Tunnel explosion puts Palestinian reconciliation to the test

Since Operation Protective Edge, the defense establishment heads have been promising that the Gaza tunnels would turn into cemeteries for anyone who enters them. It took time, but over the past year Israel has developed tunnel-destruction techniques. Destroying every tunnel being dug into Israel is a legitimate goal, and it is the political echelon’s duty to instruct the army to destroy it.

On Monday, Israel not only demonstrated its ability to turn the tunnels into cemeteries, but also its ability to bury the Palestinian reconciliation agreement if the basic conditions it is demanding aren’t met. The main condition is demilitarizing the Gaza Strip and handing security responsibility over to the Palestinian Authority, so that Gaza doesn’t turn into Lebanon, and Hamas and the Islamic Jihad don’t turn into Hezbollah.

Monday's tunnel explosion, as seen from Gaza. How will PA gain responsibility for crossings and borders if it has no control over tunnels and military forces?

The preparations to destroy the tunnel took many days. IDF Southern Command, Intelligence Directorate and Air Force units were placed in a state of high alert over the weekend. The IDF prepared both for an offensive and for defensive fighting, in light of the possibility that the tunnel demolition would lead to a counterreaction.

Israel took, and is still taking, into account the possibility that the Islamic Jihad would seek revenge and deterrence, as the organization isn’t committed in any way to the reconciliation agreement signed between Fatah and Hamas. Its weapons can’t be revoked and it can’t be required to stop digging tunnels.

The Islamic Jihad organization is operated and funded by Iran. While Hamas is running out of cash reserves and is forced to reduce its digging pace, the Islamic Jihad has no such problem. It’s a big military organization, and its rocket arsenal is half of Hamas’ arsenal. It’s an organization which can forcibly torpedo any dialogue with the PA or Israel, in accordance with an Iranian decision.

If the Islamic Jihad decides to fire rockets at Israel in response to the tunnel bombing, Hamas won’t be able to stop it from doing so. Hamas, which seeks to reconcile with Iran, won’t clash with the Islamic Jihad, and definitely not over an Israeli attack.

If the Islamic Jihad fires, Israel would respond, and the exchanges of fire that would develop would drag Hamas into the fray. If that happens, the Egyptians may remove their people from the strip and inform the Americans that the dream of a regional reconciliation plan, which the Fatah-Hamas reconciliation is only part, can be shelved.

The Palestinian reconciliation agreement will be put to its first practical test on Wednesday, when Hamas is expected to hand control over the crossings from the strip to the PA, including the Rafah Crossing. As soon as members of the Presidential Guard from Ramallah show up at the Rafah Crossing, they will receive the keys to the dream of every Palestinian in Gaza—opening the road to Egypt for free movement and goods.

Fatah and Hamas sign reconciliation agreement in Cairo, earlier this month (Photo: EPA)

A flare-up on the Gaza border could affect the entire reconciliation process. Israel is against the agreement in its current wording, and rightfully so, and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who knows he won’t have real security control over the strip, would gladly bid farewell to this reconciliation move, which was forced on him by the Egyptians and the Jordanians, as long as he isn’t held accountable for its failure. Hamas won’t have the tunnel map over to the PA, and the Islamic Jihad definitely won’t do that. Dozens of other organizations in the Gaza Strip aren’t committed to this agreement, from the Democratic Front to the Doghmush family’s armed forces. Monday’s tunnel demolition made it clear to the PA that the current reconciliation agreement would put it to a daily test vis-à-vis Israel. How will the PA gain responsibility for crossings and borders if it has no control over the tunnels and military forces of the different organizations operating in the area? Every firing incident from the strip is going to immediately lead to a face-off between Abbas’ people and Israel, which will demand that they take responsibility. From this point, the road to a complete severance of ties and a conflict between Israel and the PA isn’t long.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Tunnel explosion puts Palestinian reconciliation to the test : http://ift.tt/2A5aDZQ

Islamic Jihad's unpredictable response

Even though they've made no official statement to that end, it appears Hamas is trying to calm down the tensions in Gaza after the IDF blew up a tunnel infiltrating Israeli territory on Monday.

In recent years, the IDF has uncovered and blown up several terrorist tunnels, but all of those have been built by Hamas. The destruction of these tunnels at the time did not provoke any significant retaliation from Hamas because the organization, as the sovereign in the strip, is responsible for any military escalation and is expected to pay the steepest price.

There is, however, a strong likelihood of escalation in the wake of the destruction of the tunnel on Monday, both because Islamic Jihad—which built the tunnel—does not bear the responsibility of the sovereign, and because it is a more radical organization whose reaction is harder to predict.

Islamic Jihad fighters (Photo: AFP)

 The intensity of the response by its spokespeople, and the fact it lost both a strategic assert and two of its top commanders in one fell swoop, would make it harder for Islamic Jihad to demonstrate restraint. Hamas leader Ismail Hanieyh, who spoke at the funeral of the killed Islamic Jihad fighters, issued a threat of his own: "Our response for this massacre will be to continue efforts to restore national unity," he said, without offering any details as to whether this response would include fire.

Funeral of Islamic Jihad fighters killed in tunnel explosion (Photo: AFP)

Haniyeh did make one declaration more militant in nature, in a message to Islamic Jihad: "Blood will be answered with blood, and destruction will be answered with destruction. The enemy is dreaming if it thinks it can force new rules of confrontation. The resistance and the weapons of the resistance are our top priority. Our weapons are our honor."

Egyptian intelligence officials have been talking to relevant officials both in Israel and in the Gaza Strip is an effort to lower the flames and prevent further escalation. The Egyptians know that at this time, a violent conflict in the Gaza Strip could spell an end for the reconciliation agreement signed between Fatah and Hamas, which Cairo has put a lot of time and work in.

The tunnel explosion (Photo: Barel Efraim)

To that end, Egypt's ambassador to Ramallah will visit the Gaza Strip on Tuesday with the sole objective of calming down the situation. At the same time, Egyptian intelligence officials are also expected to visit the strip, though their visit was planned before the tunnel explosion and has to do with the Palestinian reconciliation effort. It appears Israel has carefully chosen the timing for the tunnel's demolition—just two days before the Palestinian Authority is scheduled to get control over the Erez and Kerem Shalom border crossings from Hamas. This is an important step in the reconciliation process between the two sides, and would give Abbas significant control in the strip.

It's safe to assume Israel is counting on Hamas to put all of its weight behind stopping Islamic Jihad from dragging Gaza into another round of violence before that important step in the reconciliation process is completed. Supporting that is the very moderate statement released by Hamas on Monday, claiming the Israeli escalation was meant to sabotage reconciliation efforts and making no concrete threats.

Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh: a moderate response

 Haniyeh also called Islamic Jihad leader Ramadan Shalah to express solidarity, but in addition to the pleasantries, it is safe to assume Haniyeh also requested—or demanded—Shalah not to escalate the situation before Fatah gets civil control over the Gaza Strip. A round of hostilities now would only lead to an indefinite postponement of the reconciliation agreement, burden the civilian population in Gaza—which is already exhausted by the military blows—and force Hamas to once again carry the burden of civil control over the strip. The bottom line, however, is the fact it's hard to predict the moves of a radical organization such as Islamic Jihad, while its patron sits in Tehran, those working to lower the flames sit in Cairo, and the sovereign in Gaza is following orders from the Egyptians. When this is the situation, and the different players each pull in a different direction, the solution could be somewhere in the middle. Meaning, Islamic Jihad might choose to respond, but in a way that does not cross Israel's red lines and won't lead to escalation. This way, all sides can say they've done their part and then move on with their lives. Islamic Jihad's window of opportunity to respond is seemingly small, while the organization's fuse is short. But an organization taking its marching orders from Iran could, at the end of the day, catch everyone—Egypt, Hamas and Israel—by surprise.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Islamic Jihad's unpredictable response : http://ift.tt/2A3BEwq

Tunnel explosion timing affected by Gaza political situation

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Analysis: The IDF kept track of the offensive tunnel that was exploded Monday for a long time, but didn’t take any measures to destroy it before finding a suitable time, which wasn’t only the result of operational considerations. Israel likely chose to bomb the tunnel at this time as the political conditions in Gaza reduce the chance of a response through rocket fire. Tunnel explosion timing affected by Gaza political situation : http://ift.tt/2A2CxFD

Why Israel should talk to Iran

Iran has been establishing its position in recent years as a much crueler enemy than the hostile countries surrounding us, and after declaring its intention to destroy the Zionist state, it is moving on to more practical moves that may lead to a fulfillment of this promise.

Iran is settling a score with the State of Israel, which once helped the Persian Shah’s horrific regime and supported his brutal deeds. At the time, it was convenient for us as well as for that regime, but the Iranians haven’t forgotten about it and it accompanies their collective memory to this day. The Iranian street has been educated for years to hate Israel, and they are more than willing to wreak destruction on the country. The common perception that the ordinary citizen couldn’t care less about the rivalry between the regime in Tehran and the government in Jerusalem is unfounded, as tens of millions of Iranians hate Israel and want to see it destroyed.

We did it with Egypt. We did it with Jordan. We’re trying to do it with the Palestinians. So all our efforts should be focused on reconciliation and peace with the great, tough, brutal Iran (Photo: Reuters)

And so, we have a much bigger enemy than all Arab states. We have an intelligent enemy looking for every possible way to take revenge against us. It creates a potential for an Armageddon between Israel and Iran, and it’s definitely possible that the Islamic Republic will have the upper hand in this battle. It is therefore the duty of Israel’s political echelon today to make every effort to find routes for reconciliation and peace talks with the Iranians.

We did it with Egypt. We did it with Jordan. We’re trying to do it with the Palestinians. So all our efforts must be focused on reconciliation and peace with the great, tough, brutal Iran.

Quite a few Israelis will likely say: There’s no chance, it’s a waste of time. But those who say that should remember that we said similar things in the 1970s about Egypt and in the 1990s about Jordan. We’ll make concessions. They’ll make concessions. And following long and difficult talks, we’ll achieve one goal: Peace with Iran.

Iran isn’t a desert country, and its residents don’t ride camels. It’s a developed country, which has a lot to lose as well. The Iranian nuclear power, for example, or the commercial and economic life. A country of 80 million citizens can’t afford to toy with too many wars, even if they see us as heretics and keep assembling Islamic enemies around us. It’s very possible that the circumstances which will encourage peace talks will come from the civil sector, like what happened at the time with the Palestinians.

Few people remember, for example, that Abie Nathan was jailed for months for wanting to talk with the PLO, when it was forbidden to raise PLO flags on the street. Look at how far we’ve come, making not very significant concessions to the Arab Islamic side.

We are facing a tough and brutal enemy, and all our intentions, desires and resources must be directed toward talks with Iran over the United States’ head. The US isn’t putting its residents’ lives at risk the way we are putting the lives of Israeli citizens at risk right now.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Why Israel should talk to Iran : http://ift.tt/2hqbj40

It’s not a sourpuss industry, it’s a corruption industry

The legislation granting a sitting prime minister immunity from investigation is corrupt legislation, and the public should take to the streets if it doesn’t stop.

Like many citizens in this country, I have been following the media updates and reports about the investigations taking place these days in the Lahav 443 fraud investigation unit and the different opinions in the public about these investigations.

Unlike many people who hope the investigations will lead to a political upheaval, I sincerely hoped that the prime minister would be replaced democratically, rather than through the legal system. I believe that the people of Israel’s top priority should be the important, and even fatal, democratic decision on the way the citizens of the State of Israel choose to march toward implementing the vision of Zionism—being a democratic and Jewish state, in which the rule of law is above everything else.

Netanyahu addressing the Knesset, last week. Corruption has reached the Knesset, and this time it’s no longer in the form of ‘errant weeds’ (Photo: Reuters)

Because I believe the means are as important as the end, I hoped and I still hope that the state’s citizens will express their disgust over the current leadership’s conduct—as well as over its norms and values—in democratic elections, and choose a new way. I am convinced that a democratic decision is preferable to maintain the Israeli society’s national strength.

I see no room, therefore, for pressing the attorney general or the police, and definitely not the Supreme Court—neither from the right nor from the left, and not even from the center. On the contrary, we should voice our support for them so they can do their jobs fearlessly and undisturbed and produce professional, clean and impartial decisions, free of politics. The people heading these important systems are well aware of the essence of their positions, the value of national-scale responsibility and, above all, the importance of the rule of law and the fact that all of us, with no exception, are subject to the authority of the rule of law.

The recent developments in the Knesset and in the coalition have changed my mind. Any sensible person can clearly see that corruption has reached the Knesset, and this time it’s no longer in the form of “errant weeds.” It has put down deep roots in our house of representatives, who are allowing it to stand on the podium, undisguised—and worse, with no shame—in an attempt to lead fundamentally corrupt legislation, aimed at shielding the prime minister through unrestrained politics from the police investigations and the attorney general.

The coalition deal they are apparently trying to devise behind the scenes, under which the law preventing future investigations of the current prime minister would be approved in exchange for an agreement to limit the prime minister to two terms in office, reeks of intolerable corruption which can be felt miles away. There’s no other way to explain the attempt to advance such a deal apart from hysteria at the Prime Minister’s Residence over the potential outcome of what is taking place in the Lahav 443 interrogation rooms.

Unlike the sourpuss specialist from Jerusalem’s Balfour Street, I am not particularly concerned about the despondency industry in the State of Israel and about the sourpuss industry he says has developed in the State of Israel, but I am much more concerned about the corruption industry which has developed the rotten eggs industry in our parliament—whose representatives have no problem insulting bereaved families and the heads of the defense establishment and legal system without any of Jabotinsky’s inner glory, whose representatives openly declare on the radio that their goal is the rescue the prime minister from the current investigations against him and from future investigation which may develop.

Of course we’re told almost every day that “there’s nothing, because there was nothing, because there’s nothing” or that all the investigations are complete nonsense. It’s just a few takeout trays (worth hundreds of thousands of shekels), just a few packs of fine cigars and champagne bottles (worth hundreds of thousands of shekels) or just a weird coincidence that the closest people to the sourpuss man—like the relative lawyer who represented the man from Caesarea who became a state’s witness in the submarine and vessel deal, or the former Navy officer who was almost appointed by the prime minister, in the most puzzling manner, as head of the National Security Council while the submarine and vessel deal was in the works—are involved in the same deal that was led by the prime minister against the IDF and Defense Ministry’s position.

Netanyahu with Coalition Chairman David Bitan (center) and Tourism Minister Yariv Levin. Instead of demonstrating leadership and putting the national interest before any personal interest, the prime minister is setting his yes men on everyone (Photo: Alex Kolomoisky)

As the police investigations progress, we are witnessing more and more whining, delusional persecution stories or, alternatively, spins aimed at diverting the public’s attention from these important issues while inciting against everyone—especially against political rivals, Israel’s Arab citizens, and recently even against the heads of the defense establishment, the legal system and the state control system (all of whom, without any exception, were appointments led by Netanyahu).

