. Bookmark this site!
_______________________________________________________________
Read "Moral Atrocity" -- biting British commentary on Goldstone Report.
_______________________________________________________________
November 6, 2009
"Catching Up"
Before Shabbat begins, I want to touch base on a handful of subjects, most mentioned yesterday:
The UN vote on Goldstone was taken, and, as we knew it would, it passed. Attempts by Western nations to negotiate with the Arab states a compromise resolution failed. The Arabs figured they had enough third world votes to put it through and simply proceeded.
The vote: 114-18, with 44 abstentions. Israel and the United States, voted against, of course, as did Italy, the Netherlands, Poland and the Czech Republic. That leaves 12 other states that also voted nay, and I have not yet been able to identify them.
The European vote, disappointingly, was split, with both Britain and France -- craven in their inability to take a stand -- simply abstaining.
~~~~~~~~~~
From our foreign ministry came this response:
"Israel rejects the Assembly's decision, which bears no connection to the reality which Israel faces. In operation Cast Lead, the IDF showed standards of fighting and morality that were higher than those of any of the resolution's initiators.
"Israel will continue to act, like other democracies, to protect its citizens from international terror, as was proven this week.”
~~~~~~~~~~
In point of fact, Israel has now filed an official grievance with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and the UN Security Council, following the capture of the arms ship:
"The intended route of the Francop, coupled with the types of weaponry found on board, raise serious concerns that this incident also constitutes a violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1701 and 1373."
Resolution 1373 of 2001, among other things, prohibits states from "providing any form of support, active or passive, to entities or persons involved in terrorist acts" This would apply to Iran, supplying weapons to Hezbollah.
Resolution 1701, hammered out at the end of our most recent war in Lebanon (i.e., our war with Hezbollah) in 2006, was designed to prevent the re-arming of Hezbollah and to keep the area south of the Litani River free of any armed presence except Lebanese army and UNIFIL. It is forbidden to provide any entity in Lebanon with weapons or military equipment. What is more, it is forbidden to allow planes or ships to be utilized in the transport of such weapons.
The Israeli grievance thus also said;
"Iran’s national shipping company (IRISL) has been repeatedly found to be involved in transporting weapons and other banned items in violation of UN Security Council resolutions."
Prime Minister Netanyahu, in his statement after the contents of the ship were uncovered, called what Iran was doing a war crime. What is now being pushed by our diplomats is a position internationally in which countries would refuse to work with the Iranian shipping line at all (which would serve to severely weaken Iran).
I hope you will not hold your breath waiting for an appropriate UN response. Better chastise us than go after Iran.
~~~~~~~~~~
Also as expected, Abbas has declared his intention not to run again in the presidential election. This was not a tactic, he said, and his decision was final.
Although there was a flurry of phone calls to Abbas from world leaders, more than not, the reaction was tepid. There was no huge and horrified outcry -- although Fatah is planning a demonstration to take place in the next few days, to urge him to stay.
The statement from our government was that this was an internal matter in which we should not get involved. There was no response to the heated accusations by Abbas that our refusal to totally freeze building was killing the "peace process." Netanyahu did make a statement saying that if Abbas had the courage to do so, he could be a partner for peace.
Nor, do I believe, did the US bite with regard to accusations. One wonders if Obama perceives the way in which he has created this situation by raising expectations.
Hamas forthrightly accused Abbas of playing games. Its message to Abbas was that it was time to stop waiting for Israel and the US to change, to admit that negotiations had failed, and to turn towards Hamas and reconciliation.
By today a senior member of the Fatah council, Mohammed Shtaya, told Al-Jazeera that there was a good chance that Abbas would change his mind -- if there was a significant shift in the political situation.
~~~~~~~~~~
How about this!
I have been making the assumption that when he came to the States next week, Netanyahu would be meeting with Obama. I have invested energy in speculating on what would be discussed. Nor have I been alone in this, as I've been in communication with others very much in the know who have been making the same assumption. In fact, one news source cited Barak, whose pronouncements on arranging a peace plan with Obama to sell to the PA made me very nervous. Barak, it seems, talks off the top of his head, in line with what he wishes would happen.
But according to the news today, there are no plans in place for Netanyahu and Obama to meet. The prime minister is going to address the General Assembly of the United Jewish Communities. The GA is the single largest gathering of Jews within an organizational context in America, and Netanyahu has a very legitimate agenda in terms of strengthening Israel-Diaspora ties and helping American Jews to better understand Israel.
News sources report that before Obama agrees to meet with Netanyahu, he wants something in return. In return for a meeting? This from the man who believes in dialogue with enemies?? If this is the case, I will be rather pleased if our prime minister does not meet with the president, because it means he refuses to be coerced.
What I have just picked up, however, is information about Obama speaking at the GA as well. Hmmm... And no meeting scheduled but perhaps an informal meeting on the sidelines?
~~~~~~~~~~
According to the Guardian, Iranian scientists have experimented with an advanced nuclear warhead design.
Don't know about you, but this makes my blood run cold. After Shabbat I hope to have more to say about the IAEA and its destructive head, ElBaradei.
At any rate, Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon has said that talk of our attacking Iran's nuclear facilities is not an idle threat.
According to defense analyst Yaakov Katz:
"I believe the option is viable and is ready. In other words, the question for today for Israel is not a 'can or can't we'... it's a question on a political level of 'should we or shouldn't we?'"
If we do end up deciding that we must hit Iran, I wonder if Obama will understand the degree to which he will have made this necessary.
~~~~~~~~~~
The news is a bit mind-boggling: A Muslin US soldier, Nidal Malik Hasan, using two weapons, one a semi-automatic, last night killed 12 and wounded 31 at Fort Hood, the largest US army base -- a base from which troops are dispatched to Iraq and Afghanistan. A US-born citizen of Jordanian heritage, Hasan is a psychiatrist (first reported dead, it seems he is not). He was scheduled to be shipped out to Iraq. A great deal of information has yet to be uncovered.
See this commentary by Dr. Aaron Lerner of IMRA:
http://imra.org.il/story.php3?id=46321
~~~~~~~~~~
Lori Lowenthal Marcus, co-founder of Z Street (ziostreet.wordpress.com) attended the J Street Conference and has written about it. Her description is well worth reading:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/11/at_the_j_street_meeting.html
~~~~~~~~~~
November 5, 2009
"Staying Strong"
Israel is launching a massive PR campaign in the face of the capture of the arms ship yesterday. All ambassadors to Israel from foreign nations were summoned to the Ashdod port to see for themselves, as Foreign Minister Lieberman put it, "lethal weapons meant entirely to be aimed at civilians."
More than 3,000 missiles were on this ship.
I am waiting -- having picked up nothing yet -- for a response on this from Obama. There he is, making nice with Iran. How will he deal with the information that has been released regarding the weapons ship? Will it still be business as usual, and will he still be "going that extra mile"?
~~~~~~~~~~
Various munitions experts have done a first examination of the cache of weapons. The weapons came in boxes that had markings on them in various languages: Chinese, Russian, Spanish and English. In some cases there were other languages on the weapons themselves. The thought is that at least some of these were manufactured elsewhere and then shipped to Iran. The Katyusha rockets, for example, seem to have been manufactured in Russia.
Unquestionably, however, many containers were marked boldly with "IRISL" -- the mark of the Iranian shipping lines. The IDF believes the Iranian Revolutionary Guard is behind the shipment.
~~~~~~~~~~
Other information not yet available when I wrote yesterday has now come to light:
[] The ship, the Francop, is owned by the Dohle company in Germany, and was rented to the Cypriot shipping company UFS.
[] While the shipment began in Iran, UFS was not involved the entire way. About 10 days ago, an Iranian cargo ship left the Bandar Abbas Port in Iran, and carried its cargo -- via the Arabian Sea and the Suez Canal-- to the Egyptian port of Damietta, which is near the canal. There it was unloaded, and then the crates were re-loaded onto the Francop. Its scheduled route in the Mediterranean would have brought it to Cyprus, Lebanon, and then Syria.
I have picked up no indication that the Egyptians had any clue as to what was in the containers loaded and unloaded in their port. My assumption is that they did not.
~~~~~~~~~~
It is hoped that this incident will have the effect of enhancing the effectiveness of economic sanctions against Iran. As I understand this, shipping companies that might have looked the other way in terms of carry commercial cargo from Iran will now be nervous about what they are truly carrying and more reluctant to cooperate. This is the reasoning, at any rate.
~~~~~~~~~~
In spite of incredible intelligence and a stunning operation, Israel knows it is impossible to stop all of the smuggling of arms into Lebanon for use by Hezbollah. This, quite simply, is because of Syrian participation. It is common knowledge -- I've reported on this several times over the last couple of years -- that at night trucks carrying weapons cross over Syria's border into Lebanon. UNIFIL more or less stays clear. That is, it is being done under the noses of the international force charged with preventing the re-arming of Hezbollah.
Similarly, it is known that a route exists that brings weapons from Iran to Hamas in Gaza. The weapons are brought by ship to the port in Sudan on the coast of the Red Sea, and then are brought north overground into southern Egypt, and then up to Gaza. Our air force hit such a convoy of trucks last January.
It is an Iranian interest to keep its proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas, well armed. Right now it is thought that Iran is particularly concerned with doing this because Hezbollah and Hamas would be utilized in attacks against Israel, were Israel to hit Iranian military installations.
~~~~~~~~~~
In this instance, a ship was used rather than trucks because of the enormous amount of weaponry being transported. The IDF has indicated that this is weaponry for an army, not a terrorist operation.
Reuters
These crates, which have now been transferred to storage in two IDF warehouses in central Israel, required some 32 trucks to transport them. Except for some research, the weapons will not be utilized.
~~~~~~~~~~
Looks as if the vote in the General Assembly on the Goldstone Report may not take place until tomorrow. It is my understanding that the American delegation has absented itself from debate.
~~~~~~~~~~
With regard to that report, Jihad Watch has called our attention to a piece in Al Jazeera from October 28 that cites Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, the secretary-general of the OIC -- the Organization of Islamic Conference. According to him, the Conference was the "initiator" of a war crimes inquiry into our actions in Gaza.
"On January 3, during the attacks on Gaza, we convened the executive committee of the OIC on a ministerial level. It was decided that the OIC group in Geneva should ask the Human Rights Council to convene and consider the possibility of sending a fact-finding mission to Gaza.
"The OIC was instrumental in getting through this resolution..."
Figures...
~~~~~~~~~~
In the same interview, Ihsanoglu indicated that OIC was doing everything possible to protect the al-Aksa Mosque from destruction due to excavations by Israel beneath it.
"We hope that the political will of the 57 member states of the OIC will be able to levy international pressure - through various channels - on Israel to stop threatening the al-Aksa Mosque...
"About two weeks ago at UNESCO's general assembly in Paris, I called on the UN and UNESCO to declare East Jerusalem, the historical city of Jerusalem, as a world historical site - untouchable..."
Nice organization...
~~~~~~~~~~
The latest on the mass confusion that passes for Palestinian politics:
The big news right now is that a PA official has informed the media that Abbas says he won't be running for president in the next elections. Abbas was said to have made this announcement at a meeting of the executive committee of the PLO. According to Yasser Abed Rabbo, who heads the committee, he could not be dissuaded from this decision and will be making his formal announcement later today.
My first response was, "Yea, sure," for Abbas has made such threats many times in the past. And guess what???
"Experts (which 'experts'?) believe that unless enormous international pressure is exerted on Israel to change its settlement policy, Abbas will remain true to his word and refrain from running for re-election."
So we have more game-playing and one more Abbas ploy. Even if he does "announce" after this goes out, don't take his word for it, please.
Right now the PLO is lamenting that there is no realistic candidate to replace Abbas. Sounds a bit strange to me: Abbas has no clout on the street, is not respected in his own party. He's knee-deep in corruption and has a past directly linked to terrorism. There's been talk for some time with regard to who might succeed.
~~~~~~~~~~
And, as you consider the above, factor this in, as well:
Just yesterday, according to the Egyptian news service Asharq Al-Awsat, representatives of the Egyptian Intelligence Agency and certain groups within Fatah are saying that Abbas does not really intend to hold elections on January 24, as he had announced he would.
He only made the announcement to pressure Hamas into signing the Egyptian reconciliation agreement. He knows having elections just in the West Bank would not be a good idea.
But then, if he is not going to hold elections for president in 2-1/2 months, and we don't know when they're going to be held, does it really matter now if he's going to run? For the interim, he's still in office and can declare what he wishes.
~~~~~~~~~~
According to the Palestinian news agency Ma'an, Hamas official Khalil Al-Haya is saying that from the Hamas perspective the Egyptian-mediated proposal is "still alive, if it is implemented in one package." They want all the parties to come together and discuss matters.
~~~~~~~~~~
With all the talk of whether Abbas will come to the negotiating table, we must also consider the ramifications of Fatah signing that reconciliation with Hamas. For Hamas is still adamantly against recognizing Israel, honoring Oslo accords, and renouncing terrorism (aka "resistance against the occupation").
What happens to Obama's Middle East policy then?
~~~~~~~~~~
Yet one more factor must be mentioned. I spoke yesterday about what Fatah may be up to when it declares that the "two-state solution" is dead, and it's time to say so.
I considered a number of alternatives, but omitted one possibility that would have serious implications, were it to catch on internationally. "No two-states?" they are starting to say. "Then let's have one bi-national state." Would be the end of us.
And so... as I remain uneasy about where Netanyahu may be going, and as I search my heart in terms of how to assess him, I come up with this, in addition to everything else: Here's a valid reason for him to play the game, and display eagerness to begin those negotiations (which, to my discomfort, is what he has been doing).
He has to be able to say: "What one-state? We're here, we're ready to start without pre-conditions. It's the Palestinians who are the stumbling block."
~~~~~~~~~~
By the way, I have learned that Minister of Information Yuli Edelstein (Likud) will be accompanying Netanyahu to Washington along with Barak. Edelstein is tough, and he tells it like it is. And this was a reassurance.
~~~~~~~~~~
"The Good News Corner"
This story is a source of pride, which merits sharing with others, to help them understand Israel.
Captain Gerry Casey, of Ireland, has been serving with the UN Peacekeeping Force here. (I am a bit vague on what force they are referring to -- UNIFIL?) When he came, he and his wife were seeking care for their youngest child, Rachel, then 16 months, who has Down Syndrome and a heart defect. They were connected with Shalva, the Association for Mentally & Physically Challenged Children in Israel, which provides services for children with special needs and intensive support for their families. It is a very special institution.
Now that the Caseys are leaving, they wanted to say goodbye, and thank you, to Shalva, which did so much for their daughter, and has taught them techniques for coping as well. A special ceremony was held, to which Gerry invited people who worked with him in the UN Peacekeeping Division -- people from various nations, who had to be given speedy visas to enter Israel.
These people, who hail from various places in the world, now understand much better what Israel is about; a great deal of good will has been generated.
Use this link to see a video about this:
http://webcast.un.org/ramgen/ondemand/ga/64/2009/ga091104am-orig.rm?start=01:29:02&end=01:37:43
~~~~~~~~~~
November 4, 2009
"Non-stop Vigilance"
A 140 meter long cargo ship, called the Francop, was boarded by elite Israeli navy commando forces of the Shayetet 13 unit last night outside of Cyprus, some 100 nautical miles west of Israel in the Mediterranean. The ship was in deep sea and the navy used small boats to approach it.
AP
Our forces, which encountered no resistance from the crew, uncovered a cache of some hundreds of tons of weapons in dozens of containers, hidden behind what appeared to be civilian cargo. The weapons included a large number of 22 mm. Katyusha rockets, assault rifles, mortar shells, grenades and anti-aircraft platforms not previously found in the region.
These weapons were sent by Iran, and were destined for Syria and Hezbollah in Lebanon.
~~~~~~~~~~
The vessel was being operated by a Cypriot charter company called UFS, and was flying an Antiguan flag. It had apparently originated its journey in Iran, had stopped at Damietta Port in Egypt, and was bound for Limassol, Cyprus. Following this, it was due to anchor tomorrow in Beirut and then continue on to Latakia Port in Syria by the weekend. This particular ship routinely docks in these various ports.
Military Intelligence had been following it since it started on its journey, and the operation was well-planned in advance.
A representative of UFS said the company had no idea what was inside the containers: "We knew that we were delivering containers, but we are not legally permitted to check what is inside them. This is the responsibility of the customs authorities at the ports where we anchor. We do not know what happened on the ship. We are waiting...for answers.
"This is the first time something like this happens to us. I hope this will not damage the relations between Cyprus and Israel, because it is just business for us."
And indeed, Israeli navy authorities are convinced that the crew had no idea what was in the containers.
~~~~~~~~~~
Its cargo is currently being unloaded at the Ashdod port for further inspection.
Ilan Assayag
This echoes the incident of the Karine A weapons ship, which was intercepted near Gaza in 2002, carrying a weighty cache of weapons from Iran.
However, Israel Navy Chief Brig. Gen. Rani Ben-Yehuda said, "The quantity of arms seized on the weapons ship Francop is ten times or even more than the quantity of weapons on the Karine-A ship." Enough to arm Hezbollah for a month of fighting with Israel.
Blood-curdling.
~~~~~~~~~~
Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Mouallem denied that the Francop was carrying weapons. He said [commercial] goods were being brought to the port in Damascus and that the Israeli forces are "pirates."
Why do they bother, when we've unloaded the ship and know what it carried? I've learned: this is very much the Arab style, and a great bewilderment to the Western mind.
Mouallem, it should be mentioned, is in Teheran for a two day visit, and declared that "no nation could harm the relations between Syria and Iran."
~~~~~~~~~~
There are words of praise from the Israeli government for the success of this operation. And with it, words of warning as to the intentions of Iran and the need for that non-stop vigilance.
Prime Minister Netanyahu said these weapons were meant for Israel cities.
From Foreign Minister Barak:
"This is another success in the incessant battle against the smuggling of arms and military buildup by terrorist organizations who threaten Israel's security,"
And appropriate words from opposition leader Tzipi Livni (Kadima):
"We all today praise the Navy and IDF over the seizure of the ship - it's not a controversial matter. There are issues over which there are no coalition and opposition. We are all partners in the people of Israel's war on terror - whether it's Hamas, Hezbollah or other supporters [of terror]. Well done."
