IDF’s achievements in 2017 marred by political attacks

The year 2017 was a good year in terms of security. There is no external existential threat against the State of Israel, and there was no real threat on the sovereignty and routine life in Israel either.

Moreover, the Arab states, Iran and Turkey are still engaged in the bloody Shia-Sunni battle, and the wars in Syria, Iraq and Yemen are still ongoing. So in the meantime, they are unable to threaten us. According to Arab media reports, moderate Sunni states even need Israel and are receiving intelligence aid from us which their leaders highly appreciate.

Achievements and challenges in the different arenas

There were other developments which positively affected our national security. ISIS lost its huge Islamic state in Syria and Iraq and turned into a regular jihadist organization. This was mostly thanks to the efforts of the US-led coalition, which has the Kurds as its foot on the ground while all other coalition members provide pretty effective intelligence and aerial aid.

The Russians managed to save Syrian President Bashar Assad from the rebels, and received their own seaport and air base in Syria in return. Some people in the Israeli intelligence community and in the IDF have been saying in private conversations that while Assad's ongoing rule is immoral and bad for the Syrian people, it’s not necessarily bad for the Jews.

Assad’s army regains control of Deir al-Zor from ISIS occupation (Photo: AFP)

Moreover, Russian President Vladimir Putin has been unsuccessful in his efforts to advance a political agreement in Syria based on a compromise between Assad and the rebels that would end the fighting. The Kremlin is interested in such an arrangement to stabilize and implement the Russian achievements in Syria, but is unable to do so for now. The Israeli defense establishment isn’t really losing sleep over the Russian failure, although it’s clear it will happen in a few more months or even in a year.

The Russians are maintaining polite relations with Israel based on clear shared interests. Unlike what may be implied from comments made by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ministers, the Iranians are not beyond the Golan Heights border yet. The land corridor, which the Iranian Revolutionary Guards wish to develop from Tehran through Iraq and Syria to Beirut, is still a vision and an aspiration that have not been realized.

Putin (R) and Assad. The Russians managed to save the Syrian president from the rebels (Photo: AP)

And even if the Shiite-Iranian corridor becomes active, it does not pose a dramatic-strategic threat to Israel as certain senior defense officials have been warning. There are those who believe the IDF already knows how to deal with such a corridor and with its ramifications.

And finally, as ISIS continues its intensive clashes with the Egyptian army in Sinai, it is likely unavailable to harass us.

The year 2017 was a good year for the IDF. The army, the Shin Bet and the police dealt successfully with lone-wolf terrorism and with the escalation following the metal detectors affair. The intelligence and cyber warfare methods were improved, making it possible to track plans to carry out terror attacks through social media and thwart those plans through arrests and deterrence talks with would-be terrorists.

Using a wise and restrained policy, the IDF managed to create a distinction between terrorists and the uninvolved population, preventing the lone-wold attacks from turning into a popular uprising—in other words, an intifada. The IDF essentially learned and developed ways allowing it to sit on a powder keg in the West Bank and prevent it from exploding, at least from now. This is an unstable situation, however, and the next explosion will arrive and will likely be driven by a religious motive.

Riots in Ramallah. The IDF prevented lone-wolf terror attacks from turning into a popular uprising (Photo: Getty Images)

In the Gaza Strip, the Southern Command seems to have accomplished Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot’s mission to come up with a comprehensive and efficient solution to the problem of cross-border tunnels from the strip, providing not only actual security but also a sense of security to the Gaza vicinity residents. The “war between wars” was quite successful in the past year too. According to foreign reports, the IDF—with the help of the Mossad—prevented the transfer of high-quality, precision-guided weapons to Hezbollah and Hamas, prevented the construction of factories and workshops for the production and assembly of such weapon systems in Syria and in Lebanon and prevented the expansion of Iranian-backed militias in the Syrian Golan Heights in a way that would allow them to open a new terror front against Israel from there. Equally important is the fact that the IDF managed to wage this secret war without getting into trouble and without leading us to an escalation or a flare-up. The cyber system development is making nice progress, and Israel’s active anti-missile defense system is nearly completed. The David’s Sling system, which became operational this year, is the most significant component in defending the Israeli home front from precision-guided missiles and rockets with a heavy warhead launched from Lebanon and Syria. The Patriot missiles complement and support this system’s abilities. The Arrow 3, the upper layer of the active defense system, is already capable of intercepting ballistic missiles in space, but still has to undergo a few tests to prove its efficiency. The Air Force received the F-35 stealth aircraft (“Adir”) and made them operational, and the Ground Corps has already started arming a third brigade with Namer APCs equipped with the Trophy protection system. This is a significant addition to the force that will fight in constructed missile-laden areas in Lebanon and in Gaza.

Successful David’s Sling test (Photo: Defense Ministry)

Most of the components of the five-year Gideon Plan are being implemented as planned, and the IDF seems to have reached its highest level of fitness and preparedness for war since the early 1990s. The war reserve stores need to be imrpoved, but the ammunition and spare parts inventories are full and the ground forces are back to the 17/17 format—17 weeks of training and 17 weeks of engaging in operational activity a year. Several years ago, this was only a dream. The IDF’s Personnel Directorate seems to be coming up with creative but complicated solutions for the lack of professional and skilled manpower in the army, which will be tried out in the coming years.

This rather positive picture in most areas is overclouded by the troubled relations between the army and the Israeli society in the past year. The chief of staff and the top command were forced to curb a blatant and unprecedented attempt to dictate a political agenda and a new set of moral and social values on them and on them army, which differ from the values adopted by the IDF upon its establishment in 1948.

Had the IDF adopted this agenda and this set of values, it would have likely had trouble functioning as an army in a democratic state and society and as the army of all people rather than just one of the country’s sectors. This attack was led by politicians from the coalition parties—especially Likud, Bayit Yehudi and Yisrael Beytenu—and it reached its climax in the Elor Azaria affair. The affair didn’t affect IDF soldiers themselves thanks to the quick and efficient work of the different units’ commanders under the orders of the chief of staff and top generals.

Elor Azaria, who was convicted of manslaughter for shooting and killing a neutralized terrorist, with his parents. The affair didn’t affect IDF soldiers (Photo: Reuters)

But the political pressure to accept an incident in which a dying terrorist was shot the head while lying on the ground as a norm reached dimensions I have don’t recall seeing before: Starting with politicians’ arrival at the military court in an attempt to influence the judges, through wild incitement on social media to death threats against the IDF chief of staff—all in a bid to set new combat norms which contradict not only the IDF’s spirit but also Israeli law and international law. The mass protests held during the first Lebanon War in 1982, against the siege of Beirut and then against the Sabra and Shatila massacre, were all held in the political arena. The army itself and its combat norms were not targeted. This time, the IDF and its commanders were the target of a wild attack. And most importantly, they were abandoned by the political echelon (apart from the defense minister) and by the government. Some cabinet ministers even joined the attack. The Azaria affair wasn’t the only event. During the escalation periods in the West Bank, there were blatant attempt to influence the generals’ operational decisions, especially when the IDF went to great lengths to allow the uninvolved population to continue its routine life so that it won’t be motivated to join and help terrorists.

Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot. The IDF curbed the political attack with public-civilian courage (Photo: Yoav Dudkevitch)

The attack by national-religious rabbis on women’s service in combat roles was another blatant attempt to dictate exclusion norms on the IDF which contradict the values of social equality and democracy. The demand to exempt soldiers from listening to women sing during official events was another violation of the accepted status quo. The IDF, under Chief of Staff Eisenkot and with the support of most generals, curbed the attack with commendable public-civilian courage. The truth is they had no other choice. If the military leaders had given in to the politicians’ pressure, they would have risked losing the army’s national character and its ability to contain all tribes of the Israeli society. From a “people’s army,” it would have turned into the army of one political sector, causing all others to shirk military service. The soldiers’ motivation would have worn out too. Lack of motivation among large groups of soldiers serving in the IDF would have led to negative incidents at times of fighting. Furthermore, there was a need to prevent the army from heading down a slippery slope and later turning into a political tool, and prevent a situation in which Israel would defeat Hezbollah or Hamas militarily but would be defeated—like Serbia at the time—in the “soft war over legitimacy” in the international (legal, conscious, moral and media) arena. This is what would have happened had the chief of staff not worked to curb the attack. The military leaders should be given credit for exercising restraint and avoiding futile battles and over-dramatization, although the attack was—and still is—a real threat to the IDF’s performance and spirit.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

IDF’s achievements in 2017 marred by political attacks : http://ift.tt/2lxqqKt

Trump’s gift to Abbas

A great miracle happened to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Even he is having trouble containing all the good things he has been hit with since US President Donald Trump recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

On January 1, Abbas will lead Fatah’s anniversary celebrations, enjoying an upsurge in his popularity in the Palestinian street like never before. This is the man, they are saying, who managed to subdue and isolate Trump and enlist nearly the entire world around the Palestinians' right for a capital in Jerusalem.

Trump and Abbas. The entire recent round of violence was aimed at taking the original American plan off the agenda (Photo: AP)

It’s hard to believe that only about a month and a half ago, Abbas had hit rock bottom. On November 6, he received a surprise invitation to meet with Saudi King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman in Riyadh. During the meeting, they revealed to him parts of Trump’s “major plan” for an agreement in the Middle East, under which the capital of the Palestinian state would not be in east Jerusalem but in Abu Dis.

Abbas left the meeting low-spirited. While declaring in public that he and the Saudis were coordinated, deep inside he didn’t know how to deal with the disgrace: How could he market the loss of the capital in east Jerusalem to the Palestinians? Would he go down in history as the leader who had given up a Palestinian capital in Jerusalem?

When he returned to Ramallah, Abbas convened Fatah’s executive committee for a secret meeting, in which he presented the American plan. Later on, his people leaked the rest of the details of the Riyadh conversation to Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, who exposed additional parts of the plan last week, claiming it includes a cession of the right of return, a recognition of Israel as a Jewish state and a recognition of parts of the settlements.

The Palestinian Authority leaders were pushed into a corner by the Americans and the Saudis. On December 4, they suffered another blow: The New York Times published leaks from Trump’s plan, which indeed suggested that Abu Dis would be the capital and that the majority of settlements would remain intact.

The Saudis, the Americans and the Palestinians issued sweeping denials that same day. Had the report been confirmed by any official element, Abbas would have lost the little credit he had left on the Palestinian street. And then the miracle happened: On December 6, Trump gave Abbas a “golden ladder” he could never have dreamed of.

The PA leadership, to its credit, quickly regained its composure and understood the advantages hidden in Trump’s declaration, which in actual fact didn’t change the situation and didn’t even imply that east Jerusalem won’t be the Palestinian capital. From this moment, a clear Palestinian strategy was adopted: To market to the world, particularly the Muslim world, the narrative of selling Jerusalem to the Jews. And it worked.

This is the man, the Palestinians are saying, who managed to subdue and isolate Trump and enlist nearly the entire world around the Palestinians' right for a capital in Jerusalem (Photo: Reuters)

This success was accompanied by a particularly harsh attack on Trump and the American administration, a call to annul the Trump plan, an announcement that the United States could no longer serve as mediator and an emotional appeal to France, China and Russia to replace the US as mediators.

Simultaneously, Abbas got an opportunity to embrace the Qataris and with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, indicating to Egypt and Saudi Arabia that “if you don’t support me, I have alternatives.” The Palestinian show of force reached its climax at the United Nations Security Council and in the General Assembly resolution.

To intensify the PR offensive and enlist the Palestinian street, senior PA officials not only declared a rift with the Americans, but also a renunciation of the Oslo Agreements. The leadership impassioned the street and allowed Hamas to hold shows of force in the West Bank.

But the emergency meeting Abbas held with the Fatah and PLO leaders, which created expectations for a change of policy, ended without any decisions. It was an indication that his real intention isn’t to inflame the situation. He wants clashes controlled by his people, rather than by the Palestinian street, especially not Hamas. The entire recent round of violence was aimed at taking the original American plan off the agenda.

Abbas isn’t alone. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is celebrating too. Behind closed doors, he is likely proposing a toast in honor of Abbas, who created a deep crisis with the Americans which might postpone or cancel Trump’s “deal of the century”—a plan which requires Israel to make concessions too, and these concessions could rock his government.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Trump’s gift to Abbas : http://ift.tt/2BZ8xep

A weak Israeli response to rocket fire

Unlike the impression some people have been trying to create here, Friday’s rocket fire was worse than all previous incident over the past few weeks.

 

For the first time, the rockets were fired in the middle of the day rather than at night, and during an event organized by the family of fallen soldier Oron Shaul, which was also attended by Knesset members, IDF officers and government officials. And what about the Israeli response? It was the weakest we have seen so far.

We have heard many belligerent statements in recent months about the Israeli response against Hamas, but the response to the firing of three mortar shells at the Gaza border area on Friday afternoon was the most minor response so far and was quite unusual.

People take cover after Code Red alarm sounds in ceremony marking Oron Shaul's 24th birthday (Photo: Roee Idan)

  

So far, in all the incidents that resulted in rockets landing in Israeli territory, the IDF responded twice: An initial immediate response against random Hamas targets using tanks or an aircraft circling in the air; and a night attack on Hamas targets to claim a price for the organization’s responsibility for the rocket fire. This time, our response—even after Saturday night’s strike on a Hamas observation post—was weak. Why? That’s unclear.

We don’t need the Israeli intelligence community’s confirmation to understand that Friday afternoon’s rocket fire was planned, as the event was public. And so, after rockets were fired at government officials, Israel is taking its foot off the gas but keeps insisting that Hamas is deterred. In actual fact, however, Hamas has lost its deterrence against the rebel Palestinian factions, while Israeli officials continue to claim that Hamas is still deterred by Israel—a claim which contradicts the reality of the past month.