I remember an opposition leader who in 2008 publicly called on then-Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to resign immediately, using the following claim, which isn’t baseless: “This prime minister is up to his neck in investigations and has no moral and public mandate to make fateful decisions for the State of Israel, because there is a real and not unfounded concern that he will make decisions based on the personal interest of his political survival, rather than based on the national interest.”

This statement is correct and justified indeed. The problem is that the same opposition leader—who went on to become prime minister—forgot his words of wisdom, as usual, and is avoiding demonstrating any leadership and national-scale responsibility and putting the national interest before any personal interest. Instead, he is setting his yes men on everyone.

There’s no dispute that the State of Israel definitely has reasons to be concerned by Palestinian terror or by radical Islamic terror, by Hezbollah’s rocket abilities or by Iran’s military or nuclear abilities. But we can handle all these through the State of Israel’s military, security and strategic abilities, as well as through cooperation with the international community wherever it is required.

We do have a reason, however, to panic over the moral and ethical decay we are being led by, which is infiltrating the Knesset and government systems and undermining our future and the foundations of our existence. If we let corruption take its place in the Knesset, affect the separation of powers in the state, and most importantly, infiltrate the most sensitive process in a democratic state—the legislation process by our public representatives—this amazing Zionist enterprise will evaporate, and we’ll all be depressed, sour and mainly rotten.

The coalition discussions on the law banning investigations against a sitting prime minister must serve, therefore, as a red light for us all. This corrupt legislation must stop immediately. Otherwise, Israeli citizens from all ends of the political spectrum must take to the streets in masses and protest against this despicable bill in a democratic way, until it is completely removed from the agenda.

Yuval Diskin is a former Shin Bet director.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

It’s not a sourpuss industry, it’s a corruption industry : http://ift.tt/2z1GHj7

‘Package deal’ with Putin needed against Iranian expansion

The series of incidents that have taken place in recent weeks between Israel and Syria—including the rockets fired into Israel, the attempt to shoot down an Israeli plane and the attack on an anti-aircraft battery in response—created the feeling of expected escalation to the point of a possible war in the north.

  Some people even rushed to accuse Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of allowing the situation to escalate. While the situation does require our utmost attention, it isn’t bringing us closer to war. Moreover, if we do the right thing, we’ll likely be able to prevent an escalation in the situation. The northern threat should be divided in two: A threat from Hezbollah in Lebanon and a broader threat from Syria. At this stage, Hezbollah isn’t interested in a conflict with Israel. The primary reason is a political-economic reason. The organization has lost hundreds of fighters in Syria, and it must financially support their families, as well as care for thousands who were wounded.

Hezbollah fighter on Syrian-Lebanese border. At this stage, Hezbollah isn’t interested in a conflict with Israel for political-economic reasons (Photo: AP)

Furthermore, the thousands of fighters who joined the organization when it was founded about 35 years ago have already retired. In other words, the organization must pay their pensions. Yes, Hezbollah—for better or worse—is more of an army than a terror organization, and it is subject to a lot of economic pressure. The anger rising from the bottom over the hundreds of young people who have been killed in a war that isn’t theirs is creating further internal Lebanese pressure to avoid a new adventure.

The Hezbollah organization may find itself, therefore, being pressured from two directions: pressure from Iran to launch a war against Israel and internal pressure in Lebanese to avoid a war. The way to guarantee the second type of pressure will be more effective requires Israel to make it clear that “the third Lebanon war” won’t be between Israel and Hezbollah—but between Israel and the state of Lebanon, and that in such a war Lebanon will suffer horrible destruction. There is full justification for such an approach, especially after the Lebanese president announced that “Hezbollah is part of the state’s defensive force against Israel.” The situation in Syria is different. Iran isn’t hiding its intention of establishing a “second Hezbollah” there—a strong Shiite militia that would be subject to its authority and whose main purpose will be to attack Israel in due time, even if this isn’t what the government in Damascus wants. Senior Israeli officials, including the defense minister, have announced they won’t let it happen. The question is, however, are we capable of preventing it? The most Israel might be able to do is draw a line 10-15 kilometers from the Golan Heights border and attack any foreign presence there (in other words, not the Syrian army). Such a move is clearly insufficient, however. The only one who can prevent Iran from realizing its intentions is actually Russian President Vladimir Putin. Does he have an interest in turning against his ally in Syria just because it’s important to Israel? I seriously doubt it.

The conclusion is clear: Only a comprehensive American-Russian agreement over Syria's future, which would ban the presence of foreign forces (excluding Russian), could allow Israel to achieve its goals.

Israel should therefore focus all its diplomatic efforts on this issue. It should stop dealing with the Iran nuclear agreement, as it is unchangeable, and stop pressing the Americans to deal with it. It must only deal with what is more important, as well as attainable.

We are facing two challenges of a diplomatic nature: The simpler thing to do is to explain what the “third Lebanon war” would look like, and the more important thing is to urge the United States to reach a comprehensive “package deal” with Russia which would guarantee there will be no presence of foreign forces in Syria.  

Major-General (res.) Giora Eiland is a former head of Israel's National Security Council.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

‘Package deal’ with Putin needed against Iranian expansion : http://ift.tt/2gMTYSp

When old and new anti-Semitism come together

The Jews in the United States, we are told again and again, are in a wonderful state. Indeed, in most Jewish communities, especially in New York, the number of anti-Semitic incidents is infinitesimal. The Jews are living a good life.

But something is simmering below the surface. During Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, and over the past year as well, the radical right wing has been the main star of incidents anti-Semitic in nature. This Right should not be discounted. It was dangerous in the past, and it could be dangerous again.

Something else is happening, however, and not just below the surface. Within several days, three things happened in the United States that were completely unrelated, apart from the fact they likely won’t be recorded as anti-Semitic incidents, although I doubt anyone thinks otherwise.

Cartoon published in the Daily Californian against Alan Dershowitz

Let’s start with Alan Dershowitz, a well-known figure, who has been visiting campuses. It’s worth noting he isn’t right-wing. His worldview, in Israeli terms, would classify him somewhere around the Zionist Union. He is affiliated with the Democratic Party, and he is perhaps the finest speaker against the campaign to demonize Israel. About two weeks ago, he gave a lecture at Berkeley. A week later, the local student-run newspaper, The Daily Californian, published a cartoon showing Dershowitz addressing an audience as a liberal presenting his case for Israel, but all the audience can only see is his face. In the hidden part, Dershowitz has an IDF soldier on his palm shooting a Palestinian boy, and another Palestinian boy is being crushed under his foot. One can cry out “freedom of speech” of course, but it’s kind of difficult to hide the image of child-murdering Jews. Old anti-Semitism and new anti-Semitism in a joint performance. And it’s happening in the stronghold of progress, Berkeley. Let’s move on. Prof. Michael Chikindas of Rutgers University in New Jersey claimed recently that Judaism was the most racist religion in the world, charged the Jewish people with responsibility for the Armenian genocide, wrote about the “international fat Jewish pockets” and published more and more cartoons of hooked-nosed Jews controlling the central bank, of course. Chikindas teaches microbiology. He is also protected under the “freedom of speech.” And he too, like the Berkeley newspaper, has erased the distinction—if he ever had any—between new and old anti-Semitism.

The annual National Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) conference took place over the weekend in Houston, Texas. Their anti-Israel and pro-Hamas agenda is well known. The leading figure in SJP is Dr. Hatem Bazian, a Berkeley professor, who has been caught in the past making Islamist anti-Semitic comments. They are against any recognition of Israel. They are against peace.

So far, there’s nothing new here. But they have adopted a rhetoric which is not only anti-Zionist (the word Israel isn’t even mentioned, just “the Zionist project”), but also radical anti-American. According to them, these are two colonialist entities.