~~~~~~~~~~
We know who are friends are.
Yesterday, the US House of Representatives passed a nonbinding resolution urging President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to oppose unequivocally any endorsement of the Goldstone Report. The vote was 344-36, with 22 representatives voting present. A resounding and much appreciated display of support.
~~~~~~~~~~
Meanwhile, the UN General Assembly is meeting on the issue of that report. With some 40 speakers scheduled, discussion is expected to continue into tomorrow before a vote is taken.
Egypt, a nation with which we are ostensibly at peace, is taking full advantage of this forum to slam us. Its ambassador to the UN, Magued Abdel Aziz, was the first to take the floor. He said:
"[The report] verifies grave violations of international law by Israel during the Gaza campaign… it was revenge against civilians and it went against international law… This kind of blatant violation of human right must be stopped."
This is the same Egypt whose soldiers sometimes shoot African refugees in the back.
~~~~~~~~~~
The Senegalese spoke on behalf of the Palestinians, and Sweden spoke on behalf of the EU. The Syrian ambassador also addressed the assembly. What a line-up.
Our ambassador, Gabriela Shalev, told the assembly that the report was "conceived in hate and executed in sin," and that the Goldstone commission was a "politicized body with predetermined conclusions." The decision of the Human Rights Council to move the report to the General Assembly was, she said, "a cynical political maneuver." In closing she said that this debate would hinder and not further peace.
And who was listening in that assembled body?
~~~~~~~~~~
The stark juxtaposition of the above two events, occurring on the same day, cannot pass unnoticed:
We are facing the development of ever-greater military capabilities on the part of the enemies at our borders. This awareness was certainly forced upon us by the capture of the arms shipment from Iran.
We know that wars are likely not far away.
And at the same time we are fighting within the international diplomatic arena for our right to defend ourselves against those enemies.
It's obscene.
~~~~~~~~~~
On Sunday, Prime Minister Netanyahu is flying to Washington for meetings and taking Defense Minister Barak with him. In spite of my best efforts to learn what their agenda will be, I have been able to learn nothing of substance.
Am I uneasy? I cannot deny that I am. Hopefully Netanyahu will focus on Iran.
~~~~~~~~~~
It seems the Obama administration is finally willing to acknowledge that the Israeli-Palestinian "peace negotiations" are going nowhere quickly. According to the Washington Post today, the US government has now concluded that high-level talks are not likely to start any time soon. And so it hopes instead to promote lower level talks that will maintain some momentum, which will theoretically pick up steam over time.
~~~~~~~~~~
At a news conference today, Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat declared that if Israel continues to expand settlements and the US doesn't stop it, then the Palestinians may have to abandon the goal of an independent state.
It may be time, he said, for PA president Mahmoud Abbas to "tell his people the truth, that with the continuation of settlement activities, the two-state solution is no longer an option."
What nonsense this is.
I clarify again: There is no building by Israel going on in Judea and Samaria that is "expanding settlements." The understanding we had with the US government prior to Obama, and which is being honored by us, is that the perimeters of our communities are not to be expanded; building is being done within those communities.
What is more, Abbas negotiated with Olmert even while Israel was building in Judea and Samaria. This does not stop negotiations. In theory (please G-d, only in theory), any communities that fell within territory that is allotted to a Palestinian state could be dismantled.
Depending on how we read this, this statement may be a way of bowing out of participation in peace negotiations (which they don't want), while putting the onus on us. Or it may be a way to coerce us to do more -- or to frighten the US into pressuring us further.
I spoke yesterday about the expectation of violence. Claiming there is no possibility of a "two state solution" might also be a way of setting the stage for violence.
Over and over I am reminded of the complexity of this situation -- the personalities involved, the various goals, the behind-the-scene maneuvering, the play-acting. From one source I am picking up PA statements so convoluted with regard to what the Palestinians demand and what has been promised that I won't even attempt to analyze it here. I will simply note it, and then table it watchfully, until I can make further sense of it.
~~~~~~~~~~
November 3, 2009
"Shades of Gray"
In my last posting I expressed concern that Netanyahu had gone too far down a slippery slope with his unofficial agreement to freeze building in Judea and Samaria (after current building commitments are complete). I still feel so, but certain comments I've encountered have brought me back to my computer to say that I view my assessment of what he's done in shades of gray, and not a stark black and white.
After posting, I received the inevitable comments (not many in number, actually) saying in essence, "See! I knew he couldn't be trusted. He's planning to give the country away."
Well, I'm here to say that I, for one, don't know anything of the sort. Because Binyamin Netanyahu, for all his faults, is not Ehud Olmert, who couldn't wait to offer Abbas 98% of Judea and Samaria plus part of Jerusalem. Nor -- thank Heaven -- is he Tzipi Livni. I believe that he "gets it" in a way that neither of these individuals does.
I know that his key advisor, Ron Dermer, is no left-winger, and that right now there is only silence from persons within his government such as Moshe Ya'alon and Bennie Begin. And I believe that whether his judgment turns out to be flawed or not, Netanyahu is basing his decisions on factors far more complex and nuanced than a simple desire to see a sovereign Palestinian state established in all, or most, of the land we reclaimed in 1967.
~~~~~~~~~~
MK Aryeh Eldad (Ihud Leumi -- not part of the coalition) leveled a stinging critique of Netanyahu, charging that no other prime minister "[ever] put a stranglehold on Jewish settlement as Netanyahu has done." (a nod to Judith N here)
Well, he's correct, but...
The "but" is that no Israeli prime minister since Oslo has coped with an American president like Barack Obama; this means we cannot judge Netanyahu according to how other prime ministers behaved. The other prime ministers never faced the DEMAND that Netanyahu has. It might be said that facing off against Obama requires even more resilience and "no power" than the other prime ministers needed. But I would hate to be in Netanyahu's shoes right now.
As those of you who read my postings regularly are well aware, Obama reneged on commitments made by (Bill) Clinton and Bush that acknowledged our right to continue to build inside communities in Judea and Samaria, with certain specific provisos. Obama, instead, made the demand that we stop completely, and that this be done as a pre-condition to negotiations. He ultimately dropped the second part of that demand precisely because Netanyahu did balk.
But what Obama had done was set up a dynamic that made Abbas more intransigent, so that now the PA was echoing him and saying they wouldn't come to the table unless there was a freeze (even though they had willingly negotiated with Olmert with no freeze). Obama had backed himself into a corner. (I'll come back to this theme below.)
There are those who would say that a corner is the best place for Obama to be, and that Netanyahu should have left him there. But here are shades of gray, for there are a vast number of implications to letting the American president hang out to dry. I don't know what was said between Netanyahu and Mitchell last week, in light of this impasse. I only know that the offer by Netanyahu followed -- not that it turned out to be good enough for Abbas anyway.
~~~~~~~~~~
Then, lastly, we have this:
The UN General Assembly is meeting in special session today to consider the Goldstone Report. There will be a debate on a draft resolution put together by the Arabs that was circulated on Monday; it would call on Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to bring the report to the Security Council.
It would also call on Israel to launch a full investigation into the charges of the report. (This is something Netanyahu has declined to do, I think wisely: it would suggest guilt. The IDF has already investigated and answered all charges. Enough.)
This entire scenario is very ugly. That the resolution will pass is almost a certainty. What is being negotiated at present is whether it will receive the support of Western nations. Resolutions of the General Assembly are not binding in international law, as Security Council resolutions are, they are merely recommendations. But this resolution will carry far more clout and legitimacy if the Western nations support it.
Here I want to point out what an (unnamed) Israeli official in New York said about this resolution, according to YNet:
"At a time when we are debating restarting peace talks, this is not helpful to anyone."
I read this and thought, "Ah ha!" Shades of gray. Has any other prime minister of Israel since Oslo faced a situation like this?
Maybe, just maybe, Netanyahu knows what he's doing. Maybe we are so beleaguered, and so much in need of support from the West right now that a certain appearance of "give" on our part is necessary. Or we'll be the ones left to hang out to dry.
At any rate, I think we all need to consider the complexity and the dangers of our current situation before we presume to judge our prime minister in black and white terms.
~~~~~~~~~~
Returning to that corner that Obama backed himself into:
The Palestinians are quite upset with Obama, and Clinton. They think that leaving Jerusalem out of the equation and continuing to build 3,000 units before a freeze is put in place is no freeze at all. Reports Khaled Abu Toameh, one PA official in Ramallah said that the "mask has fallen off the face" of Obama. Once again, said this official, the US has shown that it is not an "honest broker" because of its "bias" towards Israel.
It's difficult not to be amused by this. Obama, biased towards Israel? What this means, of course, is that Obama is not acting totally on behalf of the Palestinians.
They said that Obama should "force" Israel to freeze construction. Force us? He couldn't force them to come to the table, but us he should force.
~~~~~~~~~~
Then the Palestinians fell back on their default position, which is threat of violence:
Declared Nabil Abu Rudaineh, an Abbas spokesman, there may be a volcanic eruption because of Netanyahu's refusal to halt settlement construction.
This reminds me of nothing more than a three year old who says, "If you don't give me candy right now, I'm going to hold my breath until I explode."
I make fun, because the Palestinians are always making these threats (just as Abbas has threatened to resign about a hundred times). This is not the way a moderate group, interested in conciliation and negotiation, would act -- although no one seems to notice this, or care.
At the end of the day, however, it's not funny. Because down the road I do expect violence.
~~~~~~~~~~
As to Clinton, the Palestinians are annoyed that she said in her press conference that the US would not be demanding more of Israel and that the offer made by Netanyahu was "unprecedented." (The truth is that she knew no more would be forthcoming from Israel, and she was thrilled for what was conceded.)
It is no surprise then that Clinton did a bit of backtracking after this. In Morocco, she said that the Israeli policy, while a positive step in the right direction, still fell short of what she would characterize as the US position on settlements. She had offered praise to Israel, she said, as "positive reinforcement."
~~~~~~~~~~
That Obama has backed himself into a corner with the Palestinians pales in comparison to how he's backed himself in a corner with Iran. The implications here are shameful and frightening.
On this, I recommend Barry Rubin's latest piece, "Why does the US plan Iran's game?"
"The great experiment of engaging Iran seems to be over but the Obama administration refuses to admit it. This shouldn't come as a surprise. As the Iranian regime's record shows, it stalls, maneuvers, gives vague promises and then doesn't deliver, but only after it's taken your concessions. Do you know how many years the talks with Iran have gone on without yielding fruit and letting Teheran develop nuclear weapons every day? Answer: Seven.
"Do you know when the 'deadline' originally was for Iran to stop its nuclear program 'or else'? Answer: Approximately September 2007.
"But the Obama administration doesn't want to admit that the new Iranian counteroffer is unacceptable because it would have to give up its dreams of a deal and actually do something in response."
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1256799063133&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
~~~~~~~~~~
Military Intelligence chief Maj.-Gen. Amos Yadlin gave a briefing to the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee yesterday, and addressed issues connected to Iran.
The nuclear facility in the city of Qom (a holy Shi'ite city) that was revealed recently has "no possible civilian use," said Yadlin. The Iranians, he said, are interested in a horizontal expansion of their nuclear production capacity, so that when they reach the point of wanting to develop their nuclear weapons capability, they can do so quickly. The Qom facility is designed for uranium enrichment.
Obama, the ball is in your court. Your secretary of state told CNN last Friday that "I am going to let this process [negotiations with Iran] play out. We are going the extra mile, as we said we would." But this is simply not acceptable.
~~~~~~~~~~
Yadlin also told the Knesset Committee that Hamas has successfully tested a rocket, launching it into the Mediterranean, that has a 60 km. range. This brings Tel Aviv within rocket range.
The speculation is that this is an Iranian made Fajr missile. What is more, Hamas does not see itself as having reached its full military capabilities. The group has been quiet in recent months for a number of reasons, including force-building and a desire to strengthen their civil rule in Gaza.
~~~~~~~~~~
The good news for today -- and do we need good news! -- is that it's raining here in Israel. Hard rain. Off and on for a few days now.
It took a while to start, as we had unseasonally warm weather into the fall. But now that it has, it seems very serious indeed -- above average fall. In this rain-starved part of the world, when the rains come everyone is delighted. "Baruch Hashem," a blessing from on high. Or, as my two-year-old grandson (too young to remember the rainy season last year) exclaimed: "mayim me'shamayim!" Water from heaven. May it continue.
No shades of gray here. The rain turns the land green.
~~~~~~~~~~
November 1, 2009
"Is This OK?"
Not from where I stand: it makes me very nervous.
According to news reports here, PM Netanyahu has unofficially given US Envoy Mitchell a commitment to stop all construction in Judea and Samaria after the 3,000 units currently in planning stages -- or otherwise in process -- have been completed. This commitment -- made, at least ostensibly, in order to render negotiations with the PA possible -- would not include eastern Jerusalem.
I'm reading nothing about continuing construction for public buildings such as schools within this understanding. Nor have I heard a word regarding how long this freeze would be sustained, and under what conditions it would be cancelled -- such a freeze being easy to start and difficult to terminate.
What's wrong with this is that is sets a precedent in principle and compromises our rights. This takes Netanyahu further down that slippery road than I had expected him to go.
~~~~~~~~~~
Actually, what Netanyahu is doing is playing with fire. He seems to be taking a risk that he anticipates will serve Israel's interests. (Yes, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, I am giving him the benefit of that doubt here.)
And so, in fairness, let's flip over that coin and look at the other side:
Secretary of State Clinton, who arrived here last night after Shabbat, has expressed satisfaction with Netanyahu, calling his concessions "unprecedented." She told the PA that a settlement freeze "has never been a precondition [for starting talks], it has always been an issue within the negotiations." She made it clear that Israel, which she praised highly, was going to go no further. Clearly she has no intention of pressuring us to do so.
But Abbas is demanding further of Israel: He is still insisting that he will not come to the table unless all construction is frozen now, including in Jerusalem.
~~~~~~~~~~
So what we have is a situation in which Israel is the "good guy" and the US is mightily irked with the PA instead.
What's clear is that Netanyahu is a genius at manipulating the political situation so that we come out ahead, at least in the short run.
Presumably, he took a calculated risk -- offering enough to delight the US, but not so much that it was likely that Abbas would accept.
It was Foreign Minister Lieberman who told the Americans (and I certainly concur) that the Palestinians weren't interested in negotiating now. As this is true, it might be argued that Netanyahu was calling their bluff. Had he offered nothing, Abbas would have attempted to put the onus on us. But he offered just enough so that the onus is now on the Palestinians -- without having given so much that there was much chance Abbas would accept.
Considering the political and diplomatic flack we've taken of late, this isn't a bad place to be.
~~~~~~~~~~
But there is a proviso here: Clinton called Netanyahu's offer "unprecedented." So now, even though Abbas has rejected this and Netanyahu's offer (I am assuming -- perhaps erroneously) won't apply at the moment, there IS a precedent. And we have to ask what happens next time around and what principle may have been sacrificed.
~~~~~~~~~~
What's interesting here is that Deputy Premier Silvan Shalom (Likud) -- something of a political adversary of Netanyahu, (and thus admittedly quick to criticize) but notably to Netanyahu's left -- said at the Cabinet meeting today:
"We did not ask any prime minister in the past to freeze the settlements. Therefore, there is no reason to ask this of Netanyahu. I very much do not support a partial freeze...we must come to any negotiations without preconditions."
This is very much to the point. Political maneuverings or no political maneuverings, there is reason to say that Netanyahu offered more than was necessary in order to show good faith or call Abbas's bluff. He was all together too eager.
At the Cabinet meeting, the prime minister declared:
"The Palestinians should come to their senses and enter negotiations as soon as possible...
"We are making a concerted effort to renew negotiations. This is not the effort of a moment. We have been making these efforts since the government was formed...
"We did things that have not been done by any prior government. (This is a point of pride?) We removed hundreds of road blocks and checkpoints. We have taken steps to ease their lives and the Palestinian economy. The result of this is unprecedented prosperity in the Palestinian Authority...
"On the other hand, we are encountering the opposite trend. While we are in the process of allowing for negotiations and their development, we are faced with preconditions being stipulated by the Palestinians that have not been posted since the beginning of the peace process 16 years ago."
So how much of what's going on has to do with keeping America happy and showing up the Palestinians, and how much is real on Netanyahu's part? He seems to be champing at the bit, terribly eager to get those negotiations going. Is this because he believes (I don't think he can really believe this!) that a settlement of some sort is possible, or because he wants to show the world that there's no compromise in the Palestinians at all, but that we are just so, so sincere?
~~~~~~~~~~
As this impasse in negotiations is faced, there is talk of some sort of interim agreement with the Palestinians.
Some -- including Shaul Mofaz (formerly defense minister and now a Kadima MK) -- are proposing that an "interim" Palestinian state be established, without final borders. A bad idea.
Foreign Minister Lieberman is referring to an interim understanding that is less than a state, although it's not quite clear to me what he does have in mind.
~~~~~~~~~~
I read one report last week that indicated the Obama administration is considering "indirect" negotiations, since Abbas won't sit down with Netanyahu. That's what is called "shuttle diplomacy." But I see no evidence for this at present, as Mitchell will be remaining in the area for a few more days, to try to get direct negotiations started.
That's part of his continuing attempt to move the rock, you understand.
~~~~~~~~~~
The Palestinian news service Ma'an on Friday cited an independent in the PA Legislature, Dr Yasser Al-Wadiyeh, who declared:
"There has not yet been an announcement that reconciliation failed - despite some setbacks."
Al-Wadiyeh says that efforts (apparently by independents) to promote a unity government are still going on; talks are being held outside the scope of media attention. (If this is so, why tell Ma'an?)
We'll see.
~~~~~~~~~~
I would like to return to the issue of the Temple Mount briefly, looking at an article by David Kirshenbaum, in the Post. Two matters he mentions are worthy of note here:
[] In point of fact, "no non-Muslim can step foot anywhere in Islam's holy cities [which means all of Mecca and Medina, not just specific places of worship there]."
This provides a jarring contrast with the reality here, which is that "Muslims can gather on the Temple Mount by the hundreds of thousands and they can play soccer and have picnics on Judaism's holiest site." I would add that it also offers a look at the mentality of religious exclusivity of the Muslims, which makes them so adamantly against compromise and sharing.