Building hit by a rocket Friday (Photo: Roee Idan)

Forty rockets were fired since Operation Protective Edge until the current escalation. Thirty rockets were fired in the past month alone. Even if senior defense establishment officials say the Israeli deterrence hasn’t worn off, reality proves otherwise, and it’s possible that the IDF—like in the days before Operation Protective Edge—is misreading the situation in Gaza. The Israeli assessments are that Hamas is trying to carry out attacks in Judea and Samaria and isn’t interested in a conflict in Gaza.

All this is less relevant, because it’s now clear that the desires don’t match reality, and that even if Hamas really wants to prevent the rebel factions from firing, it’s hasn’t been very successful. Israel, therefore, should address the acts rather than just the intentions and interests. Even if our decision-makers are convinced Hamas is interested in calm that would allow the organization to govern, it would have been enough for one rocket to have landed in the middle of the Friday’s event at Kibbutz Kfar Aza. In general, the images coming out of that event do not serve the “challenged” Israeli deterrence—the new term adopted by IDF officials.

And one more word about the Iron Dome defense system: For different reasons, its interception success rate in the past month is different from its success rates during Operation Protective Edge. We saw it both on Friday and with the rockets fired at Sderot recently. There are professional explanations for that, but most importantly, we are learning we can’t expect hermetic protection—especially not in the Gaza border area.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

A weak Israeli response to rocket fire : http://ift.tt/2lwi0TD

In the service of morality or in the service of politics?

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Op-ed: If a protest in favor of morality and stateliness is deemed ‘dangerous,’ and if discussing incorruption is forbidden by rabbis for the sake of supporting the leader, let’s hold different debate—about what it means to be right-wing in Israel. In the service of morality or in the service of politics? : http://ift.tt/2CoSo5u

US-Israel relations: The interests behind the smiles

In a little while from now, a matter of days or weeks, two US administration officials will arrive in Israel. They will be greeted at Ben-Gurion Airport’s Masada Lounge as very important guests. They will see a lot of smiles in front of their faces, and will reveal white teeth as they smile back.

They will get the presidential suite at the King David Hotel in Jerusalem. The prime minister will welcome them and market, once again, Israel's strong desire to reach peace, something along the lines of “our hands are extended.” These two will likely be President Donald Trump’s Jewish son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and his special envoy to the Middle East, Jason Greenblatt.

Prime Minister Netanyahu with Jared Kushner and Jason Greenblatt (Photo: Amos Ben Gershom/GPO)

The “major plan” will be put on the table, and once its details are leaked, the media will use the words “surprise in Jerusalem” or “embarrassment in Jerusalem.” The facts will hit the Israeli hosts in the face. The friendliest president we ever had in the White House, we’ll find out, doesn’t exactly work for us.

Immediately after the Six-Day War, the US administration said it wouldn’t recognize the occupied territories and united Jerusalem as Israel's capital. Fifty years have passed, a lot of water has gone under the bridge in the Potomac and Yarkon rivers, American presidents and Israeli prime ministers have come and gone, and the Israeli policy has been changed at least once or twice.

The Americans have taken note of every comment made by senior members of the Israeli governments, but they have always implied that the things said by Israel's leaders are not important and that, when the time comes, they will be tossed into the trashcan of history.

After the Six-Day War, the Americans believed they had a winning formula in their hands, and they have stuck to it ever since. Meanwhile, neighborhoods have been built and settlements have been established so that it would be impossible to uproot them.

After Israel and Egypt signed a peace agreement, the Arab and American leaders told Israel there was no chance for peace with Syrian leader Hafez Assad and with Jordan’s King Hussein if they weren’t given all of the land to the very last inch. In closed conversations, the Americans explained to the Israelis why they needed to return everything “to the very last inch,” and reminded those who had forgotten about what happened with Taba—the hotel Israel believed it would keep, but which was returned “to the very last inch.”

Netanyahu and Trump. The friendliest president we ever had in the White House, we’ll find out, doesn’t exactly work for us (Photo: Reuters)

The Americans are crueler than we think when it comes to their foreign policy. There is only one thing they know: Interests. They have no intention, after making such high payments to the Israeli coffers, of being nice to us on the moment of truth. If the current interest is to bring peace to the Middle East, even at the cost of evacuating most of the settlements. It’s not something they consider to be a major operation, having gained experience in such operations in many places around the world.

At first, Trump’s two representatives will likely try to insist on removing east Jerusalem neighborhoods from Israeli control, and will then turn to the Judea and Samaria settlements. Why? Because for 50 years they have been saying something, and we have been laughing at them.

And what will happen to our friend at the White House? If Israel turns down his offer, we will hear the famous “don’t call me, I’ll call you” from Washington. Trump will slowly lose interest in Israel. And when 128 states turn against Israel again, we will discover that he is seeking the friendship of the Arab states surrounding us. We don’t want that to happen of course, but that’s exactly how it could end.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

US-Israel relations: The interests behind the smiles : http://ift.tt/2EcCadH

Isolated at home, Guatemala president moves close to US with Israel move

Guatemala’s recognition of Jerusalem as the Israeli capital leaves President Jimmy Morales closer to the United States at a time his stock has fallen at home due to corruption allegations raised by UN-backed investigators.

 

Defying overwhelming international rejection of President Donald Trump’s decision to move his embassy to Jerusalem, Guatemala and Honduras were the only nations in the Americas to back him in a UN General Assembly vote last week.

Guatemalan President Jimmy Morales with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem in November 2016 (Photo: AFP)

Increasingly isolated at home, Morales won friends In Washington by aligning himself with Trump, although he runs the risk of backlash from Arab countries which import the costly spice cardamom from Guatemala.

Morales on Christmas Eve said he would follow Trump in moving Guatemala’s embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

“This is a pretty low-cost way for Morales to make sure the Trump administration is on his side,” said Michael Shifter, head of the Inter-American Dialogue, a Washington-based think tank.

Morales is no stranger to international controversy.

In August, the former TV comedian came under fire from the United Nations, the European Union and the US ambassador in Guatemala for attempting to expel a UN-backed prosecutor seeking to put him on trial for alleged corruption.

The investigation into allegations of illicit campaign financing - which followed separate graft probes into members of the president’s family—had threatened to condemn Morales to impeachment.

Morales escaped that fate but he had to back down over a bid to eject the head of the UN-backed International Commission Against Impunity in Guatemala, and his authority has been seriously undermined.

Morales, an evangelical Christian, says the Israel policy is a principled stand in the tradition of Guatemala’s longstanding support of Israel.

“Even though there were only nine of us in the whole world who backed (Trump’s position) we’re totally sure this is the right path,” Morales said of the UN vote. Eight other nations opposed the resolution condemning the United States for recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and 128 voted for it.

The status of Jerusalem is one of the thorniest obstacles to any Israeli-Palestinian peace deal. Palestinians want east Jerusalem as the capital of their own state.

Backing Trump was also an exercise in realpolitik for Morales.

Trump threatened to cut aid to countries backing the UN resolution. Few in the Americas rely more on US support than Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, which did not vote.

Morales and US President Donald Trump. ‘A pretty low-cost way to make sure the Trump administration is on his side’ (Photo: AFP, EPA)

Pending US approval, Guatemala is set to receive some $209 million from the Alliance for Prosperity Plan in the Northern Triangle, a US-funded program, according to the government.

Guatemala also received almost $100 million from the United States Agency for International Development last year, and over $75 million in security aid between 2012 and 2015, according to the Security Assistance Monitor database.

The local economy benefits from money sent home by hundreds of thousands of Guatemalans in the United States, many of whom are unlawful immigrants that Trump has threatened to send home.

Remittances are this year set to top $8 billion, equivalent to roughly three-quarters of the Guatemalan budget.

Were those flows to dry up, it would aggravate discontent at Morales.

“These acts of good faith and support for Donald Trump’s government could eventually turn into opportunities for political stability that right now aren’t there,” said Ricardo Barrero, political coordinator at the Guatemala City-based Central American Institute of Political Studies.

Israel has provided important training for Guatemala’s military.

But Guatemala also has other interests in the Middle East, not least demand from Arab states for cardamom, of which it is the world’s biggest producer.

Former Guatemalan vice president Eduardo Stein recalled that in the mid-1990s, Guatemala also said it would move its embassy to Jerusalem—before backing off amid threats from Arab nations not to import cardamom, which is used in Arabic coffee.

“It’s likely to happen again,” said Stein, referring to possible cardamom curbs.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Isolated at home, Guatemala president moves close to US with Israel move : http://ift.tt/2pR9CU0

A Jew boycotting Israel? Must be a joke

Hi there, Justine Sachs, the woman who helped convince Lorde to cancel her planned performance in Israel. Do you want to know what you’ve caused by violently and childishly pushing for this boycott? I’ll give you a hint: Violence brings more violence.

I don’t think you’re surprised by that. After all, wherever the progressive fingerprints of radical leftists like you are evident—that’s where the blood, fire and pillars of smoke can be found. A normative person may think you’re a violent person, but I have a different assumption.

Justine Sachs (R) and Lorde. The Thanatos syndrome (Photos: Getty Images, Facebook)

The difference between you and me, Justin, is that I’m an Israeli Jew and you’re a Jew. That’s it. You have no nationality. You live in a negligible, insignificant sheepfold stuck somewhere at the end of the universe: New Zealand, which robbed the indigenous Maori people of their land in favor of a European colony. By the way, what have you done to promote a cultural boycott against your exploiting country, Justin? I’d like to hear about that.

In any event, Justin, you may be satisfied with the few moments of fame you have gained, like every auto-anti-Semite in Jewish history. We Jews have been blessed with a lot of that Thanatos (“death drive”), the drive towards human self-destruction. The thing is that patriotism significantly reduces this self-destruction mechanism.

I, for example, feel no need to take the side of a culture which hasn’t brought anything to the world apart from terror. The confidence I am given by the Israeli nationality allows me to pick the democratic, free side. But nationality is not the only heart of the matter, you bleeding heart. There’s something else too.

People who don’t know you as well as I do might think that your drive towards self-destruction stems from a need to satisfy the people around you; that you choose to play the role of the classic Jewish wimp, who has to prove his animosity towards his Jewish brethren in order to survive. You’re not the first person to do so. Some people, by the way, have been much more successful than you, and this isn’t the place to quote from the history of the early 1940s.

Lorde (Photo: Lior Keter)

You may be surprised, but I don’t think this is about your desire to please the gentiles, nor does it have anything to do with the assumption that in the Southern Hemisphere the Jewish mind goes against reason. Personally, I believe this is something even more Jewish than auto-anti-Semitism. As a Jew to a Jew, let’s be honest, it’s the same unique Jewish sense of humor. Only a particularly developed Jewish sense of humor can explain why you have chosen to turn your back on the democratic, Western side, which develops medicine (at least until Teva goes bankrupt), feeds millions around the world through agricultural developments, sends doctors to every place hit by an earthquake across the globe and develops cyber defenses against the forces of evil. That same developed sense of humor alone can explain why you favor your Palestinian friend’s side, the side which hijacks planes, the side which hangs gay people on electric poles, the side which rips out girls’ throats in honor killings, the side which has failed to establish any state or society which isn’t totalitarian, chauvinist, primitive and/or murderous. So unlike some Israelis who deeply despise a woman of your kind, I’m actually capable of appreciating a proper joke or mega-trolling. This may not be the kind of joke that would place you in the same category as Jewish comedians like the Marx Brothers, Mel Brooks, Woody Allen or Jerry Seinfeld, but you do deserve an award just for trying. I’m willing to send you one, by the way. If you give me your address, I’ll gladly send over a copy of my latest book on the issue, titled “The History of the Palestinian People.” It may take a while before it reaches the end of the world you live in, but I can assure you that you’ll be able to read the entire book in less than one minute.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

A Jew boycotting Israel? Must be a joke : http://ift.tt/2Cdq2eh

Despite PM's foreign trips, Israel remains nearly isolated in UN

American Ambassador the United Nations Nikki Haley led a holding action around the clock last week, together with Israeli Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon, in a bid to prevent a defeat in the UN General Assembly in the vote against US President Donald Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

After the 14 other Security Council members voted against Israel and the United States was forced to veto the resolution, the Palestinians turned to the General Assembly. Israel found itself in diplomatic isolation yet again.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Liberia in June (Photo: Kobi Gideon/GPO)

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu uses every opportunity to boast that Israel is enjoying unprecedented diplomatic prosperity and that the Jewish state is admired and appreciated all over the world. In September, he told the UN General Assembly that he had visited six continents in the past year and that “I haven't yet visited Antarctica, but I’ve heard that penguins are also enthusiastic supporters of Israel.”

Indeed, Netanyahu has travelled all around the world in the past year. The places he has visited include Australia, China, Argentina, Colombia, Mexico, Africa (three times) and Eastern Europe. Opposition members say Netanyahu is simply using these trips to flee police investigators, but the prime minister insists that these are important diplomatic missions for the purpose of establishing strategic alliances and economic ties that will strengthen the Israeli economy.

Since the formation of the current government, Netanyahu has embarked on 30 journeys abroad, visiting 37 countries (including repeated visits to the same country), and he has been out of the country for 103 days. Eight years after he took office, we should probably ask if there is any diplomatic value in all his journeys when it comes to UN votes and to improving Israel’s position on this front.

Netanyahu with Colombia's President Juan Manuel Santos in September (Photo: EPA)

Mitvim—the Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies looked into the voting patterns of 35 states in 16 Israel-related votes held at four UN institutions—the Security Council, the General Assembly, UNESCO and the Human Rights Council—from 2009 to 2017. The selected states were mostly countries the prime minister had visited in recent years, in a bid to examine if the efforts to strengthen Israel's bilateral relations with them have also led to a change in their voting patterns in the world’s main multi-national forum.

The research, led by Dr. Roee Kibrik and Dr. Nimrod Goren, revealed that in important UN votes focusing on the Palestinian issue, Israel keeps finding itself isolate. Of the 193 UN member states, the Jewish state is supported primarily by the US, Canada and a few island countries.

“This picture hasn’t changed in the past eight years,” Kibrik and Goren concluded. Nevertheless, this isn’t an indication of Israel’s ability to influence votes held in other international forums, as well as diplomatic processes taking place behind the scenes and not through votes, nor is it a tool for measuring the efforts to strengthen Israel’s bilateral relationships with the world’s countries. All it indicates is that these kinds of efforts—if they are indeed taking place—have yet to yield results in important Israel-related UN votes.

“The prime minister stated recently that the change in the attitude towards Israel in multi-national forums could take a few more years, but the way we see it, without any progress in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, the chance for a real breakthrough in this area is low,” says Kibrik.

Goren adds, “Israel's policy on the Palestinian issue has a negative impact on Israel's status in the world. Past experience shows that a diplomatic renaissance, like the one the prime minister is hoping for, takes place when Israel shows a real commitment to advance peace and takes steps in that direction.”

Netanyahu with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Sochi August (Photo: AFP)

China and Russia, for example, two countries which Netanyahu travelled to in the past year (in fact, the prime minister visited Russia five times in the past two and a half years), kept voting automatically with the Palestinians and against Israel.

India, on the other hand, which used to vote against Israel automatically, changed its voting pattern recently in UNESCO’s resolutions on Jerusalem and moved to abstention. Netanyahu is expected to visit India for the first time next month, but Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has already visited Israel. In the recent votes on Jerusalem and the Golan Heights in the UN General Assembly, however, India kept voting against Israel's stance.

The African countries, which received frequent visits from Netanyahu in the past two years, have remained loyal to the Palestinian issue in the votes. Argentina and Colombia have kept voting with the Palestinians too, despite Netanyahu’s recent visit to Latin America. Mexico, which received a first visit from the Israeli prime minister, as well as a visit from the Home Front Command’s rescue delegation following the devastating earthquake in the country, changed its voting pattern in 10 Israel-related votes for the first time.

Netanyahu with the Visegrad Group leaders in July

The Visegrád Group, which includes Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia (three of which were visited by Netanyahu), is traditionally closer to the Israeli stance and can often be seen supporting Israel. In 2009, they supported Israel's stance and opposed the Goldstone Report on the 2008 Israeli operation in Gaza, but have failed to offer Israel their absolute support since then. Sometimes they abstain rather than completely adopting the Palestinian stance. We must remember, however, that as far as Israel is concerned, these countries play a very important role in the European Union, where they prevent anti-Israel resolutions which would have been accepted had they not cooperated with Israel.

Israel's alliance in the Eastern Mediterranean basin and its tightening relations with Cyprus, Greece and Italy (three countries which Netanyahu visited in the past year) have not been reflected in votes focusing on the Palestinian issue.

Paraguay moved from supporting the Palestinians to abstention, which may be an indication of the tightening relations between the two countries. Netanyahu hasn’t visited Paraguay, but he did meet with its president, Horacio Cartes, during his visit to Argentina. Yechiel Leiter, who served as Netanyahu’s bureau chief when he was finance minister, is one of Cartes’ senior advisors.

A favorable change has been recorded in the series of votes held by UNESCO’s Executive Board in 2016 and 2017 around the proposal condemning Israel on the Jerusalem issue and opposing its policy in the city. The votes point to a downtrend in the number of states supporting the proposal: From 33 countries in April 2016 to 22 countries in May 2017.

Netanyahu argued recently during a meeting at the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that it would take a few years before we see the changes in the international arena.

According to Foreign-Ministry Spokesman Emmanuel Nahshon, “In the past few years, we have been seeing a favorable strategic change in different countries’ attitude towards the State of Israel. This is reflected, among other things, in international institutions’ votes. When a country moves from voting against Israel to abstention, it is also seen as a diplomatic achievement.

“We must remember that these are long-term processes and that every long journey begins with a first step. The achievements of the Israeli diplomacy led by Prime Minister Netanyahu must be measured over time. The trend is positive and it will keep improving. The State of Israel is a significant player in the international arena, and many countries understand that and are moving closer to us in all respects.”

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Despite PM's foreign trips, Israel remains nearly isolated in UN : http://ift.tt/2zE5aHQ

The blue-eyed poster girl of Palestinian propaganda

For years, she has been the poster girl of Palestinian propaganda. The jewel in the crown. The star of Pallywood, a term coined by Prof. Richard Landes to describe the Palestinians' staged false displays for the purpose of accusing Israel of violence.

Ahed Tamimi (http://ift.tt/2CFDx2Y), of course, isn’t the only one in these displays. But she’s the best. She looks just like a girl who could capture the hearts of foreign photojournalists and the Western public opinion. She has neither a hijab nor a burqa. On the contrary, she has a typical European look. A girl who looks like their girl.

Ahed Tamimi. The most photographed Palestinian woman in the past five years (Photo: AFP)

For years, she has been at the center of more and more staged provocations (http://ift.tt/2BciJEb). She always tries to get IDF soldiers to respond with violence, and she always fails (http://ift.tt/2oKpTtu). Because IDF soldiers are world champions in self-restraint.

But in a region which holds the world record for cameras (http://ift.tt/2CdTsZR) per square meters, some kind of inappropriate behavior is found every few months. Not everyone is perfect. There are exceptions. Last week, soldiers were caught using unnecessary violence against a bound Palestinian. Certain organizations seize these opportunities eagerly. This is the IDF, they say. They’re lying, of course.

Not all Western newspapers, which usually love the blonde, blue-eyed girl, got caught in the trap. In recent years, different newspapers in the world—including the British Daily Mail and the American Tower—have exposed the real story of Tamimi and her parents as part of a propaganda machine in Pallywood’s service. But they were exceptions.

Tamimi at the Ofer Military Court on Monday (Photo: Gil Yohanan)

In the wide world, and usually in Israel too, the deception hasn’t really been revealed. After all, the photographers used her and she used them. The model of the intifada. Her pictures turned her into an Internet star: Raising a fist against soldiers, biting a soldier, leading a group of marching protestors. She became a propaganda asset. The most photographed Palestinian woman in the past five years.

And as is becoming of a star, in 2012 she was invited to a special event in her honor in Turkey, where she received an award named after Handala, a Palestinian boy created by cartoonist Naji al-Ali, symbolizing the Palestinian refugee as a victim of Israeli brutality. Granted, Turkey has destroyed 3,000 Kurdish villages, two million people have become refugees in their country and 30,000 have been killed. But there’s no cartoon named after them. Hypocrisy works overtime there. Later on, Tamimi was invited to have breakfast with the great leader, Sultan Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Ahed even got an academic paper about her, about what she represents and about the fact that she is joining other female stars of the Palestinian struggle, like Hanan Ashrawi and terrorist Leila Khaled. The same article also implies that there is sometime racist about the fact that the Western viewer has trouble identifying with other young women who are dark-skinned and wear a hijab. Tamimi’s success essentially stems from the fact that she doesn’t look like a typical Muslim or Palestinian woman. On the contrary, she generates sympathy because she looks like the daughter of the white family next door. There is of course a clear racist aspect in the ability to identify with her of all people. But that doesn’t matter, as long as she delivers the goods.

Bassem Tamimi, Ahed’s father. A radical Palestinian who urges violence and helps spread blood libels against Israel (Photo: Ohad Zwigenberg)

Bassem Tamimi, the star’s father, is famous for his own activities and has received the familiar “human rights activist” definition. Is that so? Tamimi is indeed a wanted guest on many anti-Israel stages around the world. But like too many of these activists, when you delve beyond the surface, you find a radical Palestinian who urges violence and helps spread blood libels against Israel.

He retweeted, for example, a tweet stating that “the Israelis’ goal, when they arrest Palestinian children, is to steal their organs.” And following that post, it was determined that “the Zionists control the global media, so we shouldn’t expect the BBC to publish this information.” So we got both a blood libel focusing on children and a repetition of theories resembling the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Pure anti-Semitism. That didn’t stop the Amnesty organization from defining him as a “prisoner of conscience.”

We mustn’t delude ourselves. In the battle between the propaganda of lies and Israel, the lies win. The somewhat exaggerated restraint of the Israeli soldiers isn’t helping either. Bassem Tamimi himself was a guest of Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), one of the leading organizations in the anti-Israel campaigns on US campuses. I once mentioned that they cancelled a collaboration with Miko Peled, a former Israeli, over anti-Semitic comments, but I believe that was a one-time digression from their usual activity.

Tamimi and his likes, who support terror and are in favor of Israel’s destruction, are honored and respected. They don’t even have to pretend to be rights activists. They are guests of honor even when they oppose peace, encourage violence and provide justifications for terror.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

The blue-eyed poster girl of Palestinian propaganda : http://ift.tt/2BHPdlI

Abbas left with an empty diplomatic toolbox

If the Palestinians had a shred of hope that peace negotiations would be renewed in the Netanyahu era, it faded away and disappeared after US President Donald Trump’s Jerusalem announcement. 

“We will no longer accept the United States as a mediator in the peace process and we will not accept any peace plan from the American side,” Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas declared in his moment of deep dispair.

Abbas. The Europeans have their own problems and the Palestinians definitely can’t rely on the Arab states (Photo: Reuters)

We must admit that there have been no real negotiations with the Palestinians since the establishment of the Netanyahu government in 2009, and they won’t be renewed as long as the current government remains in power. In general, the term “negotiations” has been erased from Israel’s political lexicon, not to mention the word “peace.” As Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says, “There was nothing, there is nothing, there will be nothing.” Throughout this entire period, Ramallah didn’t stop playing by the rules. After Trump’s election, Abbas wanted to believe that the new president supports the two-state vision. He waited to hear about the American peace plan and believed that it would be possible to return “to the table.” Until the Jerusalem announcement—which Abbas considered a low blow—he had still hoped that Trump would pull some kind of diplomatic rabbit out of his hat and salvage what could still be salvaged. Now, Abbas is left with an empty diplomatic toolbox. While he declares that he wants negotiations brokered by a different mediator—the Europeans or the Russians—and wants to create more international pressure on Israel, he knows that another United Nations discussion and another General Assembly resolution will only provide him with a worthless symbolic victory, which definitely won’t bring the Palestinians closer to a state. Europe has its own problems and is incapable of imposing terms for peace negotiations and setting them in motion, and the Palestinians definitely can’t rely on the Arab states, especially now. Despite the declarations, the Palestinians understand there will be no negotiations without American mediation. So in an attempt to reenact the first intifada, which forced Israel to come to the negotiating table, they are threatening to increase the violent popular struggle against Israel—a sort of war of attrition. The Palestinians will try to execute this battle until the end of Trump’s term or until a change of government in Israel.

Abbas and Trump. The Palestinian leader wanted to believe that the new US president supports the two-state vision (Photo: AP)

Hamas is in a catch-22 situation too. Its leaders are issuing aggressive statements, while exercising restraint and fighting the rebel organizations that are trying to drag Gaza into a war by occasionally firing rockets into Israel.

Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar and Ismail Haniyeh realize that a military adventure will threaten their organization’s rule. Furthermore, Hamas is frustrated by the fact that despite the talks of unity, Abbas “couldn’t care less” about Gaza. Now that the efforts to resume negotiations have been halted, Abbas has no motivation to reconcile with Hamas. The price is being paid, as always, by Gaza’s residents, whose situation has only worsened in the past three months. The reality in the territories, and in east Jerusalem, in the past two decades has completely changed. Now, with Trump’s encouragement, it is becoming permanent—450,000 settlers and civil and economic infrastrctures. The conditions set by the Netanyahu government, which has declared its willingness to enter negotiations without any preconditions, have increased too. In addition to saying “no” to negotiations on Jerusalem, and in addition to demanding that the Palestinians recognize Israel as the Jewish people’s nation state, it is setting a new condition: No negotiations without a Palestinian recognition of Jerusalem as the Jewish people’s capital. On the other side, we are seeing the development of a new Palestinian generation, which is more religious and struggling with collective feelings of anger, frustration, hatred and revenge, as well as a reality of a state-like entity on only 18 percent of the West Bank territories. In a reality in which the Palestinians see no diplomatic hope in the foreseeable future, their ultimate response is sticking to the ethos of the conflict, which justifies—according to their perception—a continuation of the battle. The diplomatic stalemate, the ongoing settlement construction and the de facto annexation of many areas in the West Bank leave no chance for the two-state vision. The move towards a forced binational state—which contradicts the Zionist aspiration for a Jewish and democratic state—is materializing. This reality is charged with destructive forces, both on their side and on ours.

Dr. Ronni Shaked is a research fellow at the Harry S. Truman Research Institute for the Advancement of Peace at Hebrew University.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Abbas left with an empty diplomatic toolbox : http://ift.tt/2DgSpFq

The Palestinian war of narratives

A battle of narratives is underway between Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas and the leaders of Hamas. The outcome of this battle could impact many crucial events in the future. Recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital by US President Donald Trump could serve either one of these narratives. Hamas's narrative is about the need to use violence to promote the Palestinian cause, and holds that force is the only way to get Israel to make concessions. Hamas's violence is not only used against Israel. It is also directed against Abbas and the PA. Hamas's refusal to pay taxes, and its rebellion against the PA, is also a form of violence. The narrative of Abbas, on the other hand, centers around the need to use diplomatic maneuvers, and to turn to the international community to push Israel into concessions. Abbas's position is that organized armed conflict against Israel is futile.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas (Photo: Reuters)

Events in recent years have all, from the Palestinian perspective, backed Hamas's narrative over that of Abbas. The violence of the Second Intifada, from 2000 to 2005, resulted, in Palestinian eyes, in Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and the northern West Bank. The Israeli perception of these events is based on a completely different strategic view. In June 2007, Hamas launched a successful, violent, and brutal revolution in Gaza, ousting Fatah and seizing power. From that moment, Hamas became the ruler of Gaza. It took a decade for Hamas to comprehend the weight of responsibility that comes from governing a population. But its narrative had scored an important victory in Hamas's eyes. In 2008, Hamas's rocket attacks provoked the first Israeli military campaign against Gaza, Operation Cast Lead. By that time, Israel had classified Gaza as a terrorist entity—a classification that remains in place to this day. A strict Israeli policy was put in place in response to Gazan terrorism, restricting the entry of goods, and only items deemed essential were allowed into Gaza. The international community heavily criticized this Israeli policy, and the pressure on Jerusalem to change it was enormous.

President Trump recognizes Jerusalem as Israel's capital (Photo: AP)

Following Operation Cast Lead, Israel adopted a different civilian policy towards Gaza, making it more extensive and allowing more goods into Gaza. Hamas's message to Palestinians in Gaza, and in Judea and Samaria, was clear: Force was successfully used. Israel had "surrendered" and changed its policies, Hamas claimed. In 2012, Egypt's President Mubarak was overthrown, and Muslim Brotherhood leader Muhammad Morsi won elections in Egypt. Hamas felt emboldened by the rise to power of a clear ally and sponsor. It dug over 1000 tunnels linking Gaza to Egypt's Sinai to import all manner of goods—creating a tunnel economy worth hundreds of millions of dollars a year. Hamas felt confident enough to disconnect itself from the Fatah-run Palestinian Authority, and its president, Mahmoud Abbas. This, despite the fact that Abbas continued to pay 40% of the Palestinian Authority's budget to Gaza. Hamas was enjoying the best of both worlds. That same year, Israel became involved in a second military operation against Hamas, Operation Pillar of Defense. This air campaign ended with a negotiated agreement, aimed at decreasing the smuggling of weapons into Gaza from Sinai. But it also ended with a changed Israeli policy, enlarging the number of people and goods that can cross in and out of Gaza. Hamas did not really need the extra goods from Israel, due to the extensive network of tunnels from Sinai providing it with an outlet to an allied Egypt, but the development still allowed Hamas to claim another "victory," through the use of force. In 2013, Egypt experienced a counter-revolution, and Morsi was deposed. His vision of turning Hamas into an Egyptian Islamist proxy was gone, and Egypt's policy towards Hamas was turned on its head. President El-Sisi, the new leader, systematically destroyed the tunnels linking Sinai to Gaza, and boycotted Hamas, which was no longer able to receive cash and supplies from the outside world. It could no longer smuggle weapons either. As a result, Hamas increased the production of weapons domestically, using dual use items entering Gaza. Israel's ban on dual-use items grew astronomically. Gaza's tunnel economy collapsed, and it became wholly dependent on more expensive imports from Israel. It also suddenly found itself dependent on the PA's budget, giving Abbas new leverage powers over Gaza. Hamas faced a potential humanitarian crisis in Gaza, growing shortages in water and electricity, and a mounting financial crisis which meant it could not even pay its own government officials.

Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar (L) and Quds Force commander Qassem Suleimani (Photo: AP)

Hamas began firing rockets again at Israel, vowing to break "the siege." The situation deteriorated into a conflict in the summer of 2014, lasting 52 days. At the end of that conflict, despite sustaining major casualties, and damage to Gaza, Hamas claimed that it faced the strongest military in the Middle East, and remained standing. It claimed victory, one that was very much in the eyes of the beholder. At the end of the conflict, Israel again undertook an obligation to change its civilian policy and allow more goods in to the Strip. Nevertheless, Israel did not create major strategic changes in its policies in Gaza, despite Hamas's narrative. Israel limited its steps to tactical changes. Hamas continues to seek ways to force Israel to make strategic changes, something it has so far failed to do. Abbas's narrative is based on the following guidelines: No to violence, but also, dialogue with Israel is not an option for the time being, since there is no one on the Israeli side to talk to. This leaves the door open to unilateral Palestinian steps. It also creates a suggestion to the Palestinian street, vaguely encouraging unrest, due to the signal that Israel is not a peace partner. The announcement by US President Donald Trump recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital actually plays into Abbas's hands. His claim that there is no one to talk to in Israel can now be broadened to include the United States. Abbas will try to recruit the whole of the EU and the Arab world to his side following the announcement.

Hamas rally in Gaza (Photo: EPA)

The move can be used by Abbas to create Palestinian unity, and move closer to Hamas. Currently, Abbas's legacy will be open to Palestinian accusations of causing a split among the Palestinians, dividing them into two entities. Abbas can also use his toolbox of non-violent options to punish the Americans for being "too pro-Israeli," by undermining the coalition of pragmatic, anti-Iranian Sunni states that are allied to Washington.

These events are part of a major internal Palestinian battle over the right to be the legitimate representative of all Palestinians. If Abbas's narrative wins, it will consolidate Fatah as the top Palestinian representative. If Hamas's path of violence gains the upper hand, the Hamas vision of leading the PLO will become stronger. This is a battle that will ultimately decide who will receive the lion's share of political power in the Palestinian arena.

Col. Yacoubovich concluded his career in the IDF as management head of civilian sector at the Headquarters of the IDF for the Coordination of Govt. Activities in the Territories (COGAT)

Let's block ads! (Why?)

The Palestinian war of narratives : http://ift.tt/2ldEusl

The problem with Trump’s Jerusalem announcement

US President Donald Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital has caused a stir in the world and, unfortunately, led to violence in our region. All Israeli officials welcomed the announcement, and some quoted late Prime Minister Menachem Begin’s statement: “Sometimes, even the obvious has to be said.”

 

The announcement is indeed a joyous occasion, despite being trivial and lacking any practical meaning. That being the case, why is it problematic?

The problem is primarily with what wasn’t included in the statement. The main issue is not Jerusalem’s status as Israel’s capital, but which Jerusalem the president is talking about.

Which Jerusalem is the president talking about? (Photo: Reuters)

The term “united Jerusalem under Israeli sovereignty” doesn’t refer to neighborhoods like Kiryat HaYovel or French Hill, which are in west Jerusalem, or heritage sites like the Western Wall or the Old City’s Jewish Quarter, which will be part of Israeli Jerusalem in every future permanent agreement.

The term “united Jerusalem” refers to the unification of west Jerusalem with east Jerusalem, which was annexed to Jerusalem in 1967 after the Six Day War. This area included 28 Palestinian villages, which were neither part of the city nor part of what the Palestinians call Al-Quds, and it is populated today by some 300,000 Palestinians who make up about 40 percent of the city’s residents.

These areas, which are clearly Palestinian and are being run as Palestinian but are called “Jerusalem” although the Jerusalem Municipality and Israeli state authorities avoid setting foot in them, are in fact a Jerusalem issue that has yet to be decided.

Trump was right to declare that Israel’s borders in Jerusalem would be determined in future negotiations with the Palestinians, but he avoided saying what would happen on the other side of the border. Had he noted that the area that won’t be left in Israel’s hands would become the capital of the future state of Palestine, he would have increased the chance of reaching a peace agreement. By making a unilateral statement, he encouraged the opponents of an agreement on both sides, reducing the chance for a serious peace process anytime soon.

Recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital is possible not only by the US, but by the entire world, including the Palestinians. Even the Palestinian Liberation Organization’s official stance is that, in a permanent agreement, west Jerusalem will be Israel’s capital alongside east Jerusalem as Palestine’s capital.

The Geneva Initiative model, which is accepted by senior officials on both sides, presents a possible picture of Jerusalem with two recognized capitals of two states: West Jerusalem, the Jewish neighborhoods of east Jerusalem and the Old City’s Jewish Quarter, including the Western Wall—under Israeli sovereignty; the Arab neighborhoods of east Jerusalem, the rest of the Old City quarters and the mosque area on the Temple Mount—under Palestinian sovereignty; and free access to everyone in the entire Old City and special arrangements in the holy sites.

The two-state solution will strengthen Jerusalem’s status as Israel’s legitimate capital and maintain its Jewish and democratic character (Photo: Israel Bargudo)

Menachem Begin also said: “We have learned from history that war is avoidable, peace is unavoidable. Many nations have waged war among themselves, and sometimes they used the tragic term ‘perennial enemy.’ There are no perennial enemies. And after all the wars, the inevitable comes—peace.”

After the obvious has been said, and the US has recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and voiced its commitment for peace in the region, it’s time for brave moves and for a fulfilment of the promises on peace. It’s time to agree on the borders of Israeli Jerusalem and on the borders of the State of Israel, alongside a Palestinian state. The two-state solution will strengthen Jerusalem’s status as Israel’s legitimate capital and maintain its Jewish and democratic character. This is a most important Zionist interest.

Brigadier-General (res.) Giora Inbar served as commander of the IDF's Lebanon Division, the Givati Brigade and the elite Shaldag Unit.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

The problem with Trump’s Jerusalem announcement : http://ift.tt/2lekXrs

Not everything is incitement

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Op-ed: Pretentious protest artists, who harm their own side much more than they harm the other side, exist both on the Right and on the Left; the problem is we also have people in both camps who keep crying out ‘incitement’ over every bit of nonsense, as if we have lost our sense of proportion. Not everything is incitement : http://ift.tt/2DdmoOf

BDS, unfortunately, is still alive and kicking

“I hate the headlines and the weather, I'm 19 and I'm on fire,” Lorde sings in “Perfect Places,” the song concluding her wonderful second album.

 

About two years have passed since the night this line was written, and it’s all still true: A young artist with a meteoric career gets caught in the headlines she despises. Her way out results in disappointment for tens of thousands of Israelis.

Shortly after the production company confirmed that Lorde had decided to cancel her planned concert in Israel, the usual outburst of slurs emerged: From “she probably didn’t sell enough tickets” to “who is she anyway?”

One doesn’t have to agree with the BDS movement to understand Lorde’s position (Photo: Lior Keter)

But the truth is that like Radiohead’s determination to defy Roger Waters lifted our spirits ahead of the band’s historic show at Tel Aviv’s Yarkon Park, Lorde’s retraction is very depressing. It’s not every day and not every decade that the Israeli audience gets an opportunity to see a musician as she sails to the top, at the end of a phenomenal year in nearly every aspect.

One doesn’t have to agree with the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement to understand Lorde’s position. Whether we like it or not, an international artist’s performance in Israel is a political act. Those who do it are either part of a well-oiled system which is interested in the bottom line—the money—or people who have formed an opinion and are capable of dealing with the consequences.

Lorde, it seems, is neither here nor there. It also has to do with age and experience. So it was nice reading the post published by the show’s producer, Eran Arielli, who acknowledged Lorde's difficulty in dealing with the pressure and thanked her for her actual willingness to perform here. That’s the response of a person who recognizes the complexity of the situation and doesn’t rush to get offended on behalf of the nation.

The past summer’s concerts, and primarily the high profile of Radiohead’s arrival, gave us the feeling that BDS had been defeated. Lorde’s cancellation indicates that it was an illusion. Our justice minister can tell us that she isn’t asked about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in Japan, but in the touring industry it appears to be a relevant issue. We can get annoyed, protest and slam the door angrily like a 10 year old who wasn’t given the toy he demanded. That won’t change reality.

“Let’s go to perfect places,” Lorde sings. Israel, unfortunately, isn’t one of them.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

BDS, unfortunately, is still alive and kicking : http://ift.tt/2kXxW1N

What happens at the UN GA stays at the UN GA

The proper response to the United Nations’ obsession with Israel was likely provided by Irish-American ambassador who represented the United States at the organization in the mid-1970s.

A moment after the General Assembly members voted in favor of Resolution 3379, which determined that “Zionism is racism,” that ambassador, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, approached his Israeli colleague, Chaim Herzog, gave him a warm hug and expressed his frustration with the UN—which is likely shared by many people today—by saying: “F**k ‘em.”

The United Nations General Assembly, where Arab states are given the possibility to let off diplomatic steam in the form of anti-Israel resolutions (Photo: AFP)

As our prime minister, senior ministers and ambassador at the UN issue fiery statements against the General Assembly’s recent condemnation resolution, they should perhaps tone down their comments and consider adopting Moynihan’s approach, or at least a refined version of that approach. A slightly deeper consideration of the organization’s internal tensions, and the complicated manner in which it operates, indicates that symbolic votes of this kind not only fail to threaten Israel, but they may actually help Israel indirectly.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who doesn’t miss an opportunity to use the UN stage to put on his theatrical shows, has failed to understand that that’s the General Assembly’s exact purpose: Acting. Engaging in pretend diplomacy.

Anyone who has read the UN Charter and has been following the organization knows that like in Las Vegas, what happens at the UN General Assembly stays at the UN General Assembly. Chapter IV of the UN Charter specifies the General Assembly’s functions and powers: To make recommendations, to talk, to discuss, to initiate studies and to consider. The main thing the General Assembly is explicitly unauthorized to do is to act. This power is reserved to the Security Council, and that’s the only place where Israel could really suffer.

The UN Security Council, the place where policy is mader rather than just noise (Photo: Reuters)

Despite the democratic slogans the UN likes to wