Jihadist terror needs no excuse

It was the deadliest terror attack since the 9/11 attacks in the United States 16 years ago. At least 305 people were murdered. Had 30 people been murdered in a terror attack any European city, the attack would have likely received much more coverage by the global media. Because when Muslims massacre Muslims, it doesn't mean as much to the world. It’s a lot less moved. Even worse is the fact that the massacre was immediately followed by explanations: The Bedouins in Sinai, according to commentators, are deprived by the Egyptian government. Poor things. They’re just reacting. With all due respect to the different experts and commentators, they have lost their mind. Are you serious? Is that an excuse for such a murderous massacre? Is that the reason for intentionally firing on infants, women, children, elderly people—hundreds of innocent people? Is government deprivation, assuming there was deprivation, the reason? Why, the only sin of those who were murdered was that they were there, within the jihadists’ reach.

How can deprivation be an excuse for such a murderous massacre? (Photo: Reuters)

We’re also being told that it happened in a mosque which belongs to the Sufist sect, and that’s becoming an excuse too. What does that have to do with anything? Islam has many sects. The Sufists are Sunnis. Many of those who come to pray at Sufist mosques don’t even belong to the Sufist sect. Is that the reason? Only a week ago, 58 people were murdered in the Nigerian town of Mubi. It happened inside a Sunni mosque, neither Shiite not Sufist. Jihad doesn’t need any excuse. The arguments and explanations provided by the different commentators and experts are a mockery of a tragedy. They castrate the truth. Because inasfar as the deadly results of jihadist terror can be followed, more than 95 percent of its victims are Muslim and nearly 70 percent are Sunnis murdered by Sunnis. So the glaring truth is that a weed has grown within Islam, and murder is its flag. Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna, formulated this ideology in 1938 in an article titled “The industry of death.” And no, this isn’t a battle against heretics. Quite the opposite. In fact, as a community becomes more devout, the level of victims in that community rises. After all, the Sharia laws have already been imposed in the areas where jihad is operating in northern Nigeria. And the Taliban murders masses of Sunni Muslims, although they haven’t sinned and haven’t deprived and haven’t denied religious principles. On the contrary, they have become even more religious. Taliban suicide bombers have repeatedly detonated explosives in crowded markets in Sunni-populated areas. Most of the victims have been children and women wearing burkas.

(Photo: MCT)

There are other deprived groups in the world. Aren’t there deprived Christians in Africa? Of course there are. Haven’t Jews been persecuted and deprived wherever they lived? Aren’t the Copts deprived in Egypt? Aren’t the Romani people deprived all over Europe? Aren’t black people deprived? Oddly enough, none of these groups has produced a sect engaged in organized, worldwide murder. There are no Romani or black jihad cells. And the Jews didn’t launch an endless campaign of revenge against the Germans.

The jihadists, on the other hand, have turned to murder and are receiving PR ranging from explanations (in the worst case) to justifications (in the even worse case). It starts with those who explain that it’s a response to deprivation, and it’s aggravated by those who explain that it’s the West’s fault for mistreating the East. It’s an illness which is common among some of the progressive circles, which have become jihad’s allies.

The Swedes should be punished for their involvement in Afghanistan, wrote suicide bomber Taimour Abdul Wahab, who tried to carry out a mass terror attack in Stockholm. Famous Swedish writer Henning Mankell responded in an article filled with self-guilt and self-denigration: The West is committing crimes; jihad is simply responding. That was the spirit of many scholars’ reactions following the terror attacks in the US. They are hurting us, they explained, because we’re wrong. Excuse me? The West harmed black people, Jewish people, Romani people, and they didn’t produce groups of murderers. These “experts” are so captivated by post-colonialist theories that it’s hard to confuse them with facts. The jewel in the crown of foolishness belongs to Miko Peled, a former Israeli, the son of Major-General Matti Peled, who tweeted: “As we mourn the loss of innocents in northern Sinai we must remember that this terrorism is a direct result of the regional instability caused by (Egyptian President Abdel Fattah) al-Sisi and his criminal collaboration with Israel.” The problem is that Peled is a popular lecturer in respected forums. And so, the “circles of progress” will keep providing empty explanations, and the Muslims will keep paying the price.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Jihadist terror needs no excuse : http://ift.tt/2AofQPg

The new peace partners and the next war

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Analysis: A new kind of peace is taking shape before our eyes between Israel, Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. No longer cold, indifferent and hostile, peace is hiding in the highest places of the government echelons. Together, the new peace partners are learning to assess the dimensions of the next conflict, which will likely be the worst we’ve ever experienced. The new peace partners and the next war : http://ift.tt/2nglMEE

As though it were only yesterday

There are few success stories in history like the 70 years of the State of Israel, certainly in the recent generations.

I remember the night of November 29 as though it were only yesterday. Since then, we’ve only had a few joyful moments. As a child, I remember the groups of dancers on the streets and the vehicles that crossed the streets of Tel Aviv, chanting “Aliyah hofshit, medina Ivrit!” (Free immigration, a Hebrew state).

Celebrating UN vote on November 29, 1947. There are few success stories in history like the 70 years of the State of Israel (Photo: Hans Fine, courtesy of IDF Archive at the Defense Ministry)

I also remember the silence that prevailed the following day, as an Egged bus was attacked near Petah Tikva and its passengers were killed. Among the dead was an acquaintance of my family, Pnina Federman, may her memory be a blessing, who was one of the first people to die for the State of Israel on its first day.

Seventy years have passed and the State of Israel still exists, and there is no other country like it in the entire world. We are an unusual economic success story, an inconceivable success story in military and security policy, a place where every Jew would like to live if it were possible.

Thirty-three states voted for the State of Israel’s establishment 70 years ago. Today, the United Nations includes some 200 members, and most of them were not even states at the time. Although we suffer greatly from the UN and the Security Council Resolutions, we must thank this international institution, which was founded after World War II, for its agreement and willingness to establish a state for the Jewish people.

On that same occasion, the UN suggested and sought to establish an Arab state alongside the Jewish state. The Arabs made an unforgivable historic mistake in turning down the Partition Plan. The mistake was inconceivable, and we are lucky that David Ben-Gurion imposed his will and agreed to the advancement of a Jewish state. The Arabs kept living under illusions and believing that they would defeat the State of Israel, but they were defeated themselves—and this defeat too led to the great wonder called the State of Israel.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

As though it were only yesterday : http://ift.tt/2ij9jOI

‘Recommendations bill’ a possible obstruction of legal proceedings

On Wednesday, Israel will mark 70 years since the United Nations General Assembly voted in favor of the partition of the British Mandate of Palestine into two states, a Jewish one and an Arab one.

Nothing that takes place in the Knesset can and should spoil the natural joy over the Hebrew nation’s independence. But 70 years later, it’s hard not to think about the short distance between the main headlines “A Hebrew state” and “Disgrace,” between the dancing on the streets and the opened champagne bottles.

The purpose of the “recommendations bill,” which passed its first reading at the Knesset on Monday, after aggressive physical pressure from the coalition, is not just to interfere with the media coverage of the criminal investigations involving Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Its real purpose is to disrupt the work of the police and State Attorney’s Office, and weaken the position of police investigators—those who sat in front of the suspects in these affairs and are more familiar with the smallest details in Netanyahu's investigations than anyone else.

Is the prime minister trying to disrupt his investigation by enacting a law at the Knesset? That’s a question only the police can answer (Photo: AP)

This isn’t my own estimate. These are the words of State Attorney Shai Nitzan, who is firmly against the “recommendations bill”: “We firmly oppose the bill and consider it extremely harmful… The public must understand that the police and the State Attorney’s Office work hand in hand. Hearing the opinion of the investigator in the case is highly important.”