[] There are those (a small number, unquestionably) who are promoting the establishment of a synagogue on the Temple Mount. Primary among these is "Chief Rabbi of Haifa She'ar Yashuv Cohen, [who] has long championed a change in the status quo on the Temple Mount."
The Arabs would have apoplexy, and our government would be too frightened to proceed with such an idea. But I think it's great. It would establish firmly our right to not only maintain a presence but to pray there. (There is, of course, the issue of not allowing Jews to walk on sanctified places, such as where the Holy of Holies stood, but I am betting there is a way to protect that sanctity by establishing the Jewish presence on the Mount's periphery.)
At any rate, this is an excellent piece, and I recommend reading it and sharing it:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1256799054140&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
~~~~~~~~~~
Last week thousands of pious Jews flocked to the site of Rachel's tomb -- which is outside of Bethlehem, in an Israeli-held enclave within Palestinian Authority territory -- in order to observe what is traditionally recognized as Rachel's yartzheit, the anniversary of her death.
Ma'an, the same Palestinian news agency mentioned above, noted this event and in the accounting said:
"To this day the site, formerly known as the location of the Bilal Bin Rabah Mosque..."
This is serious business, for it is one more attempt by the Palestinians to co-opt or delegitimize a Jewish site. In this case the claim is patently ridiculous.
Our mother Rachel died in childbirth (bearing Binyamin), while the family was on the road.
"And Rachel died, and was buried on the way to Ephrath, which is Bethlehem. And Jacob set a monument upon her grave: that is the monument of Rachel's grave until this day." — Bereshit (Genesis) 35:19-20
Needless to say, there were no mosques then.
I will add that many Jews (myself included) are deeply touched by the imagery of Rachel in her tomb on the road, where she wept as her children passed her as they went into exile -- and where she now awaits our return.
~~~~~~~~~~
And what is the Bilal Bin Rabah Mosque, you may ask.
According to Nadav Shragai, writing for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs two years ago, for centuries Muslim tradition had recognized the site we call Kever Rachel as being Rachel's tomb -- this was not contested.
The Gaza-Jericho Agreement (part of Oslo), signed in 1994, stipulated that the Palestinians would guarantee free access by Jews to holy places within areas of PA jurisdiction. (Because of the adamancy of key rabbis, Rachel's Tomb was retained in Israeli jurisdiction, and was never surrendered to the hands of the Palestinians.)
The Palestinian commitment, as you are likely aware, was never honored, and the most severe crisis with regard to this came with the desecration of Joseph's tomb in Shechem (Nablus) in October 2000.
Just days later, on Yom Kippur in 2000, the Palestinian daily Al-Hayat al-Jadida ran an article marking Rachel's Tomb as the next target: "'the Tomb of Rachel,' or the Bilal ibn Rabah mosque, is one of the nails the occupation government and the Zionist movement hammered into many Palestinian cities....The tomb is false and was originally a Muslim mosque."
That was apparently the first official mention of the Tomb as a mosque.
Wrote Shragai: "Bilal ibn Rabah was an Ethiopian known in Islamic history as a slave who served in the house of the prophet Muhammad as the first muezzin (the individual who calls the faithful to prayer five times a day)...The Palestinian Authority claimed that according to Islamic tradition, it was Muslim conquerors who named the mosque erected at Rachel's Tomb after Bilal ibn Rabah."
A concrete lesson in the historical distortions of the Palestinians.
~~~~~~~~~~
October 29, 2009
"The Temple"
Michael Freund says it so well that I have chosen to begin today with his column in the Post :
"Something astonishing, even alarming, is taking place in the battle over the future of Jerusalem. Even as Palestinian rioters run amok on the Temple Mount, egged on by the radicals of the Islamic Movement, much of the anger and dismay in the Israeli and international press is being directed, ironically enough, at Jews who merely wish to visit the site.
"Mustering all the righteous indignation at their disposal, the media have been filled in recent days with all kinds of pejoratives to describe them, ranging from 'extremist' to 'fringe' to 'ultra-right-wing,' as though a Jew's desire to exercise his basic, fundamental rights somehow constitutes an act of provocation.
"Local pundits and commentators alike have also joined the fray, going to great lengths to justify the restrictions imposed by the police on Jews wishing to visit the Mount, even accusing the would-be pilgrims of seeking to trigger a firestorm of Islamic fury. It does not seem to bother them one whit that the policy in place today is entirely discriminatory in nature, as the followers of Muhammad are allowed to visit and pray where Solomon's Temple once stood, but not the followers of Moses.
"Indeed, all the enlightened defenders of civil rights, and the champions of equality before the law suddenly fall silent when capitulation to Muslim threats is given preference over respecting vital Jewish rights.
"And why not, you might be asking. After all, if it is just a bunch of kooks who want to ascend the Mount, why go to all this trouble on their behalf? Needless to say, this approach plays straight into the hands of our foes, whose ultimate goal is to wrestle the holy site away from us by denying its historical and spiritual connection with the Jewish people.
"And what a sad and pitiful sight this is to behold. Before our very eyes, we are witnessing a concerted effort to delegitimize and even demonize our people's most cherished dream: the longing for the Temple.
"The very aspiration that was born in the moments when Roman flames engulfed the Second Temple more than 1,900 years ago, and which was carried in Jewish hearts throughout centuries of exile, has now become an object of scorn, mockery and ridicule.
"Make no mistake: This is nothing less than an unbridled assault on Judaism itself, and it is time for the derision and name-calling to stop."
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1256740787836&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
~~~~~~~~~~
You don't have to personally long for the Temple-rebuilt to understand the outrage. What you do need to understand is that Jews are forbidden to pray (you read this correctly) at the site that is the most sanctified in Jewish history.
You need to understand that this site stands at the core of our heritage and thus our claim to this land. When the Muslims make it "theirs" they are challenging us in the most fundamental way possible.
~~~~~~~~~~
Two Jews who were on their way to services this morning at the Yeshurun Valley Sephardic Orthodox Synagogue in North Hollywood CA were shot in the legs today by a young gunman; they are both in the hospital in good condition. The gunman -- who has not been identified as I write -- has been taken into custody, and the attack is being called a hate crime.
~~~~~~~~~~
Are we surprised?
Iran has given what it is referring to as "an initial response" to the proposal for 70% of its uranium to be shipped to Russia for enrichment; further "negotiations" -- aka known as stalling tactics -- are being sought by Iranian leaders. What is clear is that demands being made do not comport well with Western intentions to slow down, if not actually stop, Iranian nuclear development.
In a speech today, Ahmadinejad indicated that Iran "will not retreat even an iota" on its nuclear rights. He expressed satisfaction that the West has moved "from confrontation to interaction" on the issue. But so what.
~~~~~~~~~~
The one who will actually be tested now is not Ahmadinejad, though: it is Obama.
The president had vigorously advanced a policy of engagement with Iran. The question now is how he responds to the failure of this policy. It's difficult to over-emphasize the importance of that response.
As Robert Kagen wrote in the Washington Post today:
"Tehran is obviously probing to see whether President Obama can play hardball or whether he can be played. If Obama has any hope of getting anywhere with the mullahs, he needs to show them he means business, now, and immediately begin imposing new sanctions."
~~~~~~~~~~
And, points out Kagen, there's another aspect to this situation: Russia.
"Russia joined France, the United States and ElBaradei in agreeing to the proposal...Iran is now rejecting that proposal. If the administration's engagement strategy is working, then Moscow should come through by joining in sanctions. If, on the other hand, Moscow declares that Iran's counterproposal is satisfactory, or calls for further weeks or months of negotiations, then we will know that Russia, too, is playing Obama. Here again, Obama will have to show whether he is someone whom other powers have to take seriously, or if he is an easy mark in a geopolitical con game. If Moscow continues to act as Iran's facilitator, then doesn't Obama need to make clear that, just as cooperation brings rewards, noncooperation will have consequences?
"Many of us worry that, for Obama, engagement is an end in itself, not a means to an end."
(Thanks Nan A)
~~~~~~~~~~
The way I'm reading it, Obama's moment of accountability has arrived. According to Reuters yesterday, Russia is saying sanctions against Iran were unlikely in the near future.
"Russia's ties with Iran -- which include oil, nuclear and arms deals -- give it rare influence with the Islamic Republic's rulers...
"But Russia, a veto-wielding member of the United Nations Security Council, has always urged restraint and only supported previous sanctions against Iran after insisting on amendments softening the measures."
~~~~~~~~~~
The US House Foreign Affairs Committee is certainly doing what it can to make it possible for Obama to get tough. By a considerable majority, the Committee, chaired by Howard Berman (D-CA), has approved a bill that would permit tougher sanctions against Iran. It still must pass a vote in the House and the Senate.
The Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act is co-sponsored by almost three-quarters of the House membership; it would give the administration power to apply sanctions against those companies that provide Iran with gasoline, diesel and other refined petroleum fuels. Iran exports crude oil but lacks sufficient refining equipment to provide for its own needs. This is the most effective way to bring Iran to its knees without military action. But the world, for a host of reasons, has not taken this route seriously.
State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said the department prefers a multilateral approach: “Right now, I think most of our energies are focused on the engagement side."
Incredible.
~~~~~~~~~~
It is now fourteen years since Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated, and I'm not sure that national wound has ever healed. Across the country several memorials were held, including the official one at the president's residence.
Unfortunately, often the left uses the memory of the assassination politically -- to chastise the right and to represent its vision of peace (return to pre-67 lines, dismantlement of settlements, etc.) as the one that Rabin had advanced. But this, in fact, distorts Rabin's position. Every year I find myself needing to remind people of what the Rabin vision actually was.
~~~~~~~~~~
I thank Eli Hertz of Myths and Facts for putting out excerpts from Rabin's last speech, given to the Knesset days before he was murdered:
"Here, in the land of Israel, we returned and built a nation. Here, in the land of Israel, we established a state. The land of the prophets, which bequeathed to the world the values of morality, law and justice, was, after two thousand years, restored to its lawful owners - the members of the Jewish people. On its land, we have built an exceptional national home and state.
"We view the permanent solution in the framework of [the] State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity [Note from AK: he did NOT refer to a state] which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.
"We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.
"First and foremost, united Jerusalem ... as the capital of Israel, under Israeli sovereignty.
"The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley ... The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.
"We had to choose between the whole of the land of Israel ... and a state with less territory, but which would be a Jewish state. We chose to be a Jewish state.
"We ... committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.
"We are aware of the fact that the Palestinian Authority has not - up until now - [Note from EH: and never thereafter] honored its commitment to change the Palestinian Covenant, and that all of the promises on this matter have not been kept. I would like to bring it to the attention of the members of the house that I view these changes as a supreme test of the Palestinian Authority's willingness and ability, and the changes required will be an important and serious touchstone vis-a-vis the continued implementation of the agreement as a whole."
~~~~~~~~~~
October 28, 2009
"Israel and International Law"
OK, mea culpa. I wrote "Goldwater" Report in my last posting when I meant "Goldstone." Lots of people caught it. And I appreciate having it called to my attention. With the best of intentions on my part, these glitches do happen.
~~~~~~~~~~
PM Netanyahu has suggested that a change in the international laws of war is necessary because of new circumstances being confronted. Sounded good to me.
Those laws -- Geneva Conventions, etc. -- were drafted when war meant two nations with soldiers in uniform faced off against each other. Today we are dealing with a whole new situation, what with fighting forces that are not in a standing army and frequently not in uniform (which makes human rights organizations quick to say we're killing "civilians" when in fact we're not); forces storing weapons in and shooting from places of high civilian population (which makes for human shields); etc.
~~~~~~~~~~
But now I've seen a piece by Irwin Cotler, former Minister of Justice of Canada, and I've recognized that he makes a lot of sense:
It's not that current rules of war are insufficient, he says, but that there is selective application with regard to Israel. What needs to be changed are the procedures of the UN, which "displays a constant country-specific indictment of Israel.
"You can't have a situation where you have special sessions targeting Israel and the rest of the world has immunity. You can't have a situation where Israel alone is excluded from the regional deliberative groups and therefore cannot participate in the drafting of resolutions....The source of the problem [is] the singling out of one member state for differential and discriminatory treatment.
"During the Gaza operation and before it, Hamas committed several war crimes and crimes against humanity. You don't need to create a whole new law of war to be able to hold Hamas responsible. Goldstone did not address most of the existing laws of war with respect to Hamas, like the Genocide Convention, probably the most important of the treaties..."
Cotler believes that even if the laws were to be changed it would not make a lot of difference, if there continued to be selective singling out of Israel. "The laws of war are very expansive and comprehensive...what you need is equality before the law...
"In international law, Israel has emerged as a Jew among the nations."
~~~~~~~~~~
More on the upcoming visit by Hillary Clinton, who's due here on Saturday:
She will be proceeded by Mitchell, who will be arriving tomorrow for preparatory discussions.
How lucky can we get?
Clinton reported recently to Obama on the US attempts to get peace negotiations going. According to Haaretz, she focused on the setback Abbas has had in public opinion because of his stance (quickly reversed) declining to promote discussion of the Goldstone Report in the Human Rights Council. And she recommended that US efforts focus on bolstering Abbas.
This is so mind-numbingly stupid that I hardly know where to begin.
Abbas had promised Obama that he wouldn't push the Goldstone Report and then reversed himself, causing a good deal of diplomatic fallout. He reversed himself because he couldn't stand against Hamas and the hardliners in his own party. He reversed himself without regard for his commitment to Obama or for the impact on his ostensible "partner for peace" (that's us) about whom he cares less than nothing.
So why doesn't the Obama administration see that he's a loser -- a poor candidate for peace partner, someone who is incapable of toeing a moderate line and is actually running scared for his skin? Why does Clinton imagine that anything really good can come of "bolstering Abbas"?
The idea is that this will give him the strength to come to the negotiating table.
Seriously doubt it, but if so, then what? What does it mean that he sits at the table (or has his representatives do so) if he won't moderate, won't compromise, won't keep his word, and is following the lead of Hamas?
~~~~~~~~~~
In addition to which, there is this very critical factor, which the US ignores (or, more likely, doesn't grasp): Attempts by US officials to bolster Abbas may backfire because he will be seen as a US lackey. Having the US on your side is most definitely NOT a political plus when Hamas is setting the political agenda. That is what caused Abbas trouble in the first place and motivated him to reverse his position with regard to the Goldstone Report: Hamas and Fatah hardliners were saying he was doing Obama's bidding (he was).
What I'm seeing -- and I've just done some research that reinforces my impression here -- is that the US is meddling without understanding Palestinian political dynamics.
~~~~~~~~~~
One thing is nagging at me, however, and causing concern: Could it be that Clinton is coming here to pressure us in some additional way? Could she be expecting to get something from us that could be handed to Abbas as a prize so that he can claim that he came out ahead (thus currying favor in the streets)? Yes, it could be. Clinton is no friend. Hillary Clinton is in it for Hillary Clinton. If she has any values, any principles by which she stands, I have not yet observed them.
Remember this?
Hillary bears close watching.
~~~~~~~~~~
Now is a good time to say, Please Prime Minister Netanyahu, stand strong when Secretary of State Clinton comes to town. Do not make any concessions so that she can bolster Abbas!
Fax: 02-670-5369 (From the US: 011-972-2-670-5369)
Phone: 03-610-9898 (From the US: 011-972-3-610-9898)
E-mail: pm_eng2@it.pmo.gov.il (underscore after pm)
~~~~~~~~~~
October 27, 2009
"The Mask Has Dropped"
J Street's mask, that is: According to today's Post, J Street has a "university arm," and has decided to drop the "pro-Israel" half of its "pro-Israel, pro-peace" slogan, when working with students, so as to not alienate them.
Are you gagging yet?
This decision was conveyed to 250 young student activists who attended a special weekend program right before the J Street convention. At the session, the activists mapped out strategies for bringing J Street to campuses and getting students -- seen as a key part of the J Street constituency -- to "join in the effort."
Here I need to stop and ask a question. WHAT effort do they want these students, who are apparently offended by the mere mention of Israel, to join? What precisely will J Street be promoting?
Says American University junior Lauren Barr, who is secretary of the J Street student board, "We don't want to isolate people because they don't feel quite comfortable with 'pro-Israel,' so we say 'pro-peace.' But behind that is 'pro-Israel.'"
Give me a break!
~~~~~~~~~~
Barr explains further: "people feel alienated when the conversation revolves around a connection to Israel only, because people feel connected to Palestine (where's "Palestine"?), people feel connected to social justice, people feel connected to the Middle East."
Heaven help us! What does it mean to "feel connected to the Middle East"? And where, outside of Israel, is there ANY social justice in the ME? Perversions of truth are being promoted successfully enough so that it is deemed inappropriate to mention Israel to people who are in favor of social justice!! Maybe US students need to talk to some of the thousands of African refugees who have decided that Israel is the place they want to flee to, because it's the only place in the region where they can secure humane treatment.
Now here's the clincher: Barr says that individual chapters can change the slogan: they can add "pro-Israel," "pro-Israel, pro-Palestine," or other wording.
~~~~~~~~~~
I am not obtuse here. I abhor the J Street approach, but I know there is another problem: The alienation of Jewish students with regard to Israel. But it's not J Street that will solve the problem; they will only exacerbate it.
~~~~~~~~~~
Please allow me, in my outrage, to share one other piece about J Street today. This is part of an important posting on the Z Street blog, regarding the J Street conference:
"This new alliance of progressive Jewish Americans are here to tell you that they are the anointed ones who will bring peace to the Holy Land if only the world will shut up and let them work their magic. Never mind that the magic is never defined beyond 'two states for two people,' and that the goal is to 'remold Israel into a state of social justice, a state where people do right' and where everyone will 'model core Jewish values' of 'peace and outstretched arms to our neighbors.'
"Hmmm. Well, those are core humanist values, perhaps core progressive values, and values that many Jews hold dear, but those are not the core Jewish values. And that’s the biggest problem with this whole J Street charade of representing the 'New Jewish' response to the conflict in the Middle East... There is nothing inherently and solely Jewish about the J Street approach. A perfect example of this was offered by Daniel Sokatch who is, not coincidentally, the new president of the New Israel Fund...