These are only signs, but they are very concerning. They are not errant weeds. Similar voices can be heard among too many academics in the US, and the situation is only radicalizing. Jews are sometimes part of the story too. They take part in the libels against Israel and add fuel to the fire of anti-Jewish hatred.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

When old and new anti-Semitism come together : http://ift.tt/2iIxMNo

New Sara Netanyahu lawsuit raises some important questions

Reading the full statement of claim against Sara Netanyahu creates a lot of discomfort. Unsurprisingly, the lawyer who filed the claim on behalf of a former employee at the Prime Minister’s Residence is the same lawyer who represented Meni Naftali and Guy Eliyahu, two former workers who sued the Prime Minister’s Office and won.

Granted, labor law is a specific field in which not many law firms specialize, but a review of the statement of claims indicates this is not a coincidence. Absolutely not. The statement of claim, in an almost declarative manner, attempts to educate the prime minister’s wife on labor laws.

The statement of claim’s wording goes way beyond professional boundaries. Throughout, for example, the lawyers chose to refer to the residence’s cleaners, who worked under Mrs. Netanyahu's supervision, as “slaves.” That is, of course, far from acceptable neutral wording in court claims, and it doesn’t appear just once. It repeats itself throughout the entire statement, dozens of times.

Sara Netanyahu. The statement of claim, in an almost declarative manner, attempts to educate the prime minister’s wife on labor laws (Photo: AFP)

Another example is the fact that the statement of claim includes a request that the court issue an order prohibiting the prime minister’s wife from acting as the supervisor of workers at the Prime Minister’s Residence without any external supervision on her. This is a particularly unusual request in light of the fact that the plaintiff no longer works at the Prime Minister’s Residence.

These are just two examples that generate a feeling this is not a regular statement of claim. This isn’t a legitimate attempt by an employee to demand the financial rights she claims she has been robbed of, or to receive compensation for mental difficulties or abuses she experienced. This is a well-timed, calculated campaign.

Its purpose is, first of all, to keep tarnishing Sara Netanyahu's public image and, moreover, to personally harm her. This is also why, unlike previous statements of claim, this one is personally directed at Sara Netanyahu.

For the same reason, it is personally directed at three of Benjamin Netanyahu's senior employees, although their only connection to the matter is as part of their work with the prime minister.

In spite of all these warning sirens, however, we must honestly admit that even if only a quarter of the allegations included in the statement of claim—after removing all the unnecessary harsh words—are true, we have a real problem here. If this is the way things are conducted at the Prime Minister’s Residence, this isn’t simply a private matter of the Netanyahu family and its personal surroundings.

There are two high-ranking officials in Israel entitled to an official residence in the full sense of the word, the prime minister and the president, as there is no real separation between their personal and public life. The public is personal and the personal is public. So if this is the way life is conducted at the Prime Minister’s Residence, it’s difficult to see how this fact doesn’t carry any public meaning.

The unpleasant feeling raised by the statement of claim can’t serve as a barrier against raising the questions it raises to a public debate. At the end of the day, this is the residence where the prime minister hosts world leaders, this is the residence where he performs a considerable part of his work, and this is the residence which gives him personal and public backing. This is why, whatever happens, the results of the current lawsuit are so important.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

New Sara Netanyahu lawsuit raises some important questions : http://ift.tt/2gStJgZ

It’s time to change Israel’s provincial defense policy

It’s as if the headlines were taken from the previous century: The Syrians fire rockets at open areas, Israel destroys Syrian cannons in response, the Iranians threaten to deploy Shiite forces in Syria, Israel announces “red lines” and threatens a military conflict, Fatah and Hamas hold futile talks on a unity government, the prime minister declares Israel is suspending talks with the Palestinians, and everyone here applauds the security and political echelons. There, we showed them the meaning of deterrence.

 

But what we are seeing here is a provincial defense policy, a false representation of a leadership that barely sees beyond the tip of its nose and is busy putting out fires day and night.

It’s a leadership that sees national security through a narrow regional viewpoint. It’s as if everything beyond Hezbollah, Hamas and Iran doesn’t exist. It’s as if the world around us hasn’t changed in the past decades, and we are stuck in the era of aggressive solutions in the form of reward and punishment as the main political-security activity.

Israel's political-security leadership: IDF Chief of Staff Eisenkot, Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defense Minister Lieberman (Photo: Motti Kimchi)

The current political-security echelon isn’t solving problems, isn’t dealing with problems, but simply postponing them, passing them on to the next generation with the use of force.

The Israeli security worldview, if there is one, was consolidated somewhere in the Cold War era. There were two world powers at the time—the United States and the Soviet Union—which had complete dominance over the production and use of nuclear weapons. Over the years, the two powers formulated rules for the game that created mutual deterrence. At the time, the chance of a local clash in any corner of the globe sparking a nuclear conflict was low.

In the Six-Day War and in the Yom Kippur War, the Russians threatened to use a nuclear weapon to curb Israeli achievements. But they were likely unwilling to enter a nuclear conflict with the Americans over that. But times have changed. Today, the world has nine nuclear countries. They are active in different arenas, in places with different rules of the game, and they are threatening to use their nuclear weapons in local conflicts as well. Take India-Pakistan, for example. There are no clear rules of the game today, no control over the number of missiles capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. The Pakistanis aren’t bothering to produce missiles they can neutralize after the launch, in case of a mistake, and no one understands North Korea’s logic. It’s no wonder Japan and South Korea are on the verge of becoming nuclear states, and the Iranians are following in their footsteps.

Atom bomb hits Hiroshima during World War II

The world is a much more dangerous place in terms of the nuclear threat compared to the 1960s and 1980s, and it will become even more dangerous over the next decade, when other countries join the nuclear club. Such an explosive world requires a great amount of caution, in every corner across the globe. When you strike in Syria, you must take into account it could cause a regional and even global chain reaction. A crisis between India and Pakistan, or a nuclear crisis between the US and North Korea, can have ramifications on Israel as well.

In such a situation of an unclear nuclear game, countries rely less on the use of military force for solving problems, and more on the use of “soft force”—all the systems that won't lead to an explosive chain of events to achieve political goals: Diplomacy, media and economic leverages, psychological warfare, cyber warfare, the secret activity of special forces and intelligence agencies, use of low-signature systems to target the enemy and maintaining strategic ambiguity so as not to force the enemy to respond. In other words, Less tanks and more thought.

But Israel isn’t there yet. It isn’t by chance that Israel was excluded from the nuclear agreement with Iran, and that it’s being excluded from the agreement in Syria—it’s because Israel is not properly using the “soft” measures at its disposal—if at all—to reach diplomatic-regional achievements. And when you fail to implement soft abilities, the only option left at your disposal is to bomb three Syrian cannons out of an old habit and creating an illusion among the public that you solved a problem.

Israel does have “soft” abilities. Pushing Hamas into the Egyptians’ arms and pushing the Muslim Brotherhood away from Gaza is an example of a strategic achievement that was the result of proper economic and diplomatic moves. We don’t always have to bang our head against a brick wall.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

It’s time to change Israel’s provincial defense policy : http://ift.tt/2iduSMz

Gabbay’s settlement stance strips far right of its threatening weapon

Last week was Avi Gabbay’s week. If his views were unclear until now, it seems the new Labor chairman is finally shaking up the party. He may not be a seasoned politician, but seasoned politicians aren’t characterized by leadership or independent thought. They know how to take care of themselves. They don’t generate change.

Gabbay’s two statements—that there’s nothing connecting him to the Joint List, so he won’t sit in the same coalition with the Arab party, and that peace doesn’t require an evacuation of settlements—stirred a row in the left-wing camp, both the Zionist and the less Zionist, although he stated the obvious. Assuming Gabbay won’t be deterred by the criticism, what we are seeing here is the beginning of an interesting move.

The Zionist left, we should remember, has moved further to the left in recent years. When Labor Party members defend radical left-wing organizations, under the guise of freedom of speech, freedom of speech is clearly just an excuse. None of them spoke with similar empathy about Lehava, with arguments from the freedom of speech department. Only recently, Tel Aviv Mayor Ron Huldai participated in a show organized by the anti-Israel left. That’s how one scores an own goal.

Avi Gabbay understands what the Labor should have understood a long time ago (Photo: Motti Kimchi)

In a healthy democracy, the big parties don’t escape to the margins. The Labor Party doesn’t have to compete for the Joint List’s slot or for Meretz’s slot. It needs the votes of people who support a diplomatic compromise but who vote for the Right because they loath the Left’s radicalization. Yesh Atid leader Yair Lapid understood that a long time ago. He adopted a clear policy, which has been subject to countless slurs, and that’s exactly what pushed many Labor voters and some right-wing voters in his direction. Gabbay possibly, just possibly, understands what the Labor Party should have understood a long time ago, and that’s definitely refreshing news.

How dare you reject a national minority party, Gabbay was asked by Daniel Blatman, a history professor from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, who noted that Jewish parties in Poland were rejected by politicians between the two world wars.

What a lousy comparison. Were there people like Knesset Member Hanin Zoabi among the Jews who were active in Polish politics at the time? Did the Jewish party identify with people working against Poland’s actual existence? Did they preach against Jews joining the polish army? Did they refer to the recruits as “lepers”?

The right comparison, if you’re already making one, is with the Sudeten German Party (SdP)—a nationalistic, separatist Czech party which became pro-Nazi and operated from within the state against the state’s actual existence. The Joint List isn’t Neo-Nazi, God forbid, but it’s too close to the same patterns of action. It doesn’t want a partnership with the majority. It has trouble condemning anti-state terror. It even refused to sign a surplus-vote agreement with the Jewish Meretz party.

Blatman forgot to say that he is a veteran supporter of the racist party himself, but he attributes racism to those refusing to legitimize the racist party. George Orwell once said that some ideas are so stupid that only an intellectual could believe them. The history professor provided us with further proof of that.

According to the outlines for peace supported by the Labor Party, most settlers are supposed to stay put, as they live within the settlement blocs which will remain under Israeli sovereignty in any future agreement. That leaves us with some 100,000 settlers. One has to be a complete fool to think that the State of Israel is going to evacuate them by repeating the disengagement move. It barely succeeded last time. It won’t happen again.

The outposts were built in a bid to turn the difficulty to evacuate them into an obstacle to any agreement. In order to reach an agreement, therefore, we actually need to remove forced evacuation from the agenda. Gabbay’s statement strips the radical right of its threatening weapon. You don’t want to vacate? Fine. We won’t let you take us hostage, and we won’t let a radical minority won’t force anything on the majority. More than he irritated his friends from in the Left, Gabbay adopted a direction harming the radical right.

And anyway, if and when a peace agreement is signed, god willing, a million and a half Arabs will remain part of Israel. So it won’t be that bad if 100,000 Jews remain within the boundaries of the entity that will exist there, in any kind of agreement. If the State of Israel can contain an Arab minority making up 20 percent of the population, then an Arab entity—either Palestinian or Jordanian-Palestinian—can contain Jews making up two to three percent of its population. It isn’t clear that they will want to stay there, but it is clear that there is no need to enter a forced evacuation trap.

The expansion of the settlement project is a crawling disaster ahead of the creation of a binational state, but the forced evacuation idea is a fantasy we must let go of too. Not in order to thwart an agreement in the future, but in order to increase the chance for an agreement.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Gabbay’s settlement stance strips far right of its threatening weapon : http://ift.tt/2iEpdmJ

In long run, Israel favors secular Assad over Shiite Islamist regime in Syria

The map of the civil war in Syria has changed dramatically over the past few months. The Islamic State’s collapse gave all parties—the Syrian army, the Turks and the Kurds—a chance to seize lands that were under the Sunni terror organization’s control.

Bashar Assad’s army controls nearly two-thirds of Syria, following about two years in which forces loyal to Russia and pro-Iranian forces fought side by side. But as the moment of truth draws nearer, the question is: Do Russia and Iran share the same goals? And what is the Israeli and Saudi stance on the issue?

Unlike Israel-US relations, Russia and Iran share no values whatsoever. Russia is a sort of secular dictatorship, and Iran is a religious Islamic country. The future of the interest-based cooperation between these two countries in Syria is unpredictable.

Russia wants secular Assad’s regime to continue and has no problem with its dictatorial nature, as long as it maintains its absolute loyalty to Moscow (Photo: AFP)

Iran and Russia relations experienced many ups and downs over the years. After the Islamic Revolution in 1979, Iran severed ties with the Soviet Union and even referred to it as “the lesser Satan.” From 1980 to 1988, Russia helped Iraq in its war against Iran. The revolution began after the Soviet Union’s dissolution, when Russia built Iran’s nuclear reactor in Bushehr in 1992.

Russian President Vladimir Putin upgraded the relations between the countries and signed many agreements with Iran in the military and energy fields. The fact that both countries were subject to hostility and sanctions from the United States and the West only brought them closer together. The crisis in Syria created, for the first time, a military coalition between the two countries and between their protégés—the Syrian army and different Shiite militias.

The conflicts of interest between Russia and Iran emerged, however, at the start of the direct Russian involvement in Syria in the summer of 2015. The repeated ceasefires declared by Russia were regularly violated by the Shiite militias supported by Tehran. Russia realized its Iranian partner had no interest in an agreement, but only in a military takeover, using the advantage gained by the “resistance axis” (the “makauma”) over the Sunni opposition for the first time since 2015.

Russia, on the other hand, is willing to settle for an agreement that would end the war and secure the Syrian army’s advantage, allowing Moscow to sustain its naval and air bases in northwest Syria over a long period of time. Russia and Iran’s long-term conflicts of interests are more fundamental and have to do with the definition of the nature of the post-war Syrian state. Russia wants secular Assad’s regime to continue and has no problem with its dictatorial nature, as long as it maintains its absolute loyalty to the Russians and keeps purchasing Russian weapons as it did before the war.

New alliance? Russian President Putin with Saudi King Salman

Iran, on the other hand, has far-reaching aspirations concerning Syria and it won’t settle for restoring the situation to its previous state. As far as Tehran is concerned, Syria is part of the “Shiite project,” in which the entire southern part of Syria, including some of its capital, Damascus, would turn into a base of Hezbollah and Afghan and Iraqi militias under the Revolutionary Guards’ supervision. Iran is interested in creating a land corridor from its territory to Lebanon through Iraq and Syria, as well as in opening a new front against Israel in the Golan Heights. The way Iran sees it, the future state of Syria will be under the influence of Shiite religious clerics, who the Alawi sheikhs will be subject to as well. The past two years have seen Shiite ceremonies being held in public for the first time in Damascus, which used to be the heart of the Sunni world. Russia doesn’t want to discover that it launched a war on Sunni Islamic terror it launched only for it to be replaced by a new Shiite Islamic entity. Russia is aware of the fact that Iran took advantage of its intervention in favor of the Syrian regime to settle scores with Sunni organization based on Shiite religious revenge.

Russia isn’t interested in a continued involvement of Hezbollah, Iran’s main protégé, in all the wars taking place in Syria. Rather, it is interested in bolstering the Syrian military’s wing that is under its command. Moscow is thus making an effort to dissolve the militias loyal to the Assad regime and get them to join the Syrian army, hoping to secure Russian control of the areas conquered from the moderate rebels and from ISIS and to prevent Iran from seizing these lands. In the past two years, Russia established two new brigades in the Syrian army for that purpose, and it is providing the army with weapons, training and even medals for merit.

Although it won’t admit it, Russia is following Hezbollah’s takeover of entire quarters in the main cities of Aleppo and Damascus, and the establishment of Hezbollah’s permanent bases along the border with Lebanon on Syrian soil, with great concern. The Russians believe there are units within the Syrian army that are under Russian control but obey the Revolutionary Guards. These units could turn into rivals at the end of the war.

Putin and Netanyahu. Russia is turning a blind eye to the Israeli bombings of Hezbollah posts (Photo: AFP)

The Iranian aid, which saved the Syrian regime from 2012 to 2014, is basically no longer needed since the summer of 2015, when Russia became directly involved in the Syrian civil war. Now that the Syrian army is growing and being led by the Russians to occupation and victory in most parts of Syria, the Iranian involvement is turning into a burden. Iran is interested in receiving a return for its huge sacrifice and financial investment in the Syrian regime since the beginning of the crisis. But, as we know, there are no free gifts.

Meanwhile, since the war isn’t over yet, Russia is demonstrating its loyalty to its Iranian ally. ISIS hasn’t been completely eliminated yet, and there are other serious problems in northern Syria which require a continuation of the Russian-Iranian cooperation.

In the northeastern arena, the Kurds scored a huge achievement recently with the occupation of the city of Raqqa, the Sunni terror organization’s capital in Syria, and are about to progress in full force to Deir al-Zour, Syria's oil center, where they are expected to clash with the Syrian army. This is another area where there will likely be a clash between the Russians, who are willing to consider a compromise with the Kurds, and the Iranians, who see the Kurds as “agents of the Zionist enemy” and a threat the fulfillment of the “Shiite project.”

The Revolutionary Guards. The Iranians want to get a return for their sacrifice and financial investment in the Syrian civil war (Photo: EPA)

In the northwestern arena, Turkey was put in charge in the Astana talks of maintaining the Idlib province, near Turkey’s Hatay province, as a “deconflict zone.” Instead, Turkey has used the situation to bring its forces and protégés, the Syrian rebels from the Free Syrian Army, into the province. The Syrian regime responded furiously, stating Saturday that it sees the move as a military invasion of Syrian territory. According to the Assad regime, instead of fighting terror, Turkey is invading the province in full coordination with Fath al-Sham (formerly the al-Nusra Front) jihadists, who control most of the area.

In fact, Russia is indirectly harming forces loyal to Iran. The best example is its full coordination with Israel and the recent cementing of its relations with Saudi Arabia.

The fact that Russia is turning a blind eye to the Israeli bombings of Hezbollah posts in Syria is quite puzzling in light of the alleged honeymoon between Russia and Iran. Its warming relationship with Saudi Arabia is another indication that Russia is looking into new options for the day after the war in Syria. Saudi King Salman visited Russia for the first time about two weeks ago. This was a surprising move in light of the fact that Saudi Arabia supports the Syrian opposition. Russia is well aware of the fact that the countries capable of helping in Syria's reconstruction after the war are Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states—not Iran. Saudi Arabia, on its part, is interested in isolating Iran and driving Russia further away from it. The Iranians were undoubtedly concerned by the talks between Russia and Saudi Arabia, which focused on drafting economic agreements and signing arms deals. Saudi Minister Thamer al-Sabhan’s comment last week, that there is a need to create an international coalition against Hezbollah, received no response from Russia.

Iranian supreme leader Khamenei and Turkish President Erdogan. Syria accused turkey of illegally invading its territory (Photo: AFP)

Dealing with a Kurdish force which already sustains an autonomy in northern Syria and is supported by the US army requires Russian cooperation with Washington. The possibility that, in the long run, Russia will favor the US over Iran as a partner for the division of control over Syria must not be ruled out. Unlike Iran, the US has no demands concerning the area beyond the Kurds’ control. Russian-American coordination would prevent a tough war between Kurdish-Arab organization The Syrian Democratic Forces and the Syrian army. Iran is aware of this option, which is why it vetoed an American participation in the talks in the Astana conference, a move which was criticized by Russia. A particularly explosive bone of contention between Russia and Iran is Russia’s willingness, as it negotiates with the moderate rebels, to accept the idea of evacuating the foreign militias from Syria. In March, a Russian newspaper reported that during the Astana conference—in which Russia, Iran and Turkey discussed Syria's future—the Russians offered to supervise Hezbollah’s evacuation from Syria. According to the proposal, in the first state Hezbollah would be allotted an area where its forces would be concentrated, and in the second stage the fighters would return to Lebanon.

The fall of Aleppo, the opposition’s capital, in early 2017 marked the end of the revolt that began in Syria in March 2011. All parties came to terms with the bitter fact that after all the victims and suffering, the war in Syria was about to end with a complete failure for the rebels. The Syrian regime wasn’t toppled and the option of replacing it no longer exists. Post-war Syria won’t be a democracy, but it won’t be an Islamic emirate either.

Commentators in the Arab world are now defining the unexpected situation taking shape in the Middle East in general and in Syria in particular as a “card shuffling.” Russia and the moderate opposition are upholding ceasefires for the first time since the beginning of the war, and meetings are taking place between former rivals—Saudi Arabia and Russia, Turkey and Russia. What will the new ties lead to? Will the Russian-Iranian alliance break up at the end of the battles in Syria? No one knows. But Saudi Arabia and Israel have already indicated to the Russians that they would rather see a Russian Syria than an Iranian Syria.

Dr. Yaron Friedman, Ynet's commentator on the Arab world, is a graduate of the Sorbonne. He teaches Arabic and lectures about Islam at the Technion, at Beit Hagefen, and at the Galilee Academic College. His book, "The Nusayri Alawis: An Introduction to the Religion, History and Identity of the Leading Minority in Syria," was published in 2010 by Brill-Leiden.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

In long run, Israel favors secular Assad over Shiite Islamist regime in Syria : http://ift.tt/2gHVZPG

Netanyahu's right-wing noise machine

If it were up to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli government would have let the reconciliation agreement between Fatah and Hamas pass without too much drama. A faint, laconic response, such as “we’ll follow and examine,” would have definitely reduced the strain on Netanyahu's energies, which are mostly dedicated at the moment to his investigations. 

But Netanyahu failed to consider the fact that there is someone in his government who won’t let it go: Bayit Yehudi leader Naftali Bennett, along with Likud Minister Ze’ev Elkin. The two have made it their goal to prevent a retreat from a previous cabinet meeting made in 2014.

Netanyahu and Bennett. Who’s the most right-wing of them all? (Photo: Emile Salman)

At the time, after Operation Protective Edge, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas reached a reconciliation agreement with Hamas and established a government of technocrats without Hamas members, so as not to affect the US transfer of funds to the Palestinian Authority.

Israel could have said at the time that since it wasn’t a unity government with Hamas, a peace process could be pursued. But it didn’t. Although the cabinet included ministers like Yair Lapid and Tzipi Livni, and although negotiations were being held at the time, the decision was to halt the talks if the conditions set down by the Mideast Quartet were not accepted.

 

Netanyahu, it should be noted, was much more aggressive at the time than he was last week. He defined the Palestinian Authority as a government of terror and launched an international campaign against it—an action which vastly differed from the statement he released before last week’s cabinet meeting, which was very moderate.

But Bennet launched a PR campaign, a real media blitz, demanding that the cabinet adopt and reaffirm the 2014 decision, which states that the Israeli government would not negotiate with a Palestinian government supported by Hamas. Bennett, as always, managed to rein Netanyahu in, while the prime minister is still licking his wounds from the Temple Mount metal detector affair.   Bennett’s demand to convene the Political-Security cabinet was accepted. It was an unusually long meeting—two days of discussions with senior defense establishment officials, which ended with a decision justifying the long meeting. On the face of things, the decision doesn’t change anything, as there have been no negotiations for a long time and there are none in sight either. But it’s dramatic, because it has implications on relations with the Americans, who have been trying to restart negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. Granted, special envoy Jason Greenblatt did issue an American statement backing the cabinet decision and noting that Hamas must disarm and recognize Israel. But when it comes to the Americans, who knows how long this policy will last. In any event, the decision wasn’t made easily. There were other proposals and different directions in the cabinet, from not responding at all to “we’ll see what happens first and then decide.”

Fatah and Hamas representatives sign reconciliation agreement in Cairo (Photo: EPA)

There’s no other way of defining what happened at the cabinet except as a clear victory for the Right. Bennett and Elkin got everything they wanted. The interesting thing is that the decision wasn’t supported by an absolute majority of the ministers. If Netanyahu had wanted to adopt a more moderate policy, he could have. He didn’t seem keen on the outcome. He seemed to have had different intentions. But during the discussion, his main concern was ensuring that Bennett wouldn’t be perceived as more right-wing than him. On the other hand, this decision is simply a copy of the one made in 2014, with a few other conditions added by Bennett, like a return of the missing soldiers and civilians from Gaza and a demand that Hamas cut ties with Iran. In 2014, the cabinet included moderate ministers like Livni and Lapid. Netanyahu could have argued this time, rightfully, that he had no other choice but to agree to what his two partners had agreed to in the past. At the time, however, Abbas accepted the Quartet terms and said they must be adopted by any partner in his government. In this case, the cabinet wants the conditions to be accepted by Hamas, not by the Palestinian government. This is the first time Israel sets a precondition stating that it will not hold negotiations with a government supported by Hamas. The decision adopted by the cabinet last Tuesday has three possible consequences: Abbas will either disarm Hamas or dissolve the reconciliation agreement, or neither. And if it’s the third option, it means there’s no point in the Americans sending the special envoy here anymore. The Israeli government is basically rejecting US President Donald Trump’s ultimate deal. It will be very hard to change a government decision which reinforced a clear Israeli stance. The cabinet decision reflects Netanyahu's attempts to atone for the decline in his status among the Right since the Temple Mount fiasco. He is repeatedly launching right-wing missiles into the air, knowing that none of them will hit their target—but that they’ll all make noise. This includes, for example, his demand for a parliamentary commission of inquiry into the funding of left-wing NGOs, which was hindered by the Knesset’s legal advisor last week. What we are seeing here is a right-wing noise machine, like the rubble crushers. Netanyahu apparently believes that if he keeps launching right-wing initiatives—even if they have no chance of succeeding—he will be seen as right-wing.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Netanyahu's right-wing noise machine : http://ift.tt/2lifHXl

Hezbollah's leader in the Golan exposed

Munir Ali Na'im Shaiti, the person entrusted by Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah in charge of the Syrian Golan Heights from Damascus to the border with Israel, is the man who will, to a great extent, sketch for Hezbollah the plan for the next war on the Syrian front.

Shaiti, 50, was given the nickname Haj Hashem in the course of his long service in Hezbollah during which he, among other things, ordered the 2002 shooting attack at Kibbutz Matzuva which caused the deaths of six Israeli civilians.

During the Second Lebanon War he commanded a combat force against the IDF and since then has accumulated extensive operational experience.

Munir Ali Na'im Shaiti, circled in red

In June 2016, Nasrallah decided to appoint Shaiti to head the organization's southern front of the Syrian civil war, which Hezbollah has been involved in since 2011—fighting alongside the Assad regime because of their fear of ISIS and with the intention of preserving the organization's assets in the country.

His promotion took place after Mustafa Badreddine, who was Hezbollah's supreme military commander in Syria, was assassinated—allegedly on Nasrallah's orders. Yedioth Aharonoth, which first published the story after details on Shaiti were revealed, noted that "exposing the details about Hashem was meant to signal to him clearly that he was marked by Israel … (and that—ed) his fate is likely to be like that of his predecessors." It doesn't seem that farfetched, either. As part of his job, Shaiti is in charge of one of the most contentious sectors in the region, where there is coordination today between Iran, Hezbollah and the Assad army, on the border with Israeli territory considered "occupied" by all three, and where the various Hezbollah units carry many kinds of operational activities.

Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah (Photo: AFP)

Sources in Israel estimate that a total of 8,000 fighters are currently on Syrian soil. So far, some 2,000 militants have been killed there, and once the fighting in the area ends, the forces are supposed to withdraw back to Lebanon. While the IDF and Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman are debating who shot rockets at the Golan on Saturday, the person who apparently knows for sure the identity of the culprit is Shaiti, who is responsible for sending the drone to intelligence missions in the Golan a month ago, which was eventually intercepted by an Israeli patriot missile.

Israel is interested in Shaiti both because of his past special operations for Hezbollah and because of his current role in Syria, and it seems that he's well aware of that.

Shaiti is cautious, prefers to lay low and remain fairly anonymous—which he has successfully done so far, as Wednesday marked the first day that his name or picture was published in the news.

It can be reasonably assumed that exposing the details about Shaiti sent a clear message that if he continues his activities, he is liable to meet the same grim end as his predecessors.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Hezbollah's leader in the Golan exposed : http://ift.tt/2xq8JBb

Israel’s next challenge: Precision-guided missiles in Gaza

The Iranian issue has recently made its way back to the top of the global agenda in general, and the Israeli agenda in particular: Starting from US President Donald Trump’s threats to walk away from the nuclear agreement, through Tehran’s involvement in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen and the warming relations with Hamas, to the growing presence of Revolutionary Guards’ representatives on the Golan Heights border.

Looking at this list as it grows longer, many Israeli defense officials believe the most significant challenge concerning Iran these days has to do with the potential for self-production of precision-guided weapons—converting simple rockets, through wingtip devices and other components, into missiles that are capable of hitting their target with an accuracy of some tens of meters. In light of the tight connection to Hezbollah and the improving relations with Hamas, this a very troubling weapon as far as Israel is concerned.

Rockets in the Gaza Strip. An Iranian upgrade coming soon? (Photo: Reuters)

The knowledge required for upgrading the missiles already exists, and Iran’s military industry factories are advanced in this field. In addition to its expansion in the region, Iran intends to produce rockets in Syria too and set up a factory in Lebanon to perform the conversion into precision-guided missiles.

This plan isn’t limited to the Lebanese-Syrian arena. Iran wants to build similar factories in Yemen for its allies, the Houthi rebels, who still control different areas, including the capital of Sanaa, and are in a war against the Saudi-led coalition and the forces of Yemen’s official president, Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi.

On this background, Israel is watching the Gaza Strip with a great amount of concern: As part of the warming relations with Hamas, Iran will likely seek to produce precision-guided missiles in Gaza too. Only recently, during a visit by senior organization members to Tehran, the Iranian foreign minister’s advisor, Hussein Sheikh al-Islam, promised that “Iran will give Hamas whatever Hamas asks for and Iran can comply with.”

At the moment, there is no concrete operation taking place in Lebanon, Yemen or Gaza, but the planning and thought do exist. According to foreign sources, the Israel Air Force occasionally strikes in Syria to prevent the transfer of components and weapons aimed at helping in Hezbollah and Iran’s effort.

Furthermore, the Israeli defense establishment is concerned by a possible deployment of Iranian elements and pro-Iranian forces in the Golan Heights, a move which is likely only in its infancy. It’s still unclear who was responsible for the rockets fired into Israel from Syria on Saturday. In any event, the Syrian Golan Heights is currently filled with a mixture of elements: Some of the areas are controlled by the regime (especially in the northern and central Golan), other areas are in the hands of rebel groups sitting just along the border in the central Golan, and the ISIS-affiliated Khalid ibn al-Walid Army is waiting on the tripoint in the southern Golan.

The Syrian regime is trying to regain areas in the Golan. There have been many reports recently on massive bombings carried out by the regime near the town of Beit Jann, at the foot of the Syrian Mount Hermon. Syrian President Bashar Assad appears to be progressing in a relatively fixed manner, which has been successful in other areas in Syria too: Shelling and an ongoing siege on a village until its residents surrender.

A Russian soldier in Syria. The Kremlin seeks to avoid an escalation with Israel (Photo: AP)

A key role in this battle is played by Russia, the dominant element in the area known as “Assadstan” (the areas controlled by the regime, although they don’t necessarily have an abundance of members of the Alawi sect which the tyrant’s family comes from). The Russian goal is likely to reach an agreement and restore the Syrian regime’s control in the Jordanian and Israeli border areas. As Russia has no desire to create an escalation with Israel, its interest is to pressure Iran and Hezbollah to dilute their forces in those areas. The problem is it still needs their forces as the rebels have yet to be fully eradicated. Despite many reports of cracks in the relations between Russia, Iran, Hezbollah and the Assad regime, the cooperation continues as all parties share the same interest: To secure the Assad regime’s survival. It’s clear, however, that each party has different interests and different aspirations. Russia is interested in preserving its port on the Syrian coast in the Mediterranean Sea. Iran is interested in expanding in Syria and creating a platform against Israel. Assad may be more committed to Tehran than in the past, but contrary to the prevalent opinion, he has yet to open all doors to them and has yet to completely give up his assets.

The Iranian military’s chief of staff, General Mohammad Baqeri, who visited Syria (Photo: Reuters)

An interesting example emerged during a recent visit to Damascus by the Iranian military’s chief of staff, General Mohammad Baqeri. While the visit received wide media coverage, the agreements with the Syrians were apparently only in principle and no official contracts were signed.

The fourth element in the equation is Hezbollah, which has invested—and is still investing—many resources in the civil war in Syria, led by its elite unit, the Radwan force. The involvement in Syria has already cost the Shiite organization 2,000 fighters, almost three times the number of Hezbollah fighters killed in the Second Lebanon War.

In the past few years, it has often been reported that Hezbollah is pulling its forces out of Syria, but the organization is still there, and as its leader Hassan Nasrallah says, his people will be present wherever they are needed.

A Hezbollah show of force in Syria

Nevertheless, they have likely started to think about the day after. It seems Hezbollah isn’t interested in continuing its massive presence in Syria, but rather in diluting its forces. An Iranian presence in the area, along with a reduction in the Russian presence, will be convenient for Nasrallah, who will have no problem stationing his people in observation posts on the Golan Heights, and this situation should concern Israel in any event. The organization has yet to appoint a replacement to the head of its military wing, Mustafa Badreddine, who was mysteriously assassinated in May 2015 in the Damascus Airport. The two people running Hezbollah’s efforts in Syria these days are believed to be Nasrallah himself and the commander of the Revolutionary Guards’ Quds Force, Qasem Soleimani, who is already being defined by some people as Iran’s “sanctum” in the Middle East.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Israel’s next challenge: Precision-guided missiles in Gaza : http://ift.tt/2lgzTZE

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

: http://ift.tt/2esBqp1

Welcome to the golden age of Bibism

The basic philosophies of modern politics, the famous liberalism and conservatism, were officially joined this week by Bibism.

 

Addressing the Knesset, and not for the first time, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu explicitly expressed how he sees the political world he wants to live in, the ideology which is the most important thing during his years in power. It’s a world based on flattering the leader and his regime, a world in which criticism is a crime, free thought is sourness, and ingratiation and sycophancy are a way of life.

This world spins on the axis of the Bibist worldview, which is a sort of hybridization between battered and unconscious liberalism, proclaimed but unimplemented conservatism, blatant egoism and a lot of opportunism.

The Bibists’ main goal is to amend and adjust reality to their own needs. In other words, to the needs of their omnipotent leader (Photo: Reuters)

While the liberals pursue personal liberty, secularization, absolute freedom, equality, human rights and separation of powers, and while the conservatives seek to preserve the current situation and to avoid causing any confusion through revolutions, the Bibists’ main goal is to amend and adjust reality to their own needs. In other words, to the needs of their omnipotent leader.

Everything is flexible and open to changes. There are no sacred cows. Everything that can be changed, to make reality more convenient for us to handle, matters. Everything that has to be destroyed/ruined/spoiled is open for discussion. And if you resist, you’re traitors. It doesn’t matter how much it costs, as long as no one stops us from doing what we want.

President Reuven Rivlin spoke Monday about the death of stateliness. Rivlin is optimistic and slightly naïve. Stateliness did not die a natural death. It was brutally murdered years ago. Its bleeding body has been lying for several terms now on Israeli democracy’s floor, and no one cares—definitely not the fans of Bibism, who enjoy being close to the leader.

Stateliness, after all, has no room in Bibism, because it hinders. It prevents the deceptive use of racism and incitement, it forbids creating a rift for the sake of a rift, spewing hatred for the sake of political gain and spreading lies and libels against police investigators, judges and journalists.

That’s why stateliness was murdered. Because it got in the way of implementing the Bibist ideology, which refers to legal offenses as “gifts” and to other offenses as “takeaway food.”

Stateliness wouldn’t have allowed the invented buses heading nowhere in droves or the birth of leftist traitors who are bringing the Islamic State to the Western Wall. These contemptible lies, alongside other contemptible lies that pop up every two hours, would have been unacceptable in a world where there is still room for stateliness. But they flourish just fine in Bibism.

The Bibists see nothing wrong with anything they do. They’re okay, more than okay. All they want to do is “make a change,” “balance,” “fix.” They’re never trying to destroy, Heaven forbid—not the media, not the police, not the courts. They aren’t threatening anyone with personal bypass laws. No way. It’s only the president, who hardly has any official authorities, who’s intimidating. He’s the biggest threat. Because he’s setting off the village’s alarm bells.

Bibism isn’t conservatism, and it’s definitely not liberalism. There is nothing from these famous ideologies in the modus operandi of Netanyahu's inner circle. They act according to pure Bibism, a new ideology lacking any basic guidelines apart from submissiveness to the leader’s whims.

The Bibists shout that they’re rightists, but they have nothing to do with the original Israeli Right. Absolutely nothing. A real conservative Right seeks minimum governmental involvement in day-to-day life. Bibism seeks to be involved in everything, to determine everything, to tell every person what he’s allowed and isn’t allowed to say or do.

Bibism supports coercion, whether through legislation or through dictation. The president of the State of Israel, who voices his concern over the attempt to undermine all the foundations of Israeli democracy, is a threat. The rest are sourpusses. The Bibists are the only ones who are right.

Welcome to the golden age of Bibism.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Welcome to the golden age of Bibism : http://ift.tt/2xlqYHK