Police Commissioner Roni Alsheikh made the following comment about the bill: “When it comes to a State Attorney’s Office decision, the police don’t submit recommendations but rather a summary of the case, indicating where there is evidence for an indictment and where there isn’t… The results of an investigation cannot be published without summarizing it first.”

Yedioth Ahronoth reported recently that the state attorney and the attorney general had said in closed forums that “the bill barring recommendations from investigations is a critical blow to the police’s investigation work.”

Who visited the office of Knesset Member David Amsalem, the bill’s initiator, while the bill was being discussed? The prime minister’s chief of staff, Yoav Horowitz. Amsalem said Horowitz was there to “fry schnitzel and cut salad.” He was definitely there for a salad—to turn Israeli democracy into a salad.

It was clear to every member of the coalition that the “recommendations bill” was directed by the Prime Minister’s Residence, which made sure that it would also apply to investigations that have already begun, including Netanyahu's investigation. If that isn’t the case, why was Kulanu leader Moshe Kahlon forced to support a law he clearly doesn’t approve of? To satisfy MK Amsalem? If the prime minister has no problem promoting this law, why do his people keep stressing that he’s not involved in it?

We have a person here who is suspected of criminal offenses, fraud and breach of trust, and perhaps even bribery. His people are actively promoting a law that will affect the ability of the State Attorney’s Office to make a proper decision on an indictment. There is an explicit name for a person suspected of criminal offenses who tries to disrupt police investigations, whether on his own or through anyone else. And it is also considered an offense according to criminal law: Section 244 of the Penal Law states that “a person who intentionally tries to prevent or disrupt a legal proceeding or lead to obstruction of justice, whether by thwarting the summoning of a witness, concealing evidence or in any other manner, shall be liable to three years in prison.”

The attorney general, the police commissioner and the state attorney all agree that the “recommendations bill” harms the police’s work, and the coalition agrees that the prime minister is behind this bill. Is the prime minister trying to disrupt his investigation by enacting a law at the Knesset? That’s a question only the police can answer. It should be clear to the law authorities, that with all the inconvenience involved in this matter, they must launch an investigation into the obstruction of legal proceedings and summon the prime minister’s people, the prime minister himself and the bill’s initiators (MKs David Bitan and David Amsalem), and hear exactly which conversations were or weren’t held.

We should also take note of the coalition’s statement that Netanyahu will not take part in the vote due to “a suspected conflict of interest.” Even they understand how problematic this developing situation is. We are witnessing a criminal act, but bringing the criminal threshold to a debate actually reduces the severity of the whole issue. It brings down the fundamental discussion. And this is its essence: The “recommendations bill” is a deep low and a complete loss of a sense of shame.

Had Ehud Olmert initiated such a law as a prime minister suspected of criminal offenses, the road to the Knesset would have been blocked by thousands of right-wing protestors in an effort to stop the vote, and rightfully so.

Only the public can save the State of Israel’s book of laws from this stain, and primarily Likud and Kahlon supporters who refuse to accept this stench. The Land of Israel is bought with pain, but democracy is bought day after day with the red lines drawn by its citizens, through the feedback they give the MKs they voted for. This is where we must draw a bright red line. The number of the Knesset switchboard, by the way, is 972-2-6753333.

Nadav Eyal is Channel 10's chief international correspondent. 

Let's block ads! (Why?)

‘Recommendations bill’ a possible obstruction of legal proceedings : http://ift.tt/2ie0o0T

‘Recommendations bill’: Not unconstitutional but highly problematic

The “recommendations bill,” which bars police from making recommendations on indictments and passed its first reading at the Knesset on Monday, will likely lead to a constitutional imbroglio if it is enacted into law in its current form, sources in the legal system believe.

 

Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit would still be able to ask the police for an opinion based on an amendment introduced to the legislation Monday, allowing him to request recommendations in specific cases such as the investigations against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but the recommendations would not be made public due to the limitation imposed by the law.

After the bill passes its third and final reading, its constitutionality will likely be challenged by the High Court. Yesh Atid leader Yair Lapid has already announced his intention to file a petition against the law.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit (Photo: Marc Israel Sellem)

The law will likely be struck down by the High Court for three reasons. The first is inequality—the fact it distinguishes between two types of suspects: Public figures, who the police are forbidden to submit recommendations on at the end of an investigation, and common people, who the police are allowed to submit recommendations on.

Two additional reasons are the fact this is a retroactive and personal law, which is being enacted for Prime Minister Netanyahu and will apply to investigations that have already begun. Israeli law isn’t “fond” of retroactive legislation, and all the more so legislation for specific people, as senior as they may be.

Nevertheless, sources in the legal system note that Mandelblit hasn’t deemed the law unconstitutional at any stage, although he firmly opposes it and sees it as a law aimed at protecting Netanyahu. In case of a High Court petition, the attorney general will likely be tasked with defending the law to the court.

At the end of the day, the bill does include some amendments made at the attorney general’s request. One of them is that he would be able to use his discretion in regards to whether and when to probe leaks of investigation findings. Another softened clause is a “transitional order,” which states that in the interim period, in all the investigations that had already begun by the time the law was approved, the attorney general would be able to ask the police to submit their recommendations to him even though they would not be made public.

“It’s an unwise, illogical, annoying and foolish bill,” a senior Justice Ministry official said Sunday. Other senior officials said Mandelblit could still use his authority and ask the investigation team in Case 1000, which focuses on allegedly illicit gifts received by Netanyahu and his wife from billionaire benefactors, to hand over its recommendations, but those recommendations would not be made public. Mandelblit may choose to do so, they said, in a bid to speed up the analysis of the findings and recommendations and reach a decision on the case.

Prime Minister Netanyahu will likely find himself in an absurd situation in the coming months, and he may even lose more than he gains. The “recommendations bill,” which aims to prevent the publication of police recommendations in his criminal investigations, may not only fail in preventing their publication but may even increase the rumors, reports and commentaries on the police’s findings against him.

Like in the Soviet Union, when a police investigation is completed and the investigation material is handed over to the State Attorney’s Office, the country would be filled with rumors and the different media outlets would compete over who publishes more of what they manage to collect. If the law is approved, every public figure would go through this from now on.

Mandelblit with Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked. The attorney general could still ask the police to hand over their recommendations (Photo: Motti Kimchi)

As a result, the public could be exposed to inaccurate or untrue information, and the police, the supervising attorney and even the attorney general would be barred from telling the public that the published information is wrong, even if it includes suspicions that were actually refuted in the investigation. And so, until an indictment is filed or until the case is closed, the public figure will be under a cloud of suspicions and rumors. While the “recommendations bill” may not be unconstitutional, it is highly problematic. The State of Israel raises the banner of the public’s right know, excluding issues of privacy protection and possible harm to state security. The bill basically undermines not only the public’s right to know but also its duty to know. Former Chief Justice Moshe Landau stressed in his rulings that citizens have the right to know as much as possible about the state’s leaders before making a decision on who to vote. Before casting its vote, the public must be aware of the offenses the police believe a party leader or any other candidate running in the elections should be indicted for. The “recommendations bill” further violates two of the biggest taboos in Israeli and Western law: Personal laws and retroactive laws. In this respect, the “recommendations bill” is fully adjusted to Prime Minister Netanyahu's needs.

The law is also expected to increase the foot-dragging in the State Attorney’s Office decision-making process. The lack of recommendations in a public figure’s investigation, which holds political and national ramifications in the case of an incumbent prime minister, would only push the final decision further away.

The team of attorneys handling the case would be forced to analyze the evidence from the very beginning, come up with a clear and coherent picture and form their recommendations ahead of a decision—a process that could take many months and even years and lead to major obstruction of justice.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

‘Recommendations bill’: Not unconstitutional but highly problematic : http://ift.tt/2AhpjWg

The Israeli embrace of ‘Zionist anti-Semites’

Last week, the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) hosted Stephen Bannon, US President Donald Trump’s senior advisor until recently, for a festive dinner.

The invitation was met with harsh criticism. Many US Jews see Bannon as a radical right-wing ideologist and as an anti-Semite. But ZOA President Morton Klein claimed Bannon was “a great friend of Israel and the Jews.” That’s what he was told by Israeli Ambassador to the US Ron Dermer, he said.

For a long time now, official Israel and the American liberal Jewry have been on a course of collision on issues of state and religion, on matters related to “the quality of Israeli democracy” and on the “occupation” issue.

Stephen Bannon, President Trump’s former chief strategist. A ‘great friend of Israel and the Jews’? (Photo: AP)

Former US President Barack Obama, who was perceived as representing the liberal Jewish stance, said that in the battle against anti-Semitism “we are all Jews.” But the Jewish American right and the Israeli government want to erase the Obama legacy. For them, saying “we are all Jews” is essentially different from saying “we are all Israelis.” This statement focuses on anti-Semitism and on the memory of the Holocaust as universal lessons, and indirectly indicates that right-wing Israel is on the problematic site in the battle on universal values.

Jerusalem is no longer preoccupied with the “Jewish weaknesses” of the Diaspora and with the past. State officials are talking about reinforcing a strong State of Israel, and any attempt to restrain the Judea and Samaria settlements is perceived as betrayal.

When the alliance between the Jewish American right and the pro-Israel Evangelical Christians was born in the 1980s, liberal Jews raised an eyebrow: They had always thought the Evangelicals were dangerous, as they seek to convert the Jews after the “resurrection of Jesus.” But the Jewish right in America and in Israel is no longer afraid of the “old anti-Semitism.” Abraham (Abe) Foxman, the former leader of the Anti-Defamation League, said to me during the second intifada: “We have an alliance with the Evangelical Christians, and when Jesus the messiah arrives we’ll discuss religious conversion.”

ZOA’s praise for Bannon expands the pro-Israel circle in the American right, while driving the American center away from Israel. Many Jews, including conservatives, harshly condemn what they see as the Israeli alliance with “Zionist anti-Semites.” Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Bret Stephens wrote in the New York Times that the alliance between the Jewish right and Bannon was a disgrace on a historical level.

The relationship between the American right and the Israeli right is throwing the liberal Jewry into a state of anxiety, and the American Jews affiliated with the center feel they are being pushed by Israel beyond the boundaries of the Zionist consensus, while at the same time being exposed to the threats of the US nationalistic right. As a result of the fact that there are people in Israel who define progressive Jews as accomplices of Israel’s haters, the relations with America’s Jews have become quite explosive.

The Israeli government is indeed focusing exclusively on “the new anti-Semitism,” the one affiliated with those who support the BDS movement and refer to Israel as “an apartheid state.” All the “old anti-Semitism” issues are being pushed aside. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has no sympathy for liberal Jews, who have become in his mind a foreign element among the Jewish people.

It’s interesting that the greatest fear of right-wing Israelis is President Trump and his plan to lead a two-states-for-two-people solution. In their battle against Trump, elements in the Israeli right are enlisting the “moderate” Bannon, who is fighting for the Greater Land of Israel, which he binds with the vision of bringing the Judeo-Christian forces together with the national (white) elements in the United States. Bannon fits like a glove to Jerusalem's right-wing hand, and the authorization it gives the right-wing ideologist as “a lover of Jews and Israel” strengthens him in the US.

Is it possible that liberal Jews will eventually see President Trump as the person who will execute a peace plan in the Middle East that could bring them back to the Jewish-Israeli consensus? Is it possible that Trump, who is perceived by progressive Jews as an anti-Semite himself, will become their last barrier against “the Zionist anti-Semites”? Who knows, the Messiah may arrive after all.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

The Israeli embrace of ‘Zionist anti-Semites’ : http://ift.tt/2AfCCpW

The fake Shabbat crisis

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Op-ed: If the coalition components—including those who speak so eloquently on Shabbat’s behalf—cared about the Jewish day of rest, they would have worked to reach agreements on its actual nature in our public space. But this is a debate they are so afraid of, they won’t even touch it with a stick. The fake Shabbat crisis : http://ift.tt/2icli0u

It’s time to demand recognition of Israeli sovereignty in Golan Heights

US President Donald Trump will soon present his initiative for solving the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Meanwhile, alarming agreements are taking shape in Syria between the United States, Russia and Iran concerning the deployment of forces near Israel’s northern border. The Israeli response to the Trump initiative should be a demand for an international recognition of Israel’s sovereignty in the Golan Heights and a demand for a comprehensive agreement, which won’t allow the presence of Iranian and Hezbollah forces in the Syrian Golan Heights, west of the Damascus-Suwayda road and south of the Damascus-Beirut road. Israel, in return, would pledge that a fulfillment of these two demands would pave the way for practical negotiations with the Palestinian Authority.

Israel-Syria border in the Golan Heights (Photo: EPA)

Israel has good reason to demand a stabilization of the northern border as part of a preliminary diplomatic move. This is more urgent and important than reaching agreements with and making concessions to the Palestinian Authority. In the Oslo Agreements and later on, Israel made significant concessions and offered even more significant concessions, while the PA didn’t offer and didn’t provide a thing in return, and even committed terrorism against Israel. The little that was achieved was the security cooperation, and that only happened after Yasser Arafat’s death. Now, with a proposal for renewed negotiations as part of the comprehensive regional agreement with the moderate Arab states on the table, it’s time to demand something in return before offering further compromises. This return could be a recognition of Israel’s sovereignty in the Golan Heights and security arrangements on our northern border. It will make it much easier for the Israeli government and the Israeli society to move towards another agreement with the PA, and it isn’t an obstacle to negotiations with the Palestinians.

The major changes the Middle East is going through and the results of the brutal civil war in Syria have changed the states’ borders, and these borders won’t go back to what they were since the Sykes–Picot Agreement. Now is the time to set the line established in the 1974 Agreement on Disengagement as the international border between Israel and Syria.

With a diplomatic effort and proper PR activities, we will succeed in enlisting the support of the moderate Arab states, which see terror-spreading Iran as the threat to stability in the Middle East. Trump’s sympathy towards Israel and his desire to reach a foreign policy achievement in the Middle East, while Syrian President Assad is weak and dependent on Russia and on President Vladimir Putin, create a rare opportunity to make good out of a bad situation.

Instead of keeping up with the negative reactions, instead of constantly being dragged, Israel should see Trump’s proposal as an opportunity to start initiating again. We have a chance to demand and gain international recognition of Israel’s sovereignty in the Golan Heights, and it’s an opportunity we must not waste.

Major-General (res.) Amiram Levin is a former IDF Northern Command chief.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

It’s time to demand recognition of Israeli sovereignty in Golan Heights : http://ift.tt/2ABrwP7

Shabbat train crisis: A reflection of Haredi sector changes

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Op-ed: Ultra-Orthodox politicians like Litzman, Deri and Gafni are torn between the expectations of their elderly rabbis and the expectations of the Haredi street, which are fueled by commercial websites and Haredi radio stations. The new Haredi world is populist, demagogic and verbally aggressive, and it is dragging the rabbis along with it. Shabbat train crisis: A reflection of Haredi sector changes : http://ift.tt/2k1EM8O

Islamic State’s war of survival against a helpless Egyptian army

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Analysis: After losing its territorial strongholds in Syria and Iraq, ISIS feels it must prove that it still exists as an idea and as an armed force across the universe, and the Sinai massacre serves its strategic goals. The Egyptian army, with its unsuitable fighting methods and lack of accurate intelligence, has yet to learn how to deal with the murderous organization. Islamic State’s war of survival against a helpless Egyptian army : http://ift.tt/2i88ubw

The Middle East just keeps bleeding, with no end in sight

Everything is stuck. The past weekend proved we shouldn’t expect a dramatic changeover in the Middle East anytime soon: The Russians have yet to curb the internal unrest in Syria, the Egyptians have been unsuccessful in pushing the Islamic State organization out of Sinai, and the Cairo talks revealed there is no real sign of reconciliation between the Palestinians. It’s all just manipulations of the public opinion, wishful thinking, headlines that don’t hold water, and empty documents, like the ones that came out of the Sochi summit about Syria and from the Palestinian factions’ summit in Cairo. The Middle East is stuck in the same place, and bleeding. After people already eulogized ISIS and declared the Islamic State’s collapse in Syria and in Iraq, its members bathed northern Sinai with the blood of more than 300 Egyptian citizens over the weekend.

Friday's mosque attack in Sinai. Egypt created the impression that the elimination of the ISIS threat was already in the horizon (Photo: Reuters)

We have been hearing for weeks now that the blows ISIS suffered in Sinai and the agreements between Egypt and Hamas have weakened the terror group in the peninsula and cut its number of fighters by half. The Egyptians boasted of their work in the past year vis-à-vis the Bedouin tribes in Sinai, which included investments in infrastructure and in tourism and providing workplaces for the Bedouins in Egypt itself and in the Canal cities. Egypt created the impression that eliminating the ISIS threat in Sinai was already on the horizon. On Friday, it turned out it was an optical illusion. The Egyptians didn’t really change their national list of priorities and didn't really stop neglecting the remote province in Sinai. Friday’s massacre must serve as a wake-up call for the Egyptian authorities. Without recruiting the Sinai population for the fight, the Second Field Army will keep marking time and bleeding there for many years to come. Just like the Syrian army, the Russian army and their allies—the Turks and the Iranians—will keep marking time in Syria in an effort to put out the fires of civil disobedience, jihadist movements and the Kurds.

The summit organized by President Vladimir Putin in Sochi last week with his two partners to the “victory” in Syria—Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani—was dubbed by some in the Russian media as “the second Yalta Conference.” In the first conference, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, US President Franklin Roosevelt and Russian Prime Minister Joseph Stalin divided Europe after World War II. Here they divided Syria. Vive la difference.

From left to right: Rouhani, Putin and Erdogan in Sochi last week. Conflicting interests won’t allow an agreement (Photo: Reuters)

The results of the Sochi summit were a meaningless document, filled with words of bragging, declaring that the three leaders are hoping for “UN-sponsored, democratic and transparent elections in Syria”—which goes to show that nothing realistic will come out of there. According to Russian sources, there were more disagreements than agreements there. Additional meetings will be held in the near future between the foreign ministers and chiefs of staffs, who will try to come up with an acceptable plan that will serve the three parties’ interests. The meeting planned for this week between representatives of the Syrian tribes, which were supposed to reconcile with the Assad regime, was also postponed to late December.

  

At the same time, the Russians keep planting their feet in every place in the Middle East that they can find a foothold. Russian Foreign Intelligence Director Sergey Naryshkin paid a rare visit to the Palestinian Authority and to his counterparts in Israel over the weekend. What is he doing here? Where in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are the Russians trying to plant their feet? The Cairo summit produced empty declarations as well. It was a conference between 11 Palestinian organizations discussing a position paper that was likely worded by the Egyptian intelligence services. None of the organizations signed the paper, and they aren’t committed to it in any event. The purpose of the conference was to give a real push to the reconciliation process, with the cherry on the top being regular opening of the Rafah Crossing. That didn’t happen. Just like the civil control of the Gaza Strip hasn't really been handed over to the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah. The announcement that came out of the summit about holding general elections in the PA by the end of 2018 isn’t worth much either, as Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas can postpone it as much as he wants. So whoever feared Russian-Iranian-sponsored peace and tranquility in Syria can calm down. There is no agreement in Syria, the Americans aren’t leaving yet, the partners to the “victory” have conflicting interests that won’t allow an agreement leading to governmental stability, and the civil war will break out again. Those who were concerned about a Palestinian reconciliation agreement can heave a sigh of relief too.

Because of manipulations by political leaders and the illusion of a solution among the Palestinians in Gaza, Israel must prepare for the possibility of a violent outbreak, mainly from the strip, in light of the population’s frustration and shattered expectations.

And in Sinai, as people here warned after it lost its territorial strongholds in Iraq and in Syria, ISIS will turn into a murderous organization that will mainly target civilians wherever it succeeds in planting cells and expanding.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

The Middle East just keeps bleeding, with no end in sight : http://ift.tt/2k2yS73

Iranian axis threat that led Lieberman to seek increased IDF budget

The demand from the Ministry of Defense and Minister Avigdor Lieberman for additional budgeting is only the tip of the iceberg, the top of which pokes out on occasion in the media and in the political arena. The iceberg itself is change—for the worse—in the threat the Israeli home front faces in case war breaks out on the northern border.

  While the defense establishment estimates the Iranians and their proxies, Hezbollah and Syria, can cause a far greater loss of life and material damages to the Israeli civilian and military home front than they could mere years ago, with the worst still yet to come.

In two or three years' time, threats to the home front will become graver. The main reason for this eventuality is not the increase in the number of rockets, missiles and mortars Iran and its satellites may rain on Israel, but rather the deadly effectiveness of such an attack, far more precise than ever before, and hitting Israel on two fronts: the Lebanese and Syrian ones. As a result, casualties—both civilian and military—may increase by hundreds of percents.

Chief of Staff Eisenkot (L) and Minister of Defense Lieberman offer differing views on the defense budget (Photo: Ariel Hermoni/Ministry of Defense)

This would appear to be the main catalyst for Lieberman's request to supplement his ministry's budget with billions of shekels more.

Lieberman's request to break out of the confines of the defense budget is the minister's first major independent initiative since he was appointed in May 2016.

While IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot and top army brass are not opposed to the move, they have thus far offered only halfhearted support for it publically. Senior army officials concur with Lieberman and the ministry's officials on the gravity of the new potential threat the Iranian axis poses to the home front. Indeed, the estimate was originally put together by the IDF's Military Intelligence Directorate and Planning Directorate. However, the top army brass believes the IDF already possesses the means and the methods to tackle the worsening northern threat head-on, and it would therefore be imprudent and unjustified to undercut the budgetary equilibrium struck by the IDF thanks to the Gideon multiyear plan, which was achieved after exhausting negotiations between the finance minister and Lieberman's predecessor Moshe Ya'alon. Motivating the requested NIS 3.8 billion (net) increase to the defense budget are three strategic developments that came into force in the past two years, which adversely affect the country's security standing. The first development is the so-called "precision revolution," which the Iranians and their proxies attempt to inject into their munitions component. Instead of "static fire" based on a large number of missiles, rockets, artillery shells and mortars—a large portion of which will either hit low-value targets or miss their mark completely—the Iranian axis is moving on a smaller arsenal of munitions of different types, all of which are calibrated to hit high-value targets. Either direct hits or hit landing within several meters of a relatively small number of "quality targets" will inflict casualties and damages of a strategic military or functional civilian nature far, far graver than the thousands of imprecise missiles and rockets (representing "static fire") lobbed by Hezbollah at Israel during the Second Lebanon War, for instance. Simultaneously with improving the projectiles' precision using GPS and other means, Iranian military industries are also hard at work to increase their warheads and range. Adding hundreds of kilograms more of conventional explosives to a rocket or missile's warhead increases its destructive potential and number of losses it can cause with a direct hit. Increasing the range then enables to move rocket launch pads further back in Syria and Lebanon—and even Iran—to areas the Israeli Air Force will be hard pressed to attack.

Iranian militias proliferate in war-torn Syria

The second strategic development we've witnessed is the Syrian theater, recently (re)appearing in Israel's northern front. Should Iran make good on even some of its intentions to increase its foothold in the war-torn country, the next war will probably display a coordinated, cohesive action by Iranian, Syrian and Lebanese firing forces operating against Israel from the northwest in Syria and north in Lebanon.

These firing forces will not be many, but they will be more precise. This effectively means the IDF will have to split its main offensive effort in twain. Instead of a focused, simultaneous effort hitting all of Lebanon from the air, ground and sea to paralyze or suppress projectiles lobbed by Hezbollah at Israel, the army's command will have to send the air force and maneuvering land divisions to attack not just in Lebanon but also in Syria. Such an attack will also be waged not merely at Hezbollah—now attacking on two fronts—but also at the Syrian army and whichever forces Iran stations in Syria. All of the aforementioned forces will come together—according to Iran's strategic vision—to rain precise fire on central Tel Aviv and the Kirya army headquarters base, the Haifa oil refineries and ammonia tank, as well as many more "quality targets" on the Israeli home front. The third strategic development to hamper our ability to defend ourselves is the Russian military presence in Syria. Without going into too much detail, it may be said Russian boots on the ground limit the air force's abilities as far as neutralizing projectile launch pads in Syria and Lebanon is concerned. The air force will now have to consider Russian radars and antiaircraft batteries already stationed in Syria, as well as cutting edge antiaircraft missiles—such as the SA-22—Russia has already sold to the Syrian and Iranian armies and will assist them in operating, it may be reasonably assumed.

The Russian military presence in Syria complicates matters for the IDF (Photo: AP)

It's entirely possible access to some far-off targets of long-range missile launch pads in Syria will be blocked off due to Russian measures capable of forewarning the Syrians and Iranians, which means Israeli aircrafts will need to fly longer and more dangerous routes to reach their targets. Israel will find it hard, for example, to attack military air bases or sites where Russian army personnel are present—Putin does not appreciate his men being in harm's way. The bottom line is that in the not-too-distant future, the IDF will find it difficult to powerfully and efficiently mount the offensive operational plans on land, sea and air with the intention of paralyzing or substantially reducing casualties and damage inflicted by Hezbollah, Iran and Syria on the Israeli home front.

The conclusion is self-evident, then: the Israeli home front is in dire need of added protection and shielding. Active rocket and missiles defenses developed in Israel have proven to be immensely successful. It's unparalleled in the world when it comes to successful interception. This is, therefore, the first item that needs boosting in light of the escalating threat.

If Israel's enemies already possess several hundreds precise missiles and heavy rockets, it would be fair to assume there will eventually be hundreds such projectils aimed at Israel. Based on the above assumption, the number of intercepting missiles carried by the IDF's missile-defense systems must be increased, especially as it pertains to missiles carried by the David's Sling system and the Arrow 2 and 3 missiles intended to handle heavy rockets and precise ballistic missiles.

An Israeli Arrow missile (Photo: Ministry of Defense)

Why? Because more precise Iranian, Syrian and Hezbollah rockets and missiles will almost certainly find their mark, and David's Sling and Arrow batteries will therefore be required to launch more than one interceptor at each missiles fired to ensure a hit. That will cost money, true, but the damage each precise Iranian projectile can inflict on a quality Israeli civilian or military target will be far more costly, without even going into casualties. Another implement that needs to be purchased and whose price only soars is precise and sophisticated armaments, remotely-operated aircrafts and other intelligence systems for the air force, all of which will allow it to handle the number of targets it will be required to hit in far-flung environs, hampered as it is by the Russian military presence and the building up of the Syrian-Iranian antiaircraft arsenal. In addition, Israel must consider the possibility that when such fire is aimed at our home front, the air force will not be able to operate at full force for different reasons, whether due to inclement weather conditions or because the Russians and Iranians pull some kind of rabbit out of their hats. The IDF's ground-based fire deployment must be endowed with the same precise destructive capabilities possessed by the air force. That is, precise medium- and long-range missiles and rockets with relatively heavy payloads.

Lastly, the army must double its capabilities to plan and carry out cyber-based attacks.

The IDF's cyber warfare capabilities must be boosted (Photo: IDF Spokesperson's Unit)

  

Defense Minister Lieberman, IDF chief Eisenkot, and other senior army officials all concur on the necessity of the above measures. But since this threat to the home front is still in the future—grave though it may be, it is still considered potential—the IDF believes the necessary procurement may be spread out over a year or two with the bulk of expenses absorbed by the current defense budget. The army further maintains that budgetary stability—so difficultly won—is an important asset in effective, orderly building (one planned for years in advance) of the IDF's powers. The budgetary system's basic elements of stability, then, should not be thrown out of order. Lieberman, on the other end, says he favors an improved home front defense in the present over the uncertainty of the IDF's offensive plans and other capabilities developed as part of the Gideon multiyear plan. The minister of defense is thus seeking additional budgets, and it's certainly easy to see why. As a high ranking political official, he must first and foremost ensure civilians and home front functioning are done minimal harm, even at the expense of the otherwise worthy principle of endowing the army with years' long budgetary stability.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Iranian axis threat that led Lieberman to seek increased IDF budget : http://ift.tt/2zn9Pi7

#MeToo likely to end up like Breaking the Silence

We live in an era of swift changes in social norms. It’s too early to tell if what we’re seeing is the dawn of a new day or the headlights of a derailed train. One thing’s for sure: It’s a fascinating process.

 

In the United States, Donald Trump’s victory in the presidential election challenged a series of sacred liberal cows. Some blame identity politics, which has sanctified every minority and sub-minority, every ethnic color apart from white and every gender apart from straight men; some blame political correctness, which dictated to people what they can and can’t say, against their nature.

Millions of Americans saw Hillary Clinton as a symbol of the arrogant, detached elite, imposing foreign values. Trump may be a reckless clown, but the rebellion against the liberal elite is absolutely authentic.

Some say we have gone too far. We have lost the people, and we must find our way back. And there are those who say: On the contrary, instead of fearing the revolution, let’s take advantage of it. That’s one of the explanations for the tremendous success of the #MeToo project, in which women accuse influential men of harassing them.

The #Me Too campaign in Israel. The goal is sacred, but the means are not so sacred (Photo: Shutterstock)

As expected, these battles are reaching Israel too. Sometimes, something happens to them on the way, like in the Labor leader’s case. Avi Gabbay is adopting an identity politics, as long as it focuses on one identity. In an interview he gave me last week, he said that was the way to attract traditional voters. “I’m the identity,” he said, specifying why: He is the son of Moroccan Jews, he comes from a working-class family, he grew up in a transit camp, he knows what a Shabbat meal looks like and he has succeeded in life.

Gabbay is a Trump-style leader, sort of.

Another charged issue is freedom of speech—a sacred value in America. Up until Trump’s rise to power, it resided in the sanctuary of the liberal Left. Today, it resides in the Right. We’ve had enough of political correctness, Trump says, we’ve had enough of silencing. There are some fine people among the neo-Nazis too. They have a right to hold parades, they have a right to speak out.

The battle is mainly being waged on campus. Sigal R. Ben-Porath is an Israeli professor of education at the University of Pennsylvania. She heads the Committee on Open Expression, which helps students voice their opinions without endangering or offending their friends. Her recently published book, Free Speech on Campus, describes the challenge of dealing with the new era. Radical groups from the Right and from the Left are fighting for their right to incite against other groups, while simultaneously demanding that the university silence rival groups and lecturers. Ben-Porath presents a series of ways to maintain freedom of speech without excluding the rival.

Sometimes it succeeds, sometimes it doesn’t, like Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely’s case. After her Princeton University speech was cancelled following protest from left-wing Jewish students, she returned to Israel offended, with childish and exaggerated conclusions about the Jewish community in America. Hotovely has forgotten what it means to be Jewish.

The great defender of freedom of speech in Israel is the Supreme Court. The Right has accused the High Court of leaning to the left, but took advantage of its patience to the very end, including in the months of incitement that led up to Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin’s murder.

In the current Knesset, the Right has gone one step further: The bills proposed by its members are aimed at preventing criticism from left-wing NGOS, from journalists, from police investigators and even from the state comptroller, but maintain the freedom of speech of the neo-Kahanists. That’s what they’ve learned from Trump.

The #MeToo campaign is based on liberal values too. Women who suffered sexual harassment wish to impose a different, egalitarian culture in the relations between the sexes. The goal is sacred, but the means are not so sacred. This campaign could end up like the other campaigns waged by the American Left: Instead of improving the situation, it will evoke a counterreaction. The women’s credibility will be questioned, and it will eventually lose its impact. It will likely end up like the Breaking the Silence organization.

Veteran journalist Hadas Shtaif, one of the campaign’s leaders, gave an interview last weekend. She said she had been harassed by 40 men, no less. I hope she has 40 names, verified and well-established, written in her notebook. Otherwise, she harmed both herself and the campaign.

This reminded me of a heartwarming children’s book written by Ephraim Sidon. In the book, a grandfather tells his grandson stories. The skeptic grandson keeps reacting: “That’s impossible, Grandpa, you’re talking nonsense.”

Let's block ads! (Why?)

#MeToo likely to end up like Breaking the Silence : http://ift.tt/2Bp2csL

The takeover of Likud has been completed

Looks like we’re running out of words. We can no longer use phrases like “there’s no shame left” or “where’s the shame?” The word “shame” was dropped from our Knesset’s lexicon long ago. It’s a place that challenges the word “disgust” every single day.

 

This time, it’s about the way Knesset Member Benny Begin was replaced or deposed from the Knesset’s Internal Affairs Committee simply just because he opposed a certain section in the “second Bibi bill,” which is also known as MK David Amsalem’s recommendations bill.

This bill, which has already passed its preliminary reading, is clearly a personal bill aimed at rescuing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from a possible media and political uproar following the release of the police’s recommendations to the State Attorney’s Office in the investigations against the prime minister. If the bill is adopted by the Knesset before the police submit their recommendations, Amsalem’s law is supposed to save Netanyahu from his biggest fear: That the public will become aware of the acts that led the police to recommend an indictment.

MK Benny Begin (L) with Coalition Chairman David Bitan, who deposed him from the Knesset’s Internal Affairs Committee on Wednesday (Photo: Gil Yohanan)

After the preliminary vote, the bill was sent over to the Internal Affairs Committee, which is chaired by the bill’s initiator, MK Amsalem. As I have written in the past, the Knesset always tries to avoid a situation in which a committee chairperson discusses his own bills. But although legislation amendments are always discussed in the Constitution, Law and Justice Committee, and although the legal advisor determined that’s where the bill belongs, Coalition Chairman David Bitan made certain it would be sent to the Internal Affairs Committee.

On Wednesday morning, the Internal Affairs Committee convened to discuss the bill. Committee member Benny Begin made a few comments and finally demanded that the law would only apply to investigations that begin after it is approved.

The Internal Affairs Committee includes 15 members, six of them from the opposition. Two coalition members asked for an amendment stating the law would not apply to investigations that have already begun: Begin and Kulanu’s representative in the committee. As a result, Begin had the deciding vote on whether the bill would pass or not.

So what did they do? They deposed him.

Shortly afterwards, the Likud faction chairman, David Bitan, announced that Begin would be replaced in the Internal Affairs Committee by MK David Bitan.

There’s no way of sugarcoating this twisted story, in which the last remnant of the old Likud party is deposed from a committee as if he were just any other MK, simply because he conditioned his vote on such a controversial bill, a bill that is opposed by the law enforcement system—from the attorney general to the state attorney, who even expressed his reservations to the committee and stated the law would make the work of the State Attorney’s Office more complicated.

This day can be marked as the day the Davids completed their takeover of Likud. And all this happening after the recommendations bill, which was originally presented as a bill aimed at tackling the delay of justice suffered by common people, has been reduced to cases with a supervising attorney—in other words, cases of senior officials like Netanyahu. There is no longer an attempt to conceal the fact that this bill is a bill aimed at helping Netanyahu.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

The takeover of Likud has been completed : http://ift.tt/2zmP1XM

Hotovely Syndrome: the Israelis who are estranging American Jewry

An elephant loose in a china shop would likely cause less damage than Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely has in her wretched comments about American Jewry. Hotovely, who one would expect to know a thing or two about diplomacy, threw diplomacy to the wind with regards to internal relations among the Jewish people. And after all, why should she pay heed to the millions of Jews who for decades have been, and still are, a pillar of support of the Israeli national security. Besides, American Jews are not Likud voters. Most are not associated with her community and perhaps even believe that being liberal and enlightened, and opposing the occupation, are the most essential Jewish tenets; the complete opposite of Hotovely. So it's ok to freely disparage them, those quarter Jews, if not gentiles. Who needs them anyways?

In a closed door meeting in New York, attended by prominent members of the Jewish community and members from delegations representing "Gesher", an Israeli nonprofit organization, and the Minister of Diaspora Affairs (including yours truly), President of the Reut Institute Gidi Grinstein described the relationship between Israel and American Jewry as "the perfect storm" and added that "revoking the Kotel agreement has caused a nuclear reaction from American Jews; all their frustration with Israel's attitude towards them has burst out."

Other American Jews, among them many youths active in various Jewish frameworks, used harsher language when describing Israel, the most common term used was "a burden." "Israel is not part of our day to day existence," said students at NYU as well as young members of GatherDC, an organization comprising about six thousand Jews who live in the American capital. "We don’t really understand how Israel is connected to our Jewish identity; Israel is a tough subject so we gave up on it."

(Photo: Ehud Zwigenberg)

 

Yes, in 2017 the state of Israel has become a sort of burden to American Jews. Many don’t feel any connection to it; some believe that Israel makes them look bad vis-à-vis its policies in the territories. Those whose religious identity is important to them are even more offended because of the disdainful treatment by the orthodox religious establishment that completely avoids any dialogue or meaningful connection with the Reform and Conservative communities that make up the majority of American Jews.

In short, the relationship between Israeli and American Jews is at a breaking point and the results can be seen on the ground: fewer donations, less support for Israel among Jewish students on college campuses, fewer visits to Israel and less desire to identify as a Zionist.

As usual, instead of dealing with the problem, bridging the gap and initiating dialogue that might lessen the damage and the divide, the Israeli leadership is demonstrating weakness. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu loves to attend AIPAC conferences and use the platform to churn out another faultless English speech to the sound of applause from 20 thousand Israel supporters. But when it comes to real leadership decisions Netanyahu is mainly concerned with holding on to his seat, whether the issue is the Kotel or the conversion law.

Netanyahu, who claims to know America and claims that he understands the American character, has abandoned the second largest Jewish community in the world. He has sacrificed its relationship with Israel on the altar of his political survival and his alliance with the Ultra Orthodox parties. When the head allows itself to ignore American Jewry, what will the backbench politicians say?

And sure enough, as Tzipi Hotovely confirmed Wednesday, they will mostly spew rubbish that is bound to explode with a bang and further widen the gap between American Jews and Israel. Apparently, most of us are not very concerned with this, be it out of ignorance, jealousy or just plain shallowness, but significantly, in the most open generation in Jewish history, one of the biggest crises in the history of the Jewish people is taking place—but there is no leadership to deal with it. And Hotovely has added another bulldozer to the destruction.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Hotovely Syndrome: the Israelis who are estranging American Jewry : http://ift.tt/2zAIzRr

Israel’s leaders unjustly abandoned Hotovely for spurious political ends

The criticism to which Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely has been subjected since making remarks in which she highlighted the fact that some, though not all, Jews in the US and the Diaspora have failed to understand the complexities of Israel’s challenges is not only disproportionate and unjustified, but it is a political tactic by Israel’s politicians designed to win back favor with liberal streams of US Jewry.

 

Speaking about some Jews in the US who are critical of Israel’s policies, whether they be on construction in Judea and Samaria, or on military operations and responses to provocations from one enemy or another, Hotovely merely stated a fact. “I think the other issue is not understanding the complexity of the region. People that never send their children to fight for their countries. Most of the Jews don’t have children serving as soldiers, going to the Marines, going to Afghanistan or to Iraq,” Hotovely said.

“Most of them are having quite a convenient life. They don’t feel how it feels to be attacked by rockets and I think part of it is to actually experience what Israel is dealing with on a daily basis."

While these two statements triggered so much outrage, who can possibly argue with them?

Hotovely and Netanyahu (Photo: Ehud Zwigenberg)

Many Jews in the diaspora cast negative judgements on IDF soldiers—boys and girls—who courageously and selflessly defend that precious country about which they so readily opine. Those same Jews have absolutely no idea what the experience of being a soldier means, and the outrage that has ensued by uttering this simple fact can perhaps be attributed to collective guilt, rather than serious objection regarding its accuracy. Notably absent from the media hype that followed her interview was any context. The reports deliberately isolated one quote and distorted it for the sake of the headline and whipping up the hysteria. Hotovely was speaking in reference to the fact that a Jewish group had recently stifled free speech by stopping her from speaking at Hillel in Princeton University. She was also speaking about, as the interviewer put it, “those Jews who no longer feel they have a connection with Israel on any level.” It is no coincidence that not a single one of the main online newspapers, including the one that broke the story, saw fit to mention that Hotovely also said during her interview: “This is the home of all Jews from all streams. Everyone is welcome to come here to influence Israeli politics. Please come.” This was nowhere to be seen in the stories about the interview. Most of the Jews to whom she was referring—save those who have served in the IDF or other militaries—cannot possibly know how it feels to lie in the freezing or almost unbearably hot field for days on end, to have a tank become your home, to face a Palestinian terrorist coming to kill you, your comrades and your fellow civilians—and may they never know. When Hotovely declares that Jews who are sometimes particularly critical of Israeli policies or have become estranged from the country don’t “understand the complexity of the region” or merely notes that those very same Jews have never kissed their children goodbye as they march toward an enemy craving their blood, she is merely stating a fact. To deny it and then express rage about it reflects unmitigated arrogance. Is it really so inconceivable that a Jew living in a country, with its vast expanses stretching from the Pacific to the Atlantic, with no immediate neighbors bent on its destruction, may not understand the “complex realities” that haunt a country whose borders stretch from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River at their widest, with neighbors obsessed with achieving its ultimate demise? Frankly, the fact that the Hotovely has been forced to grovel to save her political career after making these overdue remarks, is a travesty. The din surrounding her comments could have been lowered by Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Rivlin by simply contextualizing her comments. They did not have to allow her to fall on a sword which the Kotel crisis has sharpened. The spurious anger voiced by some politicians in the government is nothing more than a political ploy calculated to mend the fractures that have formed over religious differences between Israel and liberal streams of US Jewry. Hotovely is simply the sacrificial lamb tossed onto the altar. Excessively castigating her, and possibly firing her—they misguidedly presume—could regain the favor for Israel of liberal US Jews. This, they believe, could extricate them from their political tribulations which have befallen them since the Kotel controversy.

Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely (Photo: Gil Yohanan)

The hysteria surrounding her comments is insincere and sadly lends credence to the notion that Israel is merely a subservient mouthpiece for some US Jews who, if unpleasant truths are spoken, may take umbrage at the implication that their knowledge and understanding is imperfect. Moreover, the opprobrium which has been levelled against Hotovely here in Israel is also illustrative of the fact that Israel too suffers from an extreme form of political correctness that defies logic. Netanyahu should not have said “her remarks do not reflect the position of the State of Israel” because had he actually listened to what she had said in full, he would have surely realized that—on the contrary—they precisely reflect his government’s unspoken position. Rivlin decided to throw Hotovely out into the cold when he referred to an agreement signed two years after Israel gained independence by Ben Gurion and the American Jewish Committee President Jacob Blaustein, which sought to determine the nature of the relationship between the Jewish communities of Israel and the US. “Israel represents its citizens only, and speaks only in their name,” Rivlin said as he listed what he said were some of the agreement’s main clauses. It is worth noting that Hotovely’s comments, in no way, undermined this principle. “American Jews are citizens of the US and the US alone has their loyalty,” he went on. “No side will intervene in the political decisions of the other.” Does this apply to groups like J-street? Does it apply to prominent liberal Jews who seek to defame the Israeli government and lash Israel’s Orthodox population for policies relating to the Kotel? Or is the obligation to comply with the principle strictly reserved for Israelis? Should Hotovely and any other Israeli, whether in the government or not, be compelled to stay mute on an important issue that should be brought to some Jews’ attention while a significant number of those same Jews are freely and publicly able to censure Israel—all too often unjustifiably? In an address by Jacob Blaustein at the meeting of its th AJC’s executive committee on April 29, 1950 entitled “The Voice of Reason,” he made two crucial comments that Rivlin failed to mention.

Rivlin and Hotovely (Photo: AFP, Motti Kimchi)

“The future of American Jewry, of our children and of our children's children, is entirely linked with the future of America. We have no alternative; and we want no alternative,” Blaustein said during a speech in New York. Essentially, Hotovely was simply applying this same principle to Israel. Why American Jews, not to mention Israeli leaders, should be enraged by this is a mystery. Finally, Rivlin, and indeed some Diaspora Jews who are prepared to persistently slam Israel’s domestic and military policies, would be wise to remember perhaps the most pertinent point mentioned by Blaustein in his speech about American Jewry: “We shall not assume that we know all the answers.”Hotovely should be proud of finally speaking the truth. She should be hailed, not assailed, for reminding a certain section of the Jewish Diaspora of Blaustein’s words. Israel’s leaders should be firmly backing her, and not for a moment consider sacking her.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Israel’s leaders unjustly abandoned Hotovely for spurious political ends : http://ift.tt/2zybWUq

Putin and Rouhani need Assad just as much as he needs them

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani need Syrian President Bashar Assad just as much as he needs them. That explains the urgency in inviting Assad to meet with Putin and with Russia’s security-military echelon in Sochi.

Seemingly, the Assad regime would collapse without Russian and Iranian support, which is why the Syrian president is allegedly completely dependent on them and they don’t have to consider his opinion on any issue whatsoever. Recently, however, Assad gained some trump cards. Russia, Iran and even Turkey need him to exploit the assets they have gained as a result of their military intervention in Syria. Assad is providing them with legal and international legitimization to remain in his country and to gain from economic projects related to its reconstruction. Assad is also allowing the Russians, the Iranians and the Turks to realize their strategic goals through their ongoing presence in Syria.

Assad (R) and Putin. A warm welcome in Sochi

To understand that, we should remember that the Iranians, Hezbollah and the Russians needed a formal invitation from Assad to bring their military forces into Syria and help him. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov mentioned this fact several days ago, clarifying that unlike the Americans, the Russians’ presence in Syria is legitimate because they were officially invited by the Assad regime to fight the Islamic State on Syrian soil.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani (Photo: AFP)

Now that the ISIS presence on Syrian soil has been eliminated, the Russians and Iranians have legal and international legitimization to remain in the country. The Americans have no such legitimization. The Russian and Iranian presence in Syria provides Putin and Rouhani with access to military bases in a way that allows them to control a strategic point—the eastern basin of the Mediterranean Sea—and compete over economic projects to rebuild Syria’s ruined infrastrctures and receive preference over other international competitors.

Turkey wants a share of these economic profits too and seeks to maintain its military presence in Syria to ensure that the Syrian Kurds won’t establish a state in northern Syria, on the Turkish border.

Russian boat launches cruise missiles at ISIS targets from the Mediterranean Sea (Photo: Reuters) (Photo: Reuters)

Putin needs Assad's goodwill to advance the political agreement that will end the civil war. As odd as it may seem, Assad is still insisting on selecting the opposition groups he is willing to talk to, and refuses to see the groups suggested by Russia in the joint interim government. Putin wants Assad to agree to talk to everyone. In a bid to soften him, he invited the Syrian president to Sochi two days before his meeting with Rouhani and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, in which three leaders will discuss the division of their loot in Syria.

In a bid to gain Assad's cooperation, Putin invited the generals who participated in the war in Syria—the same generals Assad owes his political survival to—to his meeting with the Syrian president. Assad got the hint, and announced that he intended on talking to all opposition groups in Syria, just like the Russians want.

Russian army truck hands out supplies to refugees in Syria (Photo: MCT)

 

Putin, for his part, announced that he intended to pull his forces out of Syria. This statement should be taken with a grain of salt. Putin has already made a similar announcement in the past, but he left enough forces to protect his interests—the Russian military port in Tartus and the airport in Khmeimim. Putin will keep it up even if an agreement is reached in Syria: He will reduce the Russian forces there to a minimum in order to maintain a strategic presence. The Iranians wish to do the same, but it’s unlikely that the Russians and Assad will give them everything they want in light of the American and Israeli objection.

When the Iranian and Turkish presidents arrived in Sochi on Wednesday, Putin can tell them that he knows what Syria wants and that he’s talking on Assad's behalf too. The most important thing is to keep Assad is happy and ensure that he agrees that Russia and Iran—and perhaps Turkey too—will receive a proper reward for saving his regime from a complete collapse.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Putin and Rouhani need Assad just as much as he needs them : http://ift.tt/2jhauec

The political campaign to break Breaking the Silence

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Op-ed: Assuming its investigation was completely unbiased, why did the State Attorney’s Office announce that Dean Issacharoff had lied about beating a Palestinian during his military service instead of announcing that the evidence against him was insufficient? How can the State Attorney’s Office determine who lied under these circumstances? The political campaign to break Breaking the Silence : http://ift.tt/2zflOOC

Why Russia must take Israel’s interests in Syria into account

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Analysis: As Putin, Rouhani and Erdogan meet in Sochi to divide Syria into spheres of influence, Israel remains the leading element capable of spoiling the party. The day the Iranian-run airport in Syria is erased, all agreements will go up in the flames ignited on the Israeli-Syrian border. Why Russia must take Israel’s interests in Syria into account : http://ift.tt/2jKeveO

Why Trump’s Mideast peace plan is doomed

Last week, in Washington, I heard from workers of research institutes that have the Trump administration’s ear that the president’s new peace initiative is about to materialize. Rumor has it that in the coming weeks it will be presented to the relevant parties.

Everything they know, and everything that has been published so far, is too vague for us to seriously address the new outline. At the moment, there is more to it than meets the eye.

But the truth must be told. Regardless of the new outline’s parameters, I can say with a great amount of certainty that the new initiative won’t lead to an agreement. On the contrary, it will hinder the chance for an arrangement, because with all due respect to Trump, he will not be reinventing the wheel, and no matter what he offers the Palestinians, their answer is predetermined. Not because the plan will be so bad. Not because it won’t give them a state. They will say “no” because it’s what they know how to say. So far, the only plan they have said “yes” to is the Saudi-Arab initiative.

US President Donald Trump (R) with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. The Palestinian response will be negative (Photo: AP)

There is a dispute over a component in the initiative that has to do with the most difficult issue—the refugees. There have been comments from Arab leaders clarifying that this isn’t about the “right of return.” Occasionally, there have even been comments from Palestinian leaders that hinted at a waiver of a mass right of return.

But in real time, at the negotiating table, the Palestinians rejected any initiative that did not include a mass return. Or as Nabil Shaath, the Palestinian Authority’s former foreign minister and a member of the negotiations team, said: “We mean two states—one Palestinian state and another binational state.” Shaath is considered one of the most moderate people in the Palestinian leadership. So regardless of the outline of the Trump administration’s initiative, the Palestinian response will be negative. It’s kind of difficult to understand how the smart people at the top of the American administration, both the previous and the current one, are finding it difficult to understand this issue. An Arab acceptance of the Trump outline won’t help either. At the time, there was a considerable Arab acceptance of the Clinton Parameters, but Yasser Arafat was unconvinced. He said no.

It’s possible that a two-states-for-two-peoples formula could have been reached two decades ago. In 1988, following American pressure, Arafat announced his recognition of Israel as a Jewish state. Seven years later, the Beilin-Abbas draft agreement was finalized, including no right of return to Israel. But that’s history. In the past two decades, the Palestinian stance has increasingly radicalized. The Palestinians have turned the refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state into one of their basic principles.

And another thing happened in the past decade. A massive system of post- and anti-Zionist propaganda, in the free world and in Israel, provides justifications for the hardening Palestinian stance. “The right of return must be recognized,” representatives of the progressive elites preach. With such a stance, these different “progressive” people are reinforcing the Palestinian rejectionist camp. Because if that’s what they are told by Uri Avnery and his ilk, in Israel and in the world, why should they present a more moderate stance?

Meanwhile, every failed round of negotiations only strengthens Israel’s radical Right, which mocks the efforts to reach peace. The result isn’t a stalemate. The result is a further expansion of the settlement enterprise, and not just inside the major blocs but outside too. The Palestinians are seeking one big state. And the radical Right, which is represented in the government, is becoming their executive wing.

That doesn’t mean we have to despair. It just means that instead of more peace initiatives, and instead of pursuing an agreement, which is unachievable under the current circumstances, there is a need to pursue an arrangement. For this purpose, the parties could adopt part of the outlines of peace initiative that were put on the table in the past and implement them, creating a demographic separation (including a complete stop to Israeli construction outside the blocs), with security control in the Jordan Valley and in other security points. “The commanders’ plan,” officially known as Security First, presents the outlines for such an arrangement.

It’s possible that, one day, the Palestinians will understand that their naysaying is only worsening their situation. But there’s no need to wait for the disillusionment. There’s no need to say that the day will come. There is a need to bring on that day. If the current government can’t do it, then maybe, just maybe, the next government will.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Why Trump’s Mideast peace plan is doomed : http://ift.tt/2A1qZD9