"Perhaps the best known biblical quotation, at least amongst non-observant Jews, and the one focused on by Sokatch, is 'Justice, Justice Shalt Thou Pursue.' Deut. 16:20. This is the very core of Judaism, he explained to those gathered in the Washington D.C. Grand Hyatt at the kick-off of the J Street conference. But, perhaps unknown to Sokatch (maybe because all the lithographs and needlepoints only include these words), the phrase continues 'so that you shall inherit the land.' Yes, that really is a core value of Judaism, and the land is Israel.
The ultimate inability to differentiate between what these New Jews want to call Jewish values and what are actually the core values of Judaism, is offensive. To say the least."
This would be extremely funny, if it weren't so serious.
http://ziostreet.wordpress.com:80/2009/08/02/what-where-why-and-what-next/
~~~~~~~~~~
You might like to see Barry Rubin's latest column, "The big American freeze."
Rubin says that there is a major stumbling block to Obama's plans for promoting negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians: Mahmoud Abbas, who is holding tight to his demands and will not back down because he "is more afraid of his own colleagues, Hamas's baiting him as a 'moderate' (a compliment perhaps from the West but a deadly insult in Palestinian politics) and his own people than of Obama."
Carrying this further, Rubin comments, "Indeed, nobody is afraid of Obama, which is one of the main problems with his foreign policy."
What Rubin predicts is "a deadlock, month after month into 2010. Is there some clever way out? I don't see one and I bet the administration doesn't either.
"Abbas...has what for him is an attractive alternative: strike a militant pose, blame America, seek rapprochement with Hamas. In addition, what both the US and Europe fail to see is that the Palestinians don't need or want rapid progress on negotiations or even a state except on what would be completely their own terms."
And so matters are going very badly for Obama. He didn't observe "one of the most basic rules of foreign policy, that you don't put the chief executive's prestige on the line unless you know for darn sure beforehand that what he says will happen."
All that the American administration "has left is what might be called the cat strategy. Have you ever seen a cat miss a leap or have an embarrassing fall? It merely licks itself and looks around with an expression saying: I meant to do that. Everything is going according to plan.
"But it isn't."
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1256150048671&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
~~~~~~~~~~
Obama's envoy to the ME, George Mitchell, is apparently deep into the cat strategy. For he has declared that he intends to continue trying to get Israel and the PA to the negotiating table, in spite of Israel's concern about the announced PA elections. But it's not just "Israel's" concern: The situation in the PA is severely unstable.
No matter, says Mitchell, the US will continue "pushing the rock," until the rock actually moves. How devoted. How noble. How stupid.
~~~~~~~~~~
Abbas is being defiant and determined as he persists in his plan to hold elections in spite of warnings from several Palestinian quarters that he not do so. It's not just that Hamas will not allow elections in Gaza, it's also that they will not participate in those elections, anywhere. Says Khaled Abu Toameh, only Abbas loyalists and members of Fatah factions would run. An electoral victory in such a situation would be meaningless. This would bring "an even greater blow" to Fatah credibility, at a time when Hamas is already rising in public opinion polls.
In addition, the election is likely to harden Fatah's stance even further, as it competes with Hamas positions in attracting the electorate. This makes it precisely not the time to even try to bring Fatah to the negotiating table. But go tell that to Mitchell.
To top it all off, by the end of the week Hillary Clinton will arrive here to advance peace talks.
~~~~~~~~~~
Israeli Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi delivered a talk at a Holocaust memorial in Germany yesterday. Israel, he declared, will not entrust its security to the hands of "strangers" and will do "everything needed" to protect its citizens if war is forced upon it. The reference, of course, is to Iran:
"Today, 64 years after the last train led Jews from this platform to deathcamps, and 61 years after the Jewish homeland was founded, anti-Semitism refuses to disappear from the world. It changes its face, language, path and justifications, but its aim remains the same. Today, state leaders openly declare their desire to destroy the State of Israel, and deny the right of the Jewish people to national sovereignty.
"The Jewish nation renewed itself in its land, and is committed to its independence and security. The IDF, the protector of the Jewish nation, is not a warmongering military, but a defensive military. We do not relish combat, but if war is forced upon us, we will do all that is necessary so that Israeli citizens can sit safely in their homes. No one should test our power."
Amen v'Amen!
~~~~~~~~~~
Iran has declared that it accepts "the general framework" of the plan for shipping its uranium to Russia for processing but is seeking "important changes" in that plan. It is unclear what all the changes would be, but one demand that has surfaced involves sending the uranium out of the country "in stages," rather than at once, which was rather the point of the proposal. The nations who are dealing with Iran may yet find these "changes" unacceptable; already frustration is being expressed -- in particular by France.
In any event, there is good reason to think that this is all no more than an Iranian gambit to stall for time, and that there has never been intention to agree to the proposal. Just today Ahmadinejad declared that his country would persist with its nuclear program.
~~~~~~~~~~
Time's a-wasting with regard to Iran, and when serious commentary on the subject is considered, it is enough to make the blood run cold.
An article worth considering is "Armageddon Time" by Peter Robinson: "When it comes to Iran, the U.S. may be facing a cataclysm."
"A big nation attempting to humiliate a small nation in a way the small nation simply cannot accept. Unseriousness among great powers. A gathering sense of impending catastrophe. Once again, it may be Armageddon time."
What gets me, really gets me, is the "unseriousness among great powers," most especially the US. May this piece have it wrong!
~~~~~~~~~~
Congress has passed a non-binding, sense of the Congress, resolution calling on the President and Secretary of State to block any further endorsement of the Goldwater Report. It was sponsored by Congresswoman Ileana Ross-Lehtinen (R-FL 18th), Ranking Member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and co-sponsored by Congressman Howard Berman (D-CA 28th ), Chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Congressman Gary Ackerman (D-NY 5th), Chairman of the House Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia, and Congressman Dan Burton (R-IN 5th), Ranking Member of the House Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia.
Ileana is one of the finest friends we have in the Congress, and deserves to hear of our appreciation for this move. The other gentlemen, who are not at all times as solidly where we might like to see them, should definitely be contacted as well. It is both wise and appropriate to offer praise them when it is deserved.
In many cases today, e-mail addresses are for a Congressperson's constituents only.
A short thank you for the resolution seeking to block endorsement of the Goldwater Report would be fine.
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen:
Phones: 202-225-3931 or 305-668-2285
Fax Numbers: 202-225-5620 or 305-668-5970
Howard Berman:
Phones: (202) 225-4695 or (818) 994-7200
Fax Numbers: (202) 225-3196 or (818) 994-1050
Gary Ackerman:
Phones: (202) 225-2601 or (718) 423-2154
Fax Number: (718) 423-5053
Dan Burton:
Phones: (202) 225-2276 or (317) 848-0201
Fax Numbers: (202) 225-0016 or (317) 846-7306
~~~~~~~~~~
October 25, 2009
"Iranian Perversity"
Iranian in-your-face obstinacy is what we must be grateful for. It is all that can save us, as we confront the foolishness and naiveté being displayed by the UN and nations -- the US, France, and Russia -- participating in negotiations with Iran.
Last week headlines were made when a draft of a potential agreement was tentatively accepted by Iranian negotiators at an IAEA meeting in Vienna. The proposal was handed out to those present by IAEA head Mohammed ElBaradei, a snake in the grass if ever there was one. There was no discussion of this proposal at the meeting, according the Guardian -- it simply reflected an understanding established in principle in Geneva on October 1, with the addition by ElBaradei of some modifications that had been proposed and some red lines that had been set forth. Many details were lacking. Many questions were left unanswered.
There was no formal acceptance of this proposal by nations participating either, merely an informal indication by the US, France and Russia that they had no objections. Chief Iranian negotiator, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, said he would forward this to Iran and gave a fairly positive interview to CNN.
From some quarters a very short-lived optimism was expressed that the nuclear crisis with Iran had been averted.
Not so fast. Not so easily.
~~~~~~~~~~
The proposal called for Iran to ship some 70% of its (known) low-enriched uranium abroad for processing, first to Russia and then France -- which would then send rods back to Iran for peaceful uses. By reducing available Iranian stockpiles of enriched uranium, it was thought that Iran's potential to further enrich uranium for use in manufacturing bombs would be significantly diminished.
The international concern at this point is preventing Iran from reaching the threshold in low-enriched uranium that would allow it to turn its stocks into more highly enriched uranium for a bomb within a matter of months.
But the plan did not call for a total halt to further Iranian enrichment and did not require extensive monitoring of Iranian nuclear facilities.
~~~~~~~~~~
Iran was supposed to provide a final answer on Friday, and, not surprisingly, none was given. Iranian representatives said that the proposal was being studied and an answer would be forthcoming within about a week. But then speaker of the Iranian parliament, Ali Larijani, declared that the West was trying to cheat Iran. And various other proposals began to surface, according to the Financial Times (UK) -- plans that would require transfer of less fuel, or transfer at a later date, or keeping it all in Iran.
~~~~~~~~~~
For Israel, and indeed for the world, the proposal put forth by the IAEA, or anything akin to it, would be an unmitigated disaster. (Even if most of the world doesn't realize it.) For it would forestall sanctions and would effectively block our ability to carry out a military hit. Were Iran to agree to this proposal, should we then proceed with an attack, we would be cast as an international pariah, a seeker of military violence, to a degree that would make what is being done to us now, post-Goldstone, look a bear hug. But the agreement would not prevent Iran from ultimately achieving nuclear weapons or at least the ability to produce them.
~~~~~~~~~~
Opposition to the proposal was found across a broad political spectrum here in Israel.
Vice Premier Silvan Shalom (Likud), in a meeting with UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon, called the proposal a "bad mistake," and explained that:
"Iran will not change its path. Iran's intentions go beyond its nuclear program. Iran wants to bring back the Persian Empire, and in its view this is a way of buying time."
He said that Iran was laughing at the world, "turning the agreement into a powder keg that will explode in our faces."
Earlier, Defense Minister Barak (Labor) declared that this deal would set back Iranian nuclear plans by a year at most and that a total halt to uranium enrichment was required.
Tzipi Livni (Kadima) said the deal "would blow up in our faces," and Shaul Mofaz (also Kadima) called the proposal "a worthless piece of paper."
Are the Israelis the only ones who are clear-eyed here?
~~~~~~~~~~
Barry Rubin lays out the parameters, the intrigue and the dangers of this situation with considerable clarity. I urge you to read what he says, because it is so very important:
http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/2009/10/iranian-negotiations-ploy-of-week-or.html
~~~~~~~~~~
This entire discussion will, hopefully, turn out to be moot, and we'll be back to square one with regard to pushing tough sanctions and considering a military attack.
One European official, cited by the Financial Times, said that the discussions in Vienna "have been something of a reality check for Obama's officials on just how difficult and intransigent Iran really is."
If this were to serve as a wake-up call for Obama, that would be encouraging. But we don't even know that yet.
~~~~~~~~~~
A change of pace and subject with this link to "J Street's Spiritual Conceit, by David Weinberg of the BESA Center:
"The pious spiritual claptrap that characterizes J Street's conference in Washington this week is both a conceit and a new form of Jewish apostasy. Conference speakers earnestly broadcast their 'profound' Jewish and 'spiritual' identities in order to besmirch the mainstream Jewish community and engender a distancing in US-Israel relations. This certainly does not fool the American Muslim leaders who are speaking at the conference. They know and appreciate exactly what J Street is up to.
http://www.biu.ac.il/SOC/besa/perspectives94.html
~~~~~~~~~~
The PA President has announced that elections will be held for the presidency and the legislature on January 24.
Palestinian Front for the Liberation of Palestine politburo member, Maher At-Taher, speaking from Bethlehem, and cited by the Palestinian news agency Ma'an, is actually making sense:
How can Abbas announce these elections and pursue reconciliation with Hamas at the same time, he ponders. I would answer that it is typical for Fatah to play both ends against the middle, to attempt to cover all its bases.
Expressing no preference on the part of his party either for or against a unity government, he makes the simple observation that, while elections are constitutional, and not illegal as Hamas claims, Abbas is using them to solve a problem it actually cannot solve:
"The fact is that there is an authority in Gaza and another authority in Ramallah, there's a deep division in the Palestinian arena and there can't be elections without the national reconciliation."
Meanwhile, Deputy Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) Ahmad Bahar of Hamas, expressed concern that for Hamas to recognize the elections would be to recognize the PLO, which, by extension would mean recognizing the Oslo accords that Hamas will not accept.
Sound like a whole lot of people have backed themselves into corners.
~~~~~~~~~~
All in all, it doesn't seem like an opportune time for the PA to be involved in negotiations, does it?
One might suppose that the Obama administration would decide to hold off in promoting negotiations until issues of unity and elections were resolved and there was some sort of stability (relatively speaking, of course) in place. But if one were to assume this, one would be mistaken.
For in spite of the Palestinian unrest, and a report by Sec. of State Clinton to Obama last week indicating continuing gaps in the Palestinian and Israeli positions, the Washington Post reports that the administration "is intent" on getting talks going before the end of the year.
~~~~~~~~~~
There has been more violence on the Temple Mount over the last few days.
And tonight there is a special conference being held at Heichal Shlomo (next to the Great Synagogue) in Jerusalem, as Zionist rabbis call for Jewish ascent to the Temple Mount and an end to the Muslim use of the Temple Mount as a platform for incitement.
A heartening turn of events: It signals a Jewish refusal to surrender control of the Mount to the Muslims.
This is, it must be explained, a sensitive issue. There are rabbis on the far right who say it is forbidden for Jews to go on the Mount because of the sanctity of the place, the difficulty of determining the precise location of the Holy of Holies, and the ritual impurity of the nation of Israel today. Those Zionists rabbis who endorse going up say visitors must first immerse in the mikvah (ritual bath), and on the Mount remain on the perimeter, to avoid standing on areas of sanctity where stepping would be forbidden.
Among those participating are Rabbi Dov Lior, rabbi of Kiryat Arba and Hevron, and Rabbi Shmuel Rabinovich, rabbi of the Kotel -- neither of whom would remotely be classified as liberal.
Participants include political figures as well: MKs Uri Ariel, Aryeh Eldad and Michael Ben-Ari, all of the National Union; MK Uri Orbach (Habayit Hayehudi); MK Otniel Schneller (one of the more nationalist members of Kadima); Jerusalem Deputy Mayor David Hadari; Moshe Feiglin (head of Manhigut Yehudit faction of Likud).
~~~~~~~~~~
The date for the conference was selected because it is the anniversary of the ascent of the Rambam (Maimonides) to the Mount. (This authoritative 12th-century Jewish philosopher and codifier of Jewish law was, it seems clear, in favor of ascending.)
Said conference chair, Yehudah Glick, “There is a worrisome phenomenon that every time two or three rocks are thrown [by Arabs], the Jews are distanced from the Temple Mount. The Arabs learned this and they behave accordingly.”
There are sources that are comparing calls of this group to ascend the Mount with inciteful calls by radical Muslim groups. I find this highly offensive and very much off base.
~~~~~~~~~~
October 21, 2009
"US - Israel Relations"
The United States and Israel are today holding the biggest-ever joint missile defense drill ( the Juniper Cobra 10 exercise) that will take into account threats from Iran, Hezbollah and Syria. A thousand US military personnel will participate along with an equal number of Israelis; the Israeli Arrow 2 Theater Ballistic Missile Defense System and the American Navy's AEGIS Ballistic Missile Defense System will be tested, along with the US Patriot advanced capability anti-missile missiles.
This exercise has been in the planning for two years, and American military officials arrived months ago to help set things up. Radar stations -- including the Israeli Green Pine and Super Green Pine systems and the US Forward Based X-Bank Tactical radar -- have been erected around the country. Seventeen American navy ships are in Israel's territorial waters and air force planes will be involved.
Is this a panacea that protects us in a way that makes deterrence against Hezbollah and Syria unnecessary, or makes it irrelevant if Iran goes nuclear? Of course not.
Does it make me feel a good measure safer? Indeed it does. Iran has to know that we're not sitting ducks and that they very well might not have the advantage of a successful first strike.
~~~~~~~~~~
Yesterday President Peres opened the "Facing Tomorrow Conference" here in Jerusalem. President Obama sent a opening message to the conference via video. The US - Israel relations, he said, were "more than a strategic alliance."
He then pushed for an assumption of some measure of responsibility towards making peace happen now: "...our moment in history is filled with challenges that...invite pessimism...We can defer action...or we can meet the challenge..."
~~~~~~~~~~
When the president refers to a situation that invites pessimism, he is, undoubtedly, speaking for himself as much as anyone else. He has confronted only frustration in what he naively imagined would be his speedy success in resolving the Israeli-Palestinian (Arab) conflict. In the course of what he has been dealing with, there is no question but that the tone he has adopted towards us has become less strident.
~~~~~~~~~~
But, my friends, do not imagine that all is sweetness and light.
In today's edition of Yisrael Hayom (Israel Today), diplomatic correspondent Shlomo Tzesna reports that our government has rejected an American plan that would have called for a summit to be held in a month that would have been followed by intensive final status talks. Those talks would have been based on an Israeli commitment to reach an agreement for the establishment of a Palestinian state within two years, and would also have required us to commit to a massive withdrawal from Judea and Samaria.
This is the stuff of nightmares. What matters most is the continuing capacity and will of our prime minister and his government to continue to say no.
~~~~~~~~~~
A word about what's happening here: Obama has backed himself into a corner with the talk of a Palestinian state within two years. It's not just Obama, although he's been more strident in his approach. It was true of his predecessors as well. There's always a precipitous rush with regard to finalizing arrangements, always talk -- ludicrous talk -- about a limited "window of opportunity."
Never is there straight talk about the Palestinians not being prepared for self-rule, not having infrastructure or civil agencies in place. No talk about building a genuine civil society over a generation or two, with cessation of incitement and renunciation of violence. There is simply, quick, quick!
Not only is this talk foolish, it's dangerous. Because once expectations are raised, the Palestinian Arab response, when those expectations aren't met, is violence. There is particular concern about that now, as the US is training PA security forces -- forces that are being told that they are helping to build a state. Once they see they are not going to have their state within two years, against whom do you imagine they will turn their newly honed military skills?
There's a precedent for this: every time the CIA has trained PA forces, they ended up, in some measure or other, turning against us.
~~~~~~~~~~
After Obama's message was delivered yesterday, Netanyahu spoke. He challenged Abbas to say publicly what is said behind closed doors: "...to say the truth about peace...and the true way to achieve it."
This is mere rhetoric. Netanyahu knows full well that Abbas is weak and running scared. He cannot speak truth and cannot moderate (see below) if he values his life.
And for now there will be no negotiations.
~~~~~~~~~~
The Security Cabinet met yesterday. There was some interest within that body in debating the desirability of appointing a committee of inquiry to examine Goldstone Report charges. But it was never brought up, because Defense Minister Barak blocked the discussion. So, here we are again: I don't usually agree with him, but sometimes he is very right indeed.
Israel thoroughly investigated charges at the end of Operation Cast Lead. We conducted ourselves superbly and have no further need to justify ourselves.
What was determined was that a team -- under the jurisdiction of the Foreign Ministry -- would be established to fight the Goldstone charges. Preparation will be done for debate in the UN Security Council, should the report be brought there.
~~~~~~~~~~
I'm finding, astonishingly, some shifting of attitudes in unlikely places:
One of the sources critical of Israel that Goldstone used in his report was Human Rights Watch. Now Robert Bernstein, who founded this organization, has written a stunning op-ed in the New York Times:
"...I must do something that I never anticipated: I must publicly join the group’s critics. Human Rights Watch had as its original mission to pry open closed societies, advocate basic freedoms and support dissenters. But recently it has been issuing reports on the Israeli-Arab conflict that are helping those who wish to turn Israel into a pariah state...
"When I stepped aside in 1998, Human Rights Watch was active in 70 countries, most of them closed societies. Now the organization, with increasing frequency, casts aside its important distinction between open and closed societies.
"Nowhere is this more evident than in its work in the Middle East. The region is populated by authoritarian regimes with appalling human rights records. Yet in recent years Human Rights Watch has written far more condemnations of Israel for violations of international law than of any other country in the region.
"Israel, with a population of 7.4 million, is home to at least 80 human rights organizations, a vibrant free press, a democratically elected government, a judiciary that frequently rules against the government, a politically active academia, multiple political parties and, judging by the amount of news coverage, probably more journalists per capita than any other country in the world — many of whom are there expressly to cover the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
"Meanwhile, the Arab and Iranian regimes rule over some 350 million people, and most remain brutal, closed and autocratic, permitting little or no internal dissent. The plight of their citizens who would most benefit from the kind of attention a large and well-financed international human rights organization can provide is being ignored as Human Rights Watch’s Middle East division prepares report after report on Israel.
"Human Rights Watch has lost critical perspective on a conflict in which Israel has been repeatedly attacked by Hamas and Hezbollah, organizations that go after Israeli citizens and use their own people as human shields. These groups are supported by the government of Iran, which has openly declared its intention not just to destroy Israel but to murder Jews everywhere. This incitement to genocide is a violation of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
"Leaders of Human Rights Watch know that Hamas and Hezbollah chose to wage war from densely populated areas, deliberately transforming neighborhoods into battlefields. They know that more and better arms are flowing into both Gaza and Lebanon and are poised to strike again. And they know that this militancy continues to deprive Palestinians of any chance for the peaceful and productive life they deserve. Yet Israel, the repeated victim of aggression, faces the brunt of Human Rights Watch’s criticism..."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/20/opinion/20bernstein.html?_r=1&emc=eta1
~~~~~~~~~~
Then we have from the Guardian (UK), that bastion of anti-Israel opinion, a marvelous commentary by Harold Evans that speaks of the Goldstone Report as "a moral atrocity." ("Judge Goldstone has been suckered into letting war criminals use his name to pillory Israel.")
"Aren't the British sickened by the moral confusions of their government? ...Now we have the sickening spectacle of Britain failing to stand by Israel, the only democracy with an independent judiciary in the entire region.
"It was to be expected that the usual suspects of the risible UN Human Rights Council would be eager to condemn Israel for war crimes in defending itself against Hamas. If you treat people as the Chinese do the Tibetans...or as the Russians eliminate Chechen dissidents; or as the Nigerians tolerate extrajudicial killings...or as the Egyptians get prisoners to talk (torture) and the Saudis suppress half their population … well, go through the practices of all 25 states voting to refer Israel to the security council for the Gaza war, and you have to acknowledge they know a lot about the abuse of humans. Anything to divert attention from their own atrocities.
"...Britain didn't just abstain. It shirked voting at all...
"...No doubt there were blunders. A defensive war is still a war with all its suffering and destruction. But Hamas compounded its original war crime with another. It held its own people hostage. It used them as human shields. It regarded every (accidental) death as another bullet in the propaganda war. The Goldstone report won the gold standard of moral equivalence between the killer and the victim. Now Britain wins the silver. Who's cheering?"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/20/israel-goldstone-palestine-gaza-un
And so there is hope, my friends. Use these articles as broadly as you can. (I thank the many people who shared them with me.)
~~~~~~~~~~
It's good news that Israel's Ambassador to the US, Michael Oren, will not be attending the J Street conference, in spite of intense pressure on him by J Street to do so. A statement released by the embassy alluded to "concerns over certain policies of the organization that may impair the interests of Israel."
The embassy will be sending a lower level staffer not to "participate" but to "observe" what goes on.
Hopefully this decision will reflect upon the credibility of this organization and give pause to some US officials who were thinking of attending. A handful of Congresspersons who were listed as participants have already withdrawn because they said they hadn't been aware of the positions of the organization. Some said that the decisions to attend had been made at staff levels.
J Street has cancelled the poetry reading session of Josh Healey, whom I wrote about yesterday, because there has been publicity about his "poetry," which associated Gaza with Auschwitz, and spoke of "writing numbers on the wrists of babies born in the ghetto called Gaza."
A splendid example of how important it is to get the facts out and reveal the true (anti-Israel) face of matters.
~~~~~~~~~~
You might want to see Lenny Ben David's latest piece, which directs some pointed questions at J Street director Jeremy Ben-Ami.
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/showdown-on-j-street/#
~~~~~~~~~~
And it would be in order to send PM Netanyahu a note of appreciation for his decision (for ultimately it was his decision) to keep Oren from attending.
Fax: 02-670-5369 (From the US: 011-972-2-670-5369)
Phone: 03-610-9898 (From the US: 011-972-3-610-9898)
E-mail: pm_eng2@it.pmo.gov.il (underscore after pm)
~~~~~~~~~~
PA president Abbas is now saying that if Hamas doesn't sign the reconciliation agreement very soon he's going to order elections for January 24, which is when elections are actually supposed to be held.
But without that "reconciliation" Hamas will not permit voting to take place in Gaza.
~~~~~~~~~~
King Abdullah of Jordan has been a real disappointment for some time now. At the moment, he's in Italy and granted an interview to a paper there. What he said was:
"I've heard people in Washington talking about Iran, again Iran, always Iran. But I insist on, and keep insisting on the Palestinian question: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the most serious threat to the stability of the region and the Mediterranean."
Not remotely do I believe he actually thinks this. So I ask what advantage this brings him, what forces he's chosen to align himself with.
Just the other day he released a statement regarding the need to protect the Al Aksa Mosque on the Temple Mount. My response: "Come on! Abdullah? Who surely knows this is nonsense?" Abdullah is aware that for many years after 1967 Jordan (not the PA) staffed the Wakf that managed the Temple Mount and found Israel ever "accommodating." He's not one of the crazies of the Islamic Movement. Or he hasn't been until now.
~~~~~~~~~~
Perhaps Abdullah's current positions can be linked to what's happening in Turkey. A Post editorial on this subject offers this analysis:
"Turkey's turn against Israel is best understood in the context of its evolutionary transformation from the secular, nationalist and Western-oriented ethos of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk to the dogmatic, radical, pan-Islamic and Middle Eastern attitudes of its current rulers. It is senseless for Israelis to ask ourselves what we did to cause Arab, Persian and now Turkish rulers to ascribe the most villainous of intentions to us - for example, conspiring to demolish Muslim shrines on the Temple Mount, or relishing the systematic murder of Arab children. Israel did not lose Turkey any more than it lost Iran or the "moderate" Palestinians.
"The Palestinian national movement under Mahmoud Abbas and Salaam Fayad has been outmaneuvered by Hamas. Any move Abbas now makes in the direction of moderation gets pounced upon as perfidy. This environment has led even a sensible man like Fayad to hold cabinet deliberations on whether Israeli soldiers are stealing the organs of Palestinian youths."
~~~~~~~~~~
We are approaching the 20th anniversary of the Fall of the Berlin Wall, of the movement towards democracy and human rights and freedoms in central Europe. A hopeful time, historically, when events suggested growing enlightenment.
But what a difference two decades has made. I cannot help but compare this with the opposite movement now within large parts of the Arab/Muslim world, away from enlightenment and human freedoms. A movement towards radicalism and repression.
~~~~~~~~~~
October 18, 2009
"No Surprise"
An outrage, an act devoid of justice and morality, but not unexpected:
On Friday, the UN Human Rights Council, meeting in Geneva, endorsed the endorsed the Goldstone Commission's findings.
Specifically, it condemned ("the occupying power") Israel for not cooperating with the investigation; welcomed the report of the "International Fact Finding Mission;" endorsed its findings; and recommended that the General Assembly consider it during its (current) 64th session.
~~~~~~~~~~
How bad was this resolution? Bad enough so that Goldstone himself criticized it. While his commission's findings were severely imbalanced and did not genuinely examine Hamas's war crimes or Israel's right to self-defense, they contained some reference to Hamas.
Before the vote was taken, Goldstone, who was in Bern for a conference, told a Swiss paper, "This draft resolution saddens me as it includes only allegations against Israel. There is not a single phrase condemning Hamas as we have done in the report."
~~~~~~~~~~
The vote:
25 nations in favor: Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Mauritius, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa and Zambia.
11 nations abstained: Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Gabon, Japan, Mexico, Norway, Republic of Korea, Slovenia, and Uruguay.
Five nations opposed: Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Slovakia, Ukraine, and the US.
Five nations did not vote: Britain, France, Madagascar, Kyrgyzstan and Angola.
~~~~~~~~~~
Several comments here. Primary among them is my grievous disappointment with Britain and France for declining to vote. Netanyahu had made the point very clearly to Britain that it was in danger of being charged in similar fashion because of its military operations in Afghanistan. It fell on deaf ears.
There was a good deal of justification offered by the two nations for their position, but I'm not buying.
British Foreign Secretary David Miliband said that Britain and France chose not to vote because it would upset negotiations to restart peace talks. And France's envoy Francois Zimeray, told the Post that his country opted not to participate "to express our strong disagreement" with the fact that the vote was taken so precipitously: "As you know we wanted to improve the text, to enter into true and serious negotiations."
The Post reports that the enjoys in Geneva of both nations said they took seriously the report's allegations against Israel of war crimes. This is the bottom line and what kept them from vetoing the resolution.
What British Premier Gordon Brown and French President Nicholas Sarkozy did after making the decision not to vote is send a letter to Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu saying they recognized Israel's right to defend herself, and knew that this was a "sensitive issue," but remained convinced that "peace would guarantee Israel's security best."
Then they put the onus squarely on us, urging "an independent and transparent investigation of the events in Gaza," the facilitation of "increased access to Gaza," a "halt to settlement activity in occupied territories," and "the resumption of negotiations on the basis of parameters recalled by President Obama in his speech to the UN."
The fancy diplomatic footwork and the positive spin aside, these nations are not with us.
~~~~~~~~~~
With this comes relief that the US stood opposed. If this comes before the Security Council, we will be depending on a US veto (see more on this below).
It's instructive to note the positions of various other nations. I've long felt that our future is with alliances in eastern Europe, western Europe to a large extent having been lost. Eastern European nations largely "get it" in a way the west has failed to do, and as our foreign ministry courts them this is to the good. See that Hungary, Slovakia, and the Ukraine were opposed, while Bosnia and Herzegovina, Slovenia, and Uruguay abstained.
Also important given the shifting climate of international diplomatic relations (and the critical need for us to find alliances beyond our connection with a weakened US) is our courting of African nations. This Lieberman has also been doing. And see that Burkina Faso, Cameroon, and Gabon abstained.
Lastly, I am surprised that India, with which I thought we had a reasonably warm relationship of shared concerns, voted for.
~~~~~~~~~~
I share here a link to a video of Col. Richard Kemp -- former commander of British forces in Afghanistan and a military man with tremendous credentials -- who addressed the Human Rights Council on Friday. You will also see the text of his remarks, but I urge you to see the short -- three minute -- video.
www.unwatch.org/kemp
The Goldstone Commission declined to hear Col. Kemp. UN Watch, an NGO that monitors UN activity, arranged for him to address the Council.
The good colonel's message: "the IDF did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare."
That their own military man so defended Israel makes even more unconscionable Britain's failure to vote against.
Please, share this link very broadly, including with your Senators and Congresspeople, who should all see it.
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
~~~~~~~~~~
Netanyahu has put together a special forum to contend with the vote of the HRC. "We are now setting out to delegitimize those who try to delegitimize us. We will not tolerate it and we will respond on a case by case basis," he declared.
Among those to be involved are: Defense Minister Ehud Barak, Foreign Minister Avigdor Leiberman, and Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon, Justice Minister Yaakov Ne'eman, Social Affairs Minister Isaac Herzog and Minister Benny Begin. Senior officials from the prime minister's office Uzi Arad and Ron Dermer and Foreign Ministry Director General Yossi Gal will also be participating. (No Ya'alon?)
A long, hard and very necessary fight.
~~~~~~~~~~
What will happen now remains a bit vague.
According to the Post, Palestinian envoy to the UN in Geneva, Ibrahim Khraishi, says they are seeking ways to send the report directly to the International Criminal Court, which would charge individual Israeli leaders with war crimes.
More likely is that it will get to the General Assembly, which might send it to the International Court of Justice -- possibly for an advisory ruling. Then it may well go to the Security Council. But it's a good bet that the US would veto any proposed SC action, because American interests lie in a different direction. The Americans know full well that even debate on the subject will interferes the "peace process," and Obama is eager to get on with those negotiations. In fact, Britain and France think along the same lines.
The fact that the Human Rights Council accepted the findings of the Goldstone Commission has already had a chilling effect on that "process." Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders warned about this: We are going to be considerably less willing to "take chances" for "peace" if we may be blocked in our right to defend ourselves. What has happened, additionally, is that terrorist organizations -- reasonably assured that there will be no serious international repercussions to their actions -- have been given a green light.
~~~~~~~~~~
Jonathan Schanzer of the Jewish Policy Center says that the vote in the Human Rights Council marks a "distinct" failure for Obama policy in the Middle East. He had reportedly indicated to Jerusalem, when the Goldstone Report was first released, that it would die a quiet death in the Council, which enabled him to secure a greater measure of cooperation from Israel with regard to willingness to enter negotiations.
But, in the turn of events that has been thoroughly examined here, he was unable to keep Abbas in line on this.
"Apart from his inability to hold Abbas to his word, Obama failed to appeal to the sensibilities of U.S. allies on the council such as Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, who voted in favor of the report. This confirms that the Arab world is still more interested in vilifying Israel than negotiating with it – despite Obama's attempts to engender good will in the Arab world by exacting concessions from Israel.
"More importantly, Obama has conveyed to the Israelis that he lacks sway with the Palestinians. This bodes poorly for future negotiations. "
~~~~~~~~~~
Word is that FL Congressman Robert Wexler (D-Boca Raton area) is about to resign from Congress and become director of the Center for Middle East Peace and Economic Cooperation, in Washington DC.
No loss to the Congressional world, although I suppose he will have to be monitored with regard to his new position. Wexler was an early, and enthusiastic supporter of Obama. When he was here this past summer he referred to a freeze on settlement activity by Israel as no more than a "tiny tiny gesture."
~~~~~~~~~~
Wexler has also been a major supporter of J Street, which, as it happens, is planning its first major conference next week in Washington DC.
J Street, headed by Jeremy Ben-Ami, defines itself as "the political arm of the pro-Israel, pro-peace movement." But those terms, used so blithely, themselves must be examined. Pro-peace? Pro-Israel? By whose lights?
Ben-Ami represents his "progressive" group as being the alternative to AIPAC, and the organization that most genuinely speaks for American Jews today. He has stated that "We're trying to redefine what it means to be pro-Israel."
~~~~~~~~~~
A couple of months ago, Lawrence W. White wrote a critique of J Street that is biting and incisive -- and worthy of serious note:
"Court Jews were so named because they were Jews who did favors for noblemen in exchange for prestige, social influence, and various privileges not available to other Jews. They were often more concerned with preserving their status and fortunes than in promoting the welfare of their less fortunate co-religionists...
"In the widening divide between American and Israeli Jews over concern for the future of Israel, there are many American Jews who have taken positions harmful to the security of the Jewish state. Some Jews for a variety of reasons wish to establish themselves as 'progressives', with a universalist rather than particularist world view...
"Barack Obama has also needed court Jews. The President, clearly committed to liberal-left solutions to our national problems, campaigned as a strong advocate for Israel...His eloquence and apparent sincerity in speaking of his concern for Israel played a major role in his winning a stunning 78% of the Jewish vote.
"Once he was elected Barak Obama found governing to be more difficult than campaigning. The choices that he has made have led to erosion of support, especially among centrists who had supported him. To be successful Obama needed to retain his base...
"Obama's view of the conflict in the Middle East has been shaped by those with an imperfect understanding of Middle East history and culture...Those around him, including many Jews, encourage this ahistoric and simplistic thinking.
"But the President needs to be sure that in the process of leaning on Israel, he does not lose the American Jewish community. They were needed last year to ensure an electoral majority and will continue to be needed in the future. Having campaigned on a strong pro-Israel platform, and having assured many prominent and well-connected Jews that he was committed to the security and welfare of Israel, he needed a credible way to validate that impression in order to prevent any erosion in support. This is where Jeremy Ben-Ami, the director of the new organization J Street, comes in. Ben-Ami has become the very model of the 'court Jew'.
"...Along with others, including George Soros, Ben-Ami founded J Street last year as an organization that was 'both pro-peace and pro-Israel'. A key feature of J Street's strategy was to establish themselves as a centrist force. To achieve this they needed to do two things. First, market themselves as moderate and as authentic representatives of the American Jewish community, and secondly break the influence of AIPAC and other Jewish organizations by re-labeling them as right wing, and not sufficiently committed to the peace process.
~~~~~~~~~~
"During its short history, J Street has built up an extensive list of positions detrimental to Israel. With respect to Iran, they have defended Iran's nuclear weapons program, and lobbied Congress not to place new sanctions on Iran...They have urged ending sanctions against Syria also, and have favored pressuring Israel to return the Golan Heights to Syrian control.
"They have lobbied Congress to oppose an initiative calling on Obama to pressure Arab governments to normalize relations with Israel, They favor negotiating with Hamas...And when the President awarded the Medal of Freedom to the Durban anti-Semitic ringmaster Mary Robinson, it was J Street that was tasked with defending the indefensible.
"But their most controversial action relates to Operation Cast Lead. Last December, after several months of deadly rocket and mortar attacks from Gaza, Israel finally took military action against Hamas to defend its citizens. J Street opposed this action, calling for an immediate cease fire on the first day, claiming that Israel's actions were contrary to the interests of peace...
"J Street's strategy is deceptively simple. No matter how damaging to Israel a particular position might be, they follow with the mantra "and we are pro-Israel". That J Street takes positions inimical to Israel's welfare should be obvious, but it disguises its anti-Israel bias behind repeated declarations of support for the State of Israel...
"The claim by J Street that they are pro-Israel is one of the largest con jobs ever perpetrated on the American Jewish community...
"...J Street permits [Obama] to create the illusion that he has the support of the American Jewish community, that he is maintaining his promise to be a friend to Israel, and by doing exactly what a pro-Israel Jewish organization is recommending, he is acting in Israel's best interests...
"...As soon as the [organized Jewish] community sees through J Street's claim of being pro-Israel, the game will end. At present however, J Street is an unofficial adjunct of the Obama administration. Its allegiance is to Barack Obama, not to the American Jewish community and certainly not to Israel."
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/08/obamas_court_jews_the_rise_of.html
~~~~~~~~~~
Earlier this month, commentator Lenny Ben David took a close look at some major J Street supporters:
"In August, the Jerusalem Post revealed that J Street’s political action committee received contributions from Arab-Iranian-, and Muslim Americans. State Department officials, a Palestinian billionaire, and board members of the discredited Human Rights Watch and the Iranian lobby were also listed in the files of the Federal Election Commission. Faced with the evidence, J Street’s director Jeremy Ben-Ami responded, 'I think it is a terrific thing for Israel for us to be able to expand the tent of people who are willing to be considered pro-Israel and willing to support Israel through J Street, he said.
"Give me a break. That tent may have come directly from the Saudi king’s compound in Riyadh or Jedda. Research into J Street’s backers indicates a Washington cadre of paid Saudi agents, sycophants, and
factotums. There are not many in that bunch who would be 'willing to be considered pro-Israel.'"
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/why-does-j-street-attract-the-friends-of-saudi-arabia/?print=1
~~~~~~~~~~
October 15, 2009
"A Facade of Unity"
Khaled Abu Toameh writes in the Post today about the "forced marriage" between Fatah and Hamas -- the reconciliation being shoved down their throats by Egypt.
These two parties -- who "abhor" each other -- are being pushed into a reconciliation of sorts. I know of no serious analyst who thinks this will really become a stable situation.
Fatah, which has signed the agreement, found itself in a position of more or less having to do this as a result of the uproar that followed Abbas's withdrawal of the demand that the Human Rights Council pursue the Goldstone Report (which withdrawal he has since reversed, but not before he had promoted enormous ill will for himself and his party).
We're still waiting on Hamas's formal acceptance.
~~~~~~~~~~
A little glimpse into how volatile and hostile the situation is:
I shared in the last few days the fact that Hamas condemned Fatah for withdrawing its demand regarding the report, and that Abbas then lashed out at Hamas for lashing out at Fatah.
But here is a new wrinkle. According to the Ma'an (Palestinian) news agency on Tuesday:
"Abbas accused Hamas leaders of fleeing to Sinai Peninsula in ambulances when the Gaza strip was under Israeli fire last winter..."
This is startling.
The Goldstone Report says, "Mission did not find any evidence to support the allegations that... ambulances were used to transport combatants..." (Paragraph 485). The exceedingly dubious point being that there was no justification for Israel to have stopped or gone after ambulances. And now Abbas says otherwise, thereby undercutting the reliability of what was said in the report (the very report he has now decided to promote vigorously again). He was undoubtedly too angry at Hamas people, too busy trying to make them look like cowards, to consider the broader ramifications of what he said.
Will Hamas let this pass? Arab pride should never be discounted.
Today Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahar said that Hamas wants to prosecute Abbas:
"A day will come when Abu Mazen [Abbas] will have to answer for his smear campaign against us...in a special court...We demand Abu Mazen name those he claims hid. I want him to say exactly where he thinks we ran to. This man must stop trying to spread his lies."
~~~~~~~~~~
And in this Middle Eastern soap opera there is even more. When Abbas began to promote the report, Israel was very angry, and released a statement saying that Abbas had originally urged us not to stop fighting until Hamas was completely defeated. Needless to say, this does not sit well with Hamas either.
But any minute now sweetness and light will break forth and there will be unity between Fatah and Hamas.
~~~~~~~~~~
And here's another piece of the Goldstone story: Alan Dershowitz has written an article in which he maintains that Goldstone is backing down.
"In an interview with Jewish Forward, Goldstone denied that his group had conducted 'an investigation.' Instead, it was what he called a 'fact-finding mission' based largely on the limited 'material we had.' ...Goldstone acknowledged that 'if this was a court of law, there would have been nothing proven.' He emphasized to the Forward that the report was no more than 'a road map' for...investigators and that it contained no actual 'evidence' of wrongdoing by Israel."
~~~~~~~~~~
Things are heating up in the north.
According to the Kuwaiti newspaper Al Jarida, Syria, reluctant to take on Israel directly, is supplying Hezbollah with arms instead. Reportedly, Syria transferred one quarter of its arsenal of middle- and long-range missiles to Hezbollah, and every part of Israel can now be hit. The paper cites Israeli security forces as the source of its information.
While senior Israeli defense officials, in more direct statements, are now saying that thousands of weapons caches have been placed in civilian homes scattered in 160 villages in southern Lebanon. Hezbollah possession of weapons south of the Litani River represents a violation of SC Resolution 1701, which has been largely ignored.
Having the weapons in the south makes it easier for Hezbollah to access them and increases their reach into Israel. The fact that they are in homes raises the whole specter of human shields again.
Much must be made of this now, it seems to me, with all possible evidence provided, so that when we ultimately go after those caches of weapons, we are not again accused of "war crimes."
This entire issue was in the news this past week because of an explosion of a stockpile of weapons in a home in a village near Tyre.
~~~~~~~~~~
Turkey's behavior -- with regard to its relationship with Israel -- is moving on a path of serious deterioration. Following the cancellation of joint military maneuvers with us, the Turks announced that they would hold maneuvers with Syria.
Following this a highly inflammatory and inciteful program was aired on government-controlled TV. The first program this week, in what is planned as a series about a Palestinian family in the West Bank, shows IDF soldiers killing a baby and a young girl, and lining up people for execution.
Calling this "the gravest form of incitement," Foreign Minister Lieberman said that the Turkish envoy (the previous Turkish ambassador to Israel has left and has not yet been replaced) would be summoned in protest.
~~~~~~~~~~
"The Good News Corner"
In June, 2002, Boaz Shabo lost his wife and three of their children in a terrorist attack. In the midst of a week of murderous attacks, a terrorist, shooting wildly, infiltrated the community of Itamar, in Samaria, and entered the Shabo home.
Boaz moved with his remaining four children to Kedumim, to be near relatives. Two years ago, he was married again; his new wife, Hila, brought her five children with her into the family.
At the beginning of this year, Hila became pregnant. She delivered over the Sukkot holiday: TRIPLETS.
Said Boaz, "it was a total surprise – something so symbolic that only G-d can understand or explain it. Though it’s impossible to forget those who were killed, this is a very joyous occasion for all of us.
“The way to rebuild is by getting married again… There cannot be a 100% recovery from something like what happened to us; we are always shadowed by the loss of a mother and three children. But with love and with faith, a decision like this brings much joy… Our house is now full of children and life.
"[Our enemies] should know that they will not be able to defeat us. As the Torah says, the more they oppress us, the more we will prosper."
As to dealing with three infants, Boaz said, “It won’t be easy – but a lot of things have not been easy over the past few years. I tried to look at everything from the positive, optimistic side, and put the difficulties aside; I think that 50% of the problems are psychological. If a person says that it will be hard, then it will be hard. But if you decide to try to get up in the morning with a smile, and know you are headed in the right direction, then it will be much easier for you. You can’t let the obstacles stop you; put them aside.
“I just want to emphasize: Never give in to despair. There is always a light at the top, even if it might involve a hard climb. There is always a light at the end of the tunnel, at which can be found light, happiness, faith, and all of our goals.”
And this, I think, is the answer to all of the heavy news reported above and on so many days. The people of Israel have breathtaking resilience, founded in love and faith. And our enemies will not be able to defeat us.
(My thanks to my daughter Sharon R. for calling my attention to this from Arutz Sheva.)
~~~~~~~~~~
October 14, 2009
"The Way to Victory"
Daniel Pipes has written an article -- "Peace Process or War Process?" -- in the fall issue of Middle East Quarterly that is brilliant in its conceptual understanding of what is going on with regard to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
It doesn't matter what Obama does to advance "peace" here, says Pipes, it doesn't matter how his approach differs from that of the two Bushes or Clinton -- he is doomed to failure. For, in spite of the differences in the policies of the aforementioned presidents, there is an essential way in which all of their approaches share a common vision: That the conflict might be solved via goodwill. War would be "finessed" as steps were taken towards peace.
~~~~~~~~~~
This, says Pipes, has been the predominant Israeli attitude since the disaster of Oslo in 1993:
"...the ultimate mistake lay in Yitzhak Rabin's misunderstanding of how war ends, as revealed by his catch-phrase, 'One does not make peace with one's friends. One makes peace with one's enemy.' The Israeli prime minister expected war to be concluded through goodwill, conciliation, mediation, flexibility, restraint, generosity, and compromise, topped off with signatures on official documents. In this spirit, his government and those of his three successors — Shimon Peres, Binyamin Netanyahu, Ehud Barak — initiated an array of concessions, hoping and expecting the Palestinians to reciprocate.
They did not. In fact, Israeli concessions inflamed Palestinian hostility. Palestinians interpreted Israeli efforts to 'make peace' as signals of demoralization and weakness. 'Painful concessions' reduced the Palestinian awe of Israel, made the Jewish state appear vulnerable, and incited irredentist dreams of annihilation. Each Oslo-negotiated gesture by Israel further exhilarated, radicalized, and mobilized the Palestinian body politic to war. The quiet hope of 1993 to eliminate Israel gained traction, becoming a deafening demand by 2000. Venomous speech and violent actions soared. Polls and votes in recent years suggest that a mere 20 percent of Palestinians accept the existence of a Jewish state.
"Rabin's mistake was simple and profound: One cannot 'make peace with one's enemy,' as he imagined. Rather, one makes peace with one's former enemy. Peace nearly always requires one side in a conflict to be defeated and thus give up its goals.
"Wars end not through good will but victory." (Emphasis added)
"...Since 1993, in brief, the Arabs have sought victory while Israelis sought compromise.
"...But who does not win, loses. To survive, Israelis eventually must return to their pre-1993 policy of establishing that Israel is strong, tough, and permanent. That is achieved through deterrence — the tedious task of convincing Palestinians and others that the Jewish state will endure and that dreams of elimination must fail." (Emphasis added)
~~~~~~~~~~
Says Pipes, "This process may be seen through a simple prism. Any development that encourages Palestinians to think they can eliminate Israel is negative, any that encourages them to give up that goal is positive.
"The Palestinians' defeat will be recognizable when, over a protracted period and with complete consistency, they prove that they have accepted Israel. This does not mean loving Zion, but it does mean permanently accepting it — overhauling the educational system to take out the demonization of Jews and Israel, telling the truth about Jewish ties to Jerusalem, and accepting normal commercial, cultural, and human relations with Israelis."
~~~~~~~~~~
America has a role to play here, Pipes tells us.
"...Americans face a stark choice: Endorse the Palestinian goal of eliminating Israel or endorse Israel's goal of winning its neighbors' acceptance.
"To state the choice makes clear that there is no choice — the first is barbaric, the second civilized. No decent person can endorse the Palestinians' genocidal goal of eliminating their neighbor...the U.S. government must stand with Israel in its drive to win acceptance.
"Not only is this an obvious moral choice, but Israel's win, ironically, would be the best thing that ever happened to the Palestinians. Compelling them finally to give up on their irredentist dream would liberate them to focus on their own polity, economy, society, and culture. Palestinians need to experience the crucible of defeat to become a normal people — one whose parents stop celebrating their children becoming suicide terrorists, whose obsession with Zionist rejectionism collapses. There is no shortcut.
"This analysis implies a radically different approach for the U.S. government from the current one. On the negative side, it puts Palestinians on notice that benefits will flow to them only after they prove their acceptance of Israel. Until then — no diplomacy, no discussion of final status, no recognition as a state, and certainly no financial aid or weapons.
"On the positive side, the U. S. administration should work with Israel, the Arab states, and others to induce the Palestinians to accept Israel's existence by convincing them that they have lost. This means impressing on the Israeli government the need not just to defend itself but to take steps to demonstrate to Palestinians the hopelessness of their cause. That requires not episodic shows of force...but a sustained and systematic effort to deflate a bellicose mentality."
http://www.danielpipes.org:80/7653/peace-process-or-war-process
~~~~~~~~~~
The bellicose, non-compromising, nature of the PA is evident once again. This time it's a memo put out by Fatah, which was obtained by the Associated Press. It says:
"All hopes placed in the new US administration and President Obama have evaporated, [as Obama] couldn't withstand the pressure of the Zionist lobby, which led to a retreat from his previous positions on halting settlement construction and defining an agenda for the negotiations and peace."
Of course, Obama set himself up for this, with the demands he originally made, leading the PA to think he was going to deliver Israel on a silver platter. This runs completely contrary to what Pipes recommends. Palestinian hopes that Israel can be defeated have only been strengthened via Obama's posturing.
Abbas stated, once again, that he would not sit at the negotiating table with Israel until all settlement building had been frozen, including in the occupied territory of Jerusalem.
~~~~~~~~~~
Words matter a great deal and often not enough attention is paid to them. There is, instead, interpretation based on wishful thinking -- or a desire to look the other way.
It had made the news that the US State Department says that any unity government forged by the Palestinians must be based on Quartet principles:
"Commitment to non-violence, recognition of Israel, acceptance of previous agreements and obligations."
I acknowledge readily enough that there is no way that Hamas will even pretend to commit to non-violence. (Fatah pretends.) As to previous agreements, Hamas has spoken about "respecting" them, which is diplomatic word play -- and I don't know if the U.S. would accept that.
But what leaped out at me is "recognition of Israel." There have been Hamas leaders who have said, "Recognize Israel? Of course. It's here. We acknowledge that it's here."
What's missing from this formulation is the need to recognize Israel's RIGHT to exist as a Jewish state. That, my friends, is something else all together.
~~~~~~~~~~
Will there be reconciliation? That depends on the day of the week, and the hour of the day.
Today in Ramallah Fatah signed the Egyptian-generated agreement for reconciliation. According to the Palestinian Ma'an News Service, Hamas is in favor but has not said so publicly yet. Egypt is requesting a final answer by tomorrow.
~~~~~~~~~~
The very ugly saga of the Goldstone Report continues...
Today the Security Council will be meeting in special session, at the request of Libya, to debate the issue. Israel has been hard at work in diplomatic circles, communicating to Western nations the need to take a stand here, lest sanction be given to terrorism.
This session is not, however, expected to end with a recommendation that the report be sent to the International Criminal Court. Founded in 2002, the Court prosecutes individuals charged with genocide, crimes against humanity, and the like.
~~~~~~~~~~
Tomorrow, however, the UN Human Rights Council will meet in special session, at the behest of the PA (which has observer status in the UN).
I stop right here for a moment, however, because I accessed the UN announcement about this and found that it says that the request was made by "Palestine." Whoa! There IS no Palestine. And yet, as I've been learning in discussions with a lawyer here, the UN is perilously close to acting as if the PA indeed is a state.
(Should we be surprised, then, that UN secretary general Ban Ki-Moon praised Abbas's involvement in pushing this issue forward?)
~~~~~~~~~~
At any rate, the request was co-sponsored by the following members of the Council: Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Gabon, Indonesia, Jordan, Mauritius, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Senegal.
Discussions in this forum are expected to last for more than a day, and there is speculation that it may send the report to the General Assembly which might send it to the Security Council (GA actions not being binding), which might yet send it to the International Court of Justice, which is the judicial arm of the UN and adjudicates in issues between states.
It is not clear to me, and I have not yet been able to learn enough about the presumed process (such as it may be) to gain understanding as to why two different courts are being discussed and what would determine in which direction the report might be sent. In his recent statement on the matter, Netanyahu referred to the Criminal Court, when he said it was ludicrous and he would not permit trial of any Israelis within that court.
None of it will do us any good. But I point out that as the Court of Justice adjudicates between states, there is a legal problem, as Gaza is not a state and is controlled by a terror organization. But the UN is not likely to let this stand in its way.
I also mention here the fact that process seems to requires the report to come into the hands of the GA first, but that the real action would be in the SC.
~~~~~~~~~~
October 12, 2009
"Empty-Handed"
After five days in the area, and two meetings with PM Netanyahu, that's pretty much how US Middle East envoy Mitchell has left Israel. There will be no announcement of a resumption of negotiations with the PA. Netanyahu has made it clear that any freeze on settlements (or "moratorium on building," however that is defined) must be matched by normalization gestures of substance by the Arab world.
~~~~~~~~~~
Meanwhile, PA president Abbas, playing hardball, said last night that, "There will be no Israeli-Palestinian peace treaty until the occupation of Jerusalem ends. We are determined to safeguard the Aksa Mosque and Jerusalem."
So...there will be no Israeli-Palestinian "peace treaty."
Since the end of the holiday, a fragile quiet has settled over Jerusalem. Abbas's comments about "safeguarding" the Mosque are not going to help.
~~~~~~~~~~
Following what the NY Daily News referred to as "a brief interlude of decency," Abbas has done a complete turn-about on the matter of the Goldstone Report, instructing the PA envoy to the UN Human Rights Council to seek discussion on it now and not next March: "so that those responsible for crimes against the Palestinian people during the barbaric Israeli operation in the Gaza Strip, when Israel destroyed Gaza, its mosques, its hospitals and its homes, can be brought to justice."
What is transparently clear is that he is looking over his shoulder at Hamas, as he takes this position. Now he explains that the suggestion that the discussion on Goldstone be delayed came as a result of the "opposition of several powerful countries" and was not an initiative of the PA.
"We are working to bring to an end to the intra-Palestinian rift and to sign a reconciliation treaty," he declared, accusing Hamas of exposing its "true intentions" to hurt Palestinian unity efforts by charging that the PA was involved in the delay.
Please, allow me to translate this for you (as it gives me a moment of levity): Abbas is saying that even though the PA withdrew its demand that the Goldstone Report be discussed now, it really had nothing to do with it, and when Hamas leaders get angry with him about this, their true motivation is undermining reconciliation.
Grappling with this logic, or lack thereof, helps Westerns understand the circumlocutions of the Arab mind and perhaps sheds light on why everything is so difficult here. Most Westerners have no clue.
~~~~~~~~~~
Barry Rubin says that the PA has double-crossed the US, and not for the first time. (Will Obama take serious note of this and respond accordingly?):
"The Palestinian leadership is once again shooting itself in the foot. It is throwing away a real opportunity for a state; it is sabotaging its relationship with Western patrons.
"When it comes down to a choice between continuing the conflict and trying to win a total victory that wipes Israel off the map, or making peace and getting a state, the Palestinian leadership always chooses the former.
"And when it comes to choosing between being a bit more moderate and gaining Western support, or being demagogically radical and appealing to the most radical forces, the Palestinian leadership chooses the latter. The Fatah-dominated PA doesn't want peace with Israel; it prefers peace with Hamas, its rival that not only murders and tortures Fatah people but - one more irony - is the main beneficiary of the Goldstone Report."
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1255204772568&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
~~~~~~~~~~
At any rate, as there is considerable ill will between members of Hamas and members of Fatah at present, Egypt has come up with a new plan for finalizing an agreement: The written understanding would be faxed to leaders of each group, who would sign it and fax it back.
This would truly be a first. But this way representatives of Hamas and Fatah wouldn't have to be in the same room and certainly wouldn't be called upon to shake each others' hands.
Dr. Khalil Al-Hayya, member of Hamas's political bureau, told a rally at Islamic University yesterday that Hamas still thinks national reconciliation is the best option for all -- it hasn't been rejected -- but is awaiting the opportune moment to sign the agreement.
Abbas is making noises about holding elections soon (an announcement must be made three months prior to the election) if there is no reconciliation. But Hamas is warning him not to even think about this.
Stay tuned.
~~~~~~~~~~
Since it seems we're soon going to be back to square one with regard to risk of the Goldstone Report being sent by the Security Council to the International Criminal Court in the Hague (Netherlands), the issue of a US veto in the Security Council becomes critically important once again.
In spite of apparent pressure on Abbas by Obama, we can take nothing for granted. And so, once again, I ask that you make as much noise as possible in the US:
Contact your Congresspersons:
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml
And your Senators:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Contact President Barack Obama:
Fax: 202-456-2461 White House Comment line: 202-456-1111
E-mail form via: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
As well as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton:
Fax: 202-261-8577 or 202-647-65434
Main State Department switchboard: 202-647-4000
State Dept. Public Communication Division
(accepts opinions from the public -- best to connect here):
Fax: 202-647-2283 Phone: 202-647-6575
E-mail: secretary@state.gov
~~~~~~~~~~
Share this by e-mail with others who may be willing to act; talk about the issue so that people understand; call in to talk shows; write letters to the editor.
~~~~~~~~~~
Problems with the report include the following:
[] The mandate by the Human Rights Council -- itself overtly and blatantly anti-Israel -- to the Goldstone Commission, which did the investigation, was biased from the beginning: Only Israel that was to be investigated.
[] Hamas, with its use of human shields, was given a free ride. When a Hamas leader who testified actually referred to human shields, the report concluded that "it did not consider [the statement] to constitute evidence." Said Goldstone, in open correspondence: "We did not deal with the problems of conducting military operations in civilian areas [which is what Hamas did]. We avoided having to do so in the incidents we decided to investigate."
[] The commission was nothing more than a kangaroo court, as there were judges sitting on it who stated before the investigation even started that they knew Israel was guilty.
[] Israel's right to self-defense is not mentioned once in the report.
[] "Evidence" presented by Palestinians was accepted without corroboration.
[] The report was based in the main on statements by anti-Israel NGOs (e.g., Palestinian Center for Human Rights). NGO Monitor -- which called the report "575 pages of NGO 'cut and paste'" -- found numerous false and unsubstantiated allegations that were included.
~~~~~~~~~~
Dr. Elihu Richter, of the Hadassah School of Public Health, charged, in the Post:
"I personally submitted a nine-page, annotated and referenced brief to the Goldstone Commission last July showing that the high male-female ratio of fatalities among Palestinians in Gaza argues for the combatant status of many whom human rights organizations classified as non-combatants. However, the Commission was not driven by the evidence, but by its preset agenda."
Noam Bedein, Director of the Sderot Media Center, who went to testify to the Commission as a private individual who could attest to the suffering of the people of Sderot caused by Hamas rockets, has said that Goldstone actually slept through part of his testimony.
~~~~~~~~~~
For further background on the issues and the bias of the charges, see here (especially "Article and Reports"):
http://www.eyeontheun.org/view.asp?l=47&p=982
~~~~~~~~~~
Today was opening day of the winter session of the Knesset, and it was on this same topic that PM Netanyahu focused:
"The right to have a Jewish state and the right to self defense are two of the basic principles of our people. These two elements are interwoven: Without a state of our own we cannot defend ourselves and without the right to self defense, we cannot run our own country..
"These basic rights are under continuous assault, gaining momentum since the Second Lebanon War and Operation Cast Lead [in Gaza]. We must repel this onslaught.
"Israel will not allow its leaders to be prosecuted at The Hague. We reject this absurd state of affairs."
~~~~~~~~~~
Netanyahu has made other points on this subject that merit a mention. This can stymie the peace process, he says, for Israel will not take risks if our right to self-defense is being denied us. Never mind that we shouldn't take those "risks" in any event, for other reasons -- the point is valid. I have no doubt that he intends to give particular parties pause.
And he has cautioned that nations such as the UK, if they support the report, might find themselves similarly vulnerable in the future -- for example, with regard to military action in Afghanistan.
~~~~~~~~~~
See this piece by Professor Richard Landes. It is being suggested by Goldstone, he says, that Israel must do a serious investigation of our misdeeds. But "to paraphrase Ecclesiastes: 'there's a time for receiving rebuke and a time for rebuking...' and the time for rebuke has come."
And so Landes would recommend another sort of investigation. Israel should investigate the Goldstone Commission that did the original inquiry: the ways in which legal procedure was ignored.
"Israel must examine the role of intimidation, of advocacy, and of access in distorting and falsifying evidence, the role of political correctness in making us incapable of discussing the problem and the astonishing lack of critical thinking in assessing witnesses."
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1255204764414&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
~~~~~~~~~~
Switching topics, let me also recommend a piece from last Friday by the Jerusalem Post editor, David Horovitz, "Watching and Waiting."
"Israel had concluded long before the Obama administration took office that it would ultimately need to rely on itself in grappling with Iran. Everything that has unfolded in the last few months has only reinforced the conviction...
"Israel and the US are maintaining close and constructive coordination on the Iranian nuclear crisis. Concerns and assessments are shared effectively. Nothing that was raised by the US in Geneva came as a surprise in Jerusalem...
"But...Jerusalem's confidence in this administration and its judgment - on Iran and anything else - seems also to have been shaken because of what are considered here to have been costly rookie errors where the Palestinians are concerned...
"In this [Netanyahu's] government's thinking, efforts at negotiation with the Palestinians have been set back because of the exaggerated US demands on settlement, and the reality on the ground has grown more tense in the interim.
"That's bad enough for Israel. But miscalculation by Washington over Iran would have far more profound consequences here.
"Which is why, for all the genuinely excellent coordination between the US and Israel, and the truly wide exchange of information, Jerusalem's silence over the goings-on in Geneva speaks loudest of all.
"America and the other key world players are doing what they see fit with regard to Iran. As will Israel."
~~~~~~~~~~
The vision of tough talking, non-politically correct Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman rather appeals to me. Last week it was revealed that in a secret memo recently he called for less dependence on the US, with closer ties to developing nations.
Today he is in Kazakhstan, eager to show what is possible in terms of our relationships with genuinely moderate Muslim states.
~~~~~~~~~~
The political stance of Turkey: Something else troubling to be watched closely.
A multinational military exercise known as the "Anatolian Eagle" maneuvers -- scheduled to take place between today and September 24 in Turkey -- has been called off because Turkey demanded that Israel not participate. Why? Some of the planes we would have sent might have been used in bombing runs in Gaza against Hamas. Once Israel was excluded, the US and Italy refused to participate.
Since a treaty between Jerusalem and Ankara was ratified in 1996, the two nations have held joint maneuvers 15 times. And so this represents a serious divergence in Turkish policy. Concern is that the Turkish government, which has been pivotal in certain ways, is shifting from a moderate perspective to one that is more staunchly Muslim.
In light of this, Israeli officials are rethinking military sales and diplomatic support for Turkey, but there are those cautioning that while tensions are now high it is possible that the situation can be redeemed.
~~~~~~~~~~
Rumors have been flying regarding the fact that Ahmadinejad has Jewish roots. Here's a piece in the Guardian by a journalist who grew up in Teheran and says it is not so:
~~~~~~~~~~
"The Good News Corner"
A room from the Second Temple period was discovered decades ago, buried deep in the ground under the Old City. But no excavation was done because the ancient stones were not stable enough. But now a new technique has been developed that allows the walls to be supported while rubble within the room is removed. A concrete roof has been erected at the site, which goes six meters deep, and an iron support structure put in place.
Artifacts from both the First and Second Temple periods have been discovered in the course of the excavation.
The large room, known as the "Hall of Eras," will be opened to the public in due course.
(Because of the recent riots on the Temple Mount, authorities have stressed that this room is not under the Mount and that no excavation was done under it. The charge being made is that we are digging under the Mount in an effort to destroy the Al Aksa Mosque.)
~~~~~~~~~~
October 10, 2009
Motzei Shabbat (After Shabbat)
"From the Sublime to the Ridiculous"
Today we celebrated Simchat Torah here in Israel, ending the holiday season. Outside of Israel, it will be celebrated tomorrow, and there are some of you who will not see this until tomorrow evening. But there is so very much to say, that I wanted to pick up, and at least begin. A very active week it was.
~~~~~~~~~~
Only hours ago, I danced with the Torah. This is the ultimate in sanity. Then, as the holiday ended, I turned to the ways of the world and confronted insanity on a number of fronts.
The "ridiculous" that I refer to here is the conferring upon Barack Obama of the Nobel Peace prize. My mailbox is full of comments about this "happening," but I could not pass without adding my own.
Almost universally the response has been "What?" What has he done to merit such a prize? The answer, of course, is nothing. In fact, even before this news broke (right before the beginning of Shabbat/Chag on Friday), I had been planning to write about Obama's total failure in achieving his goals. There has been mockery about the fact that he wasn't even able to convince the Olympics Committee to hold the competitions in Chicago. Never mind that as he courts Arab and Muslim states they defy his requests for cooperation and undoubtedly laugh behind his back, seeing themselves further empowered. The world is a more dangerous place -- in no way closer to peace -- since he has taken office.
~~~~~~~~~~
What must be remembered is that this prize is totally politicized. How could anyone take it seriously, knowing that it was awarded to the unrepentant, Jew-hating terrorist Yasser Arafat because he signed his name to the Oslo Accords (which he failed to honor)?
Thus the only questions worth considering, I think, are political ones. How, if at all, will this impact Obama nationally and internationally?
Over a period of time now, Obama's domestic popularity has been dropping, and it has been my deep hope (shared with many, many others) that this would ultimately limit his ability to carry out goals that threaten to do damage -- that as his coat tails got shorter, members of Congress, eager for re-election, would balk. Will this award have a serious impact on this scenario? I'm not certain, at all. But it's worrisome.
Daniel Pipes, it should be noted, thinks that this award will work against Obama: "the absurdity of the prize decision will harm Obama politically in the United States, contrasting his role as international celebrity with his record devoid of accomplishments."
And internationally? Will the president of the United States curry more respect because of this? Could this be a good thing in terms of international leverage? Or could it motivate Obama to pressure us further? In many ways a truly weak America is a frightening prospect. (Nod to Debbie B. here.) The conundrum, of course, is that the president directly impacts how the US is seen. It's a trick to wish the US well (and oh! I do), while hoping that its chief executive is unable to succeed in advancing his dangerous goals on a variety of fronts.
Here, Pipes is cynical, seeing the Norwegian Nobel Committee as having lauded Obama for using dialogue in difficult situations -- with the political goal of making it harder for him to now use military force against Iran.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZDgzZGQxNjkzNzBkZDBmY2ZkYmVkZDFkMGRlMjFkMjI
~~~~~~~~~~
Just after I had finished my appeal a bit more than a week ago -- with regard to contacting elected officials to block the Goldstone Report from going to the UN -- and had gone to help finish decorating my children's sukkahs, there was a dramatic shift in the situation:
The Palestinians, under pressure from the Western nations and particularly the US (there are reports that Obama may have intervened personally), opted to withdraw until March a demand that the Goldstone Report be voted on.
The fallout from this has been enormous, however. Palestinians across the board are furious that Abbas had bowed to pressure. Not just the radicals, including Hamas, but Abbas's own Fatah party.
Wrote Khaled Abu Toameh in the Post yesterday:
"The phrase, 'Abbas and Fatah are finished' was uttered by almost every respected political analyst in the West Bank and Gaza Strip during the past week."
Explaining that there is widespread perception that Abbas is a pawn of Israel and the US, Abu Toameh said:
"If there's truth to the PA claim that its decision to ditch the Goldstone Report was taken as a result of American pressure and threats, then the Obama administration has effectively undermined and discredited Abbas and Fatah...
"Thanks to the recent mistakes made by the Obama administration, not only has Hamas's power grown, but it would be difficult to find a Palestinian who would agree to purchase a second-hand car from Abbas, let alone accept a peace agreement he brokered with Israel."
~~~~~~~~~~
It is important to mention this, which has the Israeli government furious:
During our military operation in Gaza, the PA encouraged us to take out Hamas, even providing information that led us to certain targets. But once the hostilities ceased, the PA reversed itself 180 degrees, charging us with horrendous war crimes for our actions in Gaza.
This playing both ends against the middle is very typical and should be noted well.
~~~~~~~~~~
Abbas and his party are now attempting to redeem their position in different ways.
Abbas -- who is even being accused of treason -- ordered a "commission of inquiry" to find out what happened with regard to the PA withdrawal of its demands on the report. This is shtuyote, nonsense.
As one PA minister said:
"What's the president trying to tell us -- that he didn't take the decision to kill the resolution...?
"Well, if he didn't take the decision, we want to know who's running the Palestinian Authority."
~~~~~~~~~~
Far, far more serious has been the PA participation in fomenting violence in Jerusalem during the course of this past week of Sukkot -- as many thousands of worshippers flock to the Kotel during this time. I've written many times about radical elements, such as the Islamic Movement, which have incited violence by telling people that the Jews are endangering the Al Aksa Mosque on the Temple Mount.
But now, Abu Toameh tells us, PA/Fatah people were also involved -- telling Palestinians to save the Mosque from being "destroyed" or "captured" by Jewish "fanatics." The PA role here has been seen as an attempt to deflect attention from the Goldstone embarrassment.
Last Sunday there were clashes between police and Muslims throwing rocks and bottles, just outside the Old City. Additionally, stores of rocks were found stockpiled on the Mount, which overlooks the Kotel and the Jewish worshippers. That there was no major incident over the holiday week is due to the diligence of the police and IDF.
There has been concern that the violence in Jerusalem might lead to another "intifada" or war. I will return to this in a great deal more detail in due course. The ability of the PA to turn in a minute is well documented.
~~~~~~~~~~
Lastly, there are now attempts by the PA to redeem itself by keeping the Goldstone Report alive, appealing to Arab and Muslim states in this regard. On Wednesday, the UN Security Council met in secret session at the instigation of Libya, which is a temporary member of the Council, to discuss holding a full Council meeting on the subject of the report. The decision was to hold that meeting this coming Wednesday.
~~~~~~~~~~
Last Sunday, Hamas and Fatah representatives announced that they are about to sign a "reconciliation agreement" on October 22, following a conference to discuss "national unity."
Hamas has since expressed anger at Fatah over its position on the Goldstone Report, and hesitation about proceeding. It remains to be seen if Fatah will sufficiently redeem itself in Hamas's eyes for plans to continue.
The "reconciliation," such as it might be -- and it would be fragile, certainly -- would not represent a true coming together in unity of the two factions. This is simply impossible. What we're looking at is more of a coalition, forged for pragmatic reasons.
The implications here are enormous and bear close monitoring. Every time there is talk of reconciliation, Fatah shifts to a more radical stance.
~~~~~~~~~~
Gilad Shalit is apparently alive. That was determined by our government a week ago Friday, when a video of Shalit -- studied carefully by various agencies -- was received from Hamas in return for the 20 women prisoners we released in exchange. The video was made in September; no intelligence could be gleaned from it.
And now? There are those (notably Hamas) who say, once again, that a deal is near, and others (notably Netanyahu's people) who caution this isn't necessarily so.
There is talk, which I cannot quite wrap my head around, that the right wing Netanyahu government might agree to Hamas terms that Olmert refused. That may or may not be. What is clear is that there is certainly another factor at work:
A Hamas-Fatah "unity" deal would include arrangements for elections early next year. It seems that Hamas is eager for an agreement on Shalit, with release of many hundreds of prisoners, before such elections take place. For bringing those prisoners home will enhance Hamas popularity and its chances at the polls.
~~~~~~~~~~
This past week Obama voiced cautious satisfaction over Iran's apparently increased cooperation on nuclear issues. The Iranians have now agreed to allow inspectors into the recently revealed Qom site. But there were no discussions on halting uranium enrichment. Analysts are warning that what seems to be a more conciliatory approach by Iran is consistent with its leaders pattern of weaving between cooperation and resistance, while continuing with its nuclear program. In other words, smoke and mirrors.
~~~~~~~~~~
"The Good News Corner"
The Nobel Peace Prize is highly politicized. The other prizes are based on very real achievements. This week, Israeli Professor Ada Yonath of the Weismann Institute won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for her work on protein development in cells and links to bacteria resistant antibiotics.
Yonath is the 9th Israeli to win a Nobel prize since the founding of the modern state of Israel and the 171st Jew to win since the prizes were founded in 1901. In that time, Nobel prizes have been bestowed on Muslims, who constitute one-fifth of the world's population, nine times.
(Yonath is obviously brilliant in her scientific work, and a source of pride to Israel. But please, do not attend to any political comments she felt moved to make to journalists regarding the fact that we wouldn't have our soldiers kidnapped if we didn't hold any Palestinian prisoners. This is clearly not her expertise.)
~~~~~~~~~~
October 1, 2009
"Season of Our Joy"
This (z'man simchatenu) is what Sukkot is called. It begins tomorrow night. A blessing to be here: all over, sukkahs are being erected and decorated. We are commanded to live in them for the week -- eating and, properly, sleeping in them.
Even restaurants put up sukkahs, mostly on the sidewalk out front, so religious people can patronize them for the Sukkot week.
As I have indicated, it is unlikely that I will be posting during this coming week. Priorities: eating and sleeping in the sukkah with my children and grandchildren, and doing tiyulim (in this instance, day trips so very popular during hol hamoed, the intermediary days of the holiday.).
The world is a heavy place. Often a cruel and awful place. It is our job to actively defeat the evil and the cruelty. But there must also be a time for celebration, and for gratitude to the Almighty for His protection and for the blessings that are bestowed upon us. To all I wish a meaningful and joyful Sukkot.
~~~~~~~~~~
Let me return to the subject of the Goldstone Report. I speak, above, of defeating cruelty and evil. Here is an opportunity to be of real service to Israel at a time when we are beleaguered.
I have been advised that it is important to contact members of Congress to combat advancement of this report. Please, go back to what I wrote yesterday, regarding the outrageous bias of this report, and advice on what to say in communication with officials. (Or see my posting at http://www.arlenefromisrael.info/ -- it will be second on the home page, after this posting goes up.)
Additionally, here, I offer this, which was put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs:
"When Colonel Richard Kemp, Commander of British forces in Afghanistan was asked about Israel's conduct in Gaza, he replied: 'I don't think there has ever been a time in the history of warfare when any army has made more efforts to reduce civilian casualties and deaths of innocent people than the IDF in Gaza.'"
As you contemplate this -- the fact that Israel is not just innocent of the obscene charges being made against her, but has been extraordinary, absolutely exemplary, in her conduct with regard to innocents -- let it fire your determination to act against this extreme and willful travesty of justice.
~~~~~~~~~~
To locate your Congresspersons:
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml
To locate your Senators:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
~~~~~~~~~~
The more publicity there is on this subject, the more Obama is likely to feel he must block the resolution. So, please! make noise. Call in to talk shows, write letters to the editor, submit op-eds to your local papers. (Letters and op-eds must be concise, unemotional and factual.) Let the truth ring out loudly.
Finally, please share this with everyone you can -- both so that others can take these actions, and simply so that people can know the truth. If you are in Israel, send this to all your friends and relatives in the States. Put this up on blogs and lists.
The Western nations represent a minority in the Human Rights Council. In spite of Netanyahu's efforts in meeting with ambassadors from nations in the Asia/Pacific region, this report is expected to not only be accepted, but to be sent on to the UN. That is where it must be blocked.
~~~~~~~~~~
Let me share here a column by Daniel Pipes, Director of the Middle East Forum, "Netanyahu's quiet success."
It echoes a theme I have been writing about:
"Almost unnoticed, Binyamin Netanyahu won a major victory last week when Barack Obama backed down on a signature policy initiative. This about-face suggests that US-Israel relations are no longer headed for the disaster I have been fearing...
"...On June 4, Obama weighed in: 'The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.... It is time for these settlements to stop.' A day later, he reiterated that 'settlements are an impediment to peace.' On June 17, Clinton repeated: 'We want to see a stop to the settlements.
"And so on, in a relentless beat.
"Focusing on settlements had the inadvertent but predictable effect of instantly impeding diplomatic progress...
"...The geniuses of the Obama administration eventually discerned that this double hardening of positions [by Israel and the PA] was dooming their naïve, hubristic plan to settle the Arab-Israeli conflict within two years.
"Obama's reconciliation with reality became public on Sept. 22, at a 'summit' he sponsored with Abbas and Netanyahu...
"Obama threw in the towel there, boasting that 'we have made progress' toward settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and offering as one indication that Israelis 'have discussed important steps to restrain settlement activity.' Those eight words of muted praise for Netanyahu's minimal concessions have major implications:
Settlements no longer dominate US-Israel relations but have reverted back to their usual irritating but secondary role.
Abbas, who keeps insisting on a settlement freeze as though nothing has happened, suddenly finds himself the odd man out in the triangle.
The center-left faction of the Obama administration (which argues for working with Jerusalem)...has defeated the far-left faction (which wants to squeeze the Jewish state).
"...Hats off to Bibi - may he have further successes in nudging US policy to the right track."
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1254163544506&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
~~~~~~~~~~
I have vast respect for Daniel Pipes, and concur with him that Netanyahu has conducted himself in a manner that has enhanced Israel's position diplomatically, while taking Obama down a peg and making a fool of Abbas.
But I am not sanguine about the situation that faces us with regard to working with the Obama administration. Netanyahu has achieved his diplomatic gains by walking the slippery slope of offering some cooperation, while holding the line on several major issues. Diligence must be the watchword now: Netanyahu must not feel reassured that Obama has mellowed, so that he believes he can now let down his guard. He must not offer more than it is in Israel's best interest to offer. And he must stand strong not only for Israeli security, but for Israeli rights.
It occurs to me that working with the "center-left" faction of the US administration that promotes working with Jerusalem may be more dangerous than working with the "far left" faction that does not.
When working with those who are adamant in their hostility to Israel, it is clear what our positions must be. But when working with those who are predisposed to us in a "lukewarm" manner, ambivalence starts to creep in with regard to correct positions. Do we want to cross or embarrass those who promote working with us or do we want to motivate them to even further cooperation? Do we want to risk giving the upper hand once more to those hostile to us? These are dangerous -- inadvertently, I would suggest, almost subversive -- questions that may lead to an entrapment.
For it must be remembered that even those in the Obama administration prepared to "work with" us have in their sites goals for a Palestinian state that are not consistent with our rights and our needs.
Indeed, diligence, on the part of all of us, from the prime minister and members of his coalition, to the average Israeli citizen. The right flank of Netanyahu's coalition, and very much including his own party, will hopefully play a watchdog role here.
~~~~~~~~~~
I must mention Iran here. As Iran's nuclear capability comes closer to reality and the time for acting draws to a close, the media is filled with commentary on what is happening,
"Dialogue" with Iran is now beginning and the US, incredibly, is taking it seriously. "Towards the end of the year, we'll be able to calculate how much progress" has been made in talks, intoned a State Department spokesman.
But, in truth, these talks can be seen only as a farce. Ahmaninejad, who is supposed to agree to IAEA inspections, is bragging that he'll buy enriched uranium elsewhere.
And so there is serious consideration being given (with China and Russia still intransigent) to stiffer sanctions when talks fails. The sanctions that will be put in place are likely to be of a financial nature, strangling Iran's capacity to function, rather than involving a blockage of imports such as refined petroleum. Insurance companies and banks would be high level goals. According to the Washington Post, the "Obama administration is laying plans to cut Iran's economic links to the rest of the world."
Playing into what is happening right now is the public announcement of Iran's second, clandestine uranium enrichment plant. (Note: Western Intelligence knew about this for some time.) It makes more clear to certain governments (who were slow to see what was staring them in the face) what the duplicitous intentions of Iran really are, and has stiffened many backs with regard to those sanctions.
One of the questions being raised is whether, with the prospect of more serious sanctions, Israel will hit Iran militarily. That hit would have to come within six months, I believe.
~~~~~~~~~~
"Good News Corner"
I began with a sense of joy and will end with a happy feeling, sharing news of innovative medical advances in Israel and other good things:
[] It is well known that antioxidants protect and work against cancers. An Israeli doctor, relying upon an ancient herbal remedy text written in Arabic, has discovered (or rediscovered) a plant that may turn out to be a powerful weapon against cancer.
Dr. Fuad Fares -- working in the Carmel Medical Center in Haifa -- has developed an antioxidant drawn from a non-edible plant that grows in Israel. In early lab tests -- on mice and in vitro cancer cells -- this compound is showing enormous promise ("a dramatic effect"). Ultimately, following more tests, it is hoped that the anti-oxidant can be purified into a new compound that would be ingested much as a vitamin pill is.
At this point the doctor will not reveal the identity of the plant. Nor is he saying if the Arabic text he is referring to is a text by Maimonides, the great 12th century Jewish scholar and philosopher, who was a physician and wrote in Arabic.
_____
[] Neurim Pharmaceuticals has developed an answer to insomnia that is far superior to standard sleeping pills, which have side effects. The product, Circadin -- developed by Neurim's founder, Professor Nava Zisapel of Tel Aviv University -- works with the body's natural processes.
Melatonin, which is released in the body at the onset of darkness, prepares the body for sleep by lowering blood pressure and body temperature. But factors such as artificial lighting, anxiety and aging can interfere with this process.
Explains Zisapel, "Circadin produces melatonin in the same way as the pineal gland: It starts slowly at around 10:00 PM, gets to a peak at around 2:00 AM, and gradually stops by the morning. It releases melatonin in a gradual manner."
Circadin is being distributed now in Israel and some European countries, and is awaiting US FDA approval. It is expected to be most helpful to people over 55.
_____
A native American tribe, the Coushatta of Louisiana, has reached out to establish a relationship with Israel.
"It is natural that we feel a connection to you and your people," says Kevin Sickey, a chairman of the Coushatta Tribal Council. "You stand for the same fundamental principles and values upon which the sovereign nation of Coushatta was [founded]: freedom and opportunity, justice and deep respect for your history and culture."
Additionally, tribe members felt that they and Israelis both have ancient languages, spoken by a minority; both struggled for sovereignty against suppressive forces; and both have a deep respect for their ancestors.
Some months ago, in a colorful ceremony highlighted by a traditional “stomp” dance, the tribe signed an unprecedented “affirmation of friendship” (an unofficial document) with the State of Israel. Asher Yarden, Israel’s Consul General in Houston and members of his staff were present.
~~~~~~~~~~
September 30, 2009
"Goldstone Report"
The Goldstone Report -- which charges Israel with war crimes: the deliberate targeting of civilians -- has now been presented to the UN Human Rights Council, which commissioned it, and which will surely accept its findings after discussion.
There will then be a move to send the report on to the UN Security Council, which, if it accepts it, may send it forward to the Hague and the International Court of Justice.
~~~~~~~~~~
Problems with the report include the following:
[] The mandate by the Human Rights Council -- itself overtly and blatantly anti-Israel -- to the Goldstone Commission, which did the investigation, was biased from the beginning: Only Israel that was to be investigated.
[] Hamas, with its use of human shields, was given a free ride. When a Hamas leader who testified actually referred to human shields, the report concluded that "it did not consider [the statement] to constitute evidence." Said Goldstone, in open correspondence: "We did not deal with the problems of conducting military operations in civilian areas [which is what Hamas did]. We avoided having to do so in the incidents we decided to investigate."
[] The commission was nothing more than a kangaroo court, as there were judges sitting on it who stated before the investigation even started that they knew Israel was guilty.
[] Israel's right to self-defense is not mentioned once in the report.
[] "Evidence" presented by Palestinians was accepted without corroboration.
[] The report was based in the main on statements by anti-Israel NGOs (e.g., Palestinian Center for Human Rights). NGO Monitor -- which called the report "575 pages of NGO 'cut and paste'" -- found numerous false and unsubstantiated allegations that were included.
~~~~~~~~~~
Dr. Elihu Richter, of the Hadassah School of Public Health, charged, in the Post:
"I personally submitted a nine-page, annotated and referenced brief to the Goldstone Commission last July showing that the high male-female ratio of fatalities among Palestinians in Gaza argues for the combatant status of many whom human rights organizations classified as non-combatants. However, the Commission was not driven by the evidence, but by its preset agenda."
~~~~~~~~~~
For further background on the issues and the bias of the charges, see here (especially "Article and Reports"):
http://www.eyeontheun.org/view.asp?l=47&p=982
~~~~~~~~~~
Outraged? Aghast at the overt bias, without even a pretense at evenhandedness, which might lead to punitive measures against Israel? Good that you should be. Let every decent person everywhere demand a stop to this.
Dr. Jan Sokolovsky, Executive Director of the International Commission for Jewish Legal Affairs, has put out a call for people to act to block acceptance of this by the Security Council.
The Council has 15 members -- five permanent and 10 temporary. It requires a permanent member to veto the motion -- and the US is the only one that would do this. Otherwise, it would require some combination of seven abstentions and 'no' votes by temporary members to block acceptance of the report, as nine votes are needed to pass it. As this is an exceedingly unlikely prospect, the US veto is the only chance to stop this.
There has been indication that Secretary of State Clinton prefers to see the Report kept in the Human Rights Council, and US Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice -- who called the report "unbalanced, one-sided, and unacceptable" -- has said the same. But we can take no chances here.
~~~~~~~~~~
Messages are best very brief. For example (using your words): The Goldstone Report commissioned by the UN Human Rights Council is highly biased and constitutes a blood libel against Israel. Please expend every possible effort to contain it in the Human Rights Council, and, if this fails, please veto its acceptance in the Security Council.
Contact:
President Barack Obama
Fax: 202-456-2461 White House Comment line: 202-456-1111
e-mail form via: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
Fax: 202-261-8577 or 202-647-65434
Main switchboard to the State Department: 202-647-4000
State Dept. Public Communication Division
(accepts opinions from the public -- best to connect here):
Fax: 202-647-2283 Phone: 202-647-6575
E-mail: secretary@state.gov
~~~~~~~~~~
Anne Bayefsky, who heads Eye on the UN, has put out a joint statement on Goldstone on behalf of the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust, and the Hudson Institute. In part, it reads:
"The Goldstone mission will go down in history as the 21st century’s equivalent to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion – a notorious work of fiction which spun a conspiratorial web of deceit and distortion that has fueled hatred of Jews ever since.
"At its core, the Goldstone report repeats the ancient blood libel against the Jewish people – the allegation of bloodthirsty Jews intent on butchering the innocent. Or as the Goldstone mission casts this abomination for a modern audience: Israel 'deliberately…terrorize[d] a civilian population;' Israeli 'violence against civilians w[as] part of a deliberate policy.' (paras. 1211, 1690)
"With this report the UN has come full circle. Rising from the Jewish ashes of crimes against humanity, it now purports to render the Jewish people’s exercise of the right of self-defence as itself a crime against humanity."
~~~~~~~~~~
And so, the world continues in its insane ways, with Palestinians using every avenue possible to try to weaken us.
In yet another version of universal jurisdiction, British law permits private individuals to lodge complaints of "war crimes" against military personnel, even if they are not British and the alleged crimes were committed elsewhere.
Drawing on this, 16 Palestinians from Gaza called on two British law firms to act on their behalf; the law firms -- knowing that Defense Minister Ehud Barak was due in the country shortly -- applied to the courts for an international arrest warrant, claiming that Barak had committed war crimes and breaches of the Geneva Convention during military operations in Gaza.
~~~~~~~~~~
Barak -- who was on his way to Britain, and received advice from many quarters to turn back -- behaved with admirable determination and courage, refusing to change his plans.
At the end of the day, the court threw out the petition for arrest. This was in response to arguments submitted by the British Foreign Office, which had been in constant consultation with Israel's Foreign Ministry, that Barak was a state guest and therefore not subject to such a law suit. Barak has come to Britain for meetings with Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Defense Secretary Bob Ainsworth and Foreign Secretary David Miliband.
Said Barak:
"We do not intend to let terror win. We will not apologize in any way for our just struggle against terrorism. We will do everything possible so that the representatives of Israel, security officials and soldiers of the IDF will continue to freely travel the world. The theater of the absurd whereby those who defend their citizens need to be on the defensive has to end. Otherwise, the world is likely not only to give a prize to terrorism, but to encourage it."
I salute him for this.
~~~~~~~~~~
Our Security Cabinet has agreed to the release of 20 women Palestinian prisoners in exchange for an up-to-the-minute video tape of Gilad Shalit that serves as evidence that he is still alive. This was worked out by the Germans, who are now mediating negotiations for Shalit's release, and was approved by our negotiating team, headed by Hagai Hadas.
This is supposed to take place on Friday, amid cautions that this does not mean a deal is almost finalized.
The women scheduled for release have all served at least two-thirds of their sentences, and none was involved directly in the murder of Israelis. (Indirectly, in a couple of instances, yes.) It is being said that this 20 would be deducted from the final number of prisoners that Hamas is demanding in exchange for Shalit.
Almost all of the women are from Judea and Samaria, and not from Gaza. What occurs to me then is that if this release takes place, it may have the effect of strengthening Hamas politically in Judea and Samaria.
Wait and see is the best policy here.
~~~~~~~~~~
A hasbara, or public relations, tour of the US coast to coast, I understand, is being planned for this fall with several ministers participating. The topic: Israeli rights. This is exceedingly good news, for this subject has been vastly neglected since the beginning of Oslo.
There has been talk unending about our obligations, and what concessions we ought to make.
And there is talk about our security requirements. Thus, there has been a campaign for us to establish "defensible borders." I never liked that. Yes, of course, we need defensible borders. But if an area of Judea and Samaria -- in the heartland of our ancient heritage -- is not needed for our defense, does this mean it's all right to surrender it? Not in my book it doesn't.
If the current government, weary with the emphasis on concessions, is now prepared to push our rights and to educate others to the matter, I celebrate. This is a theme I will return to.
~~~~~~~~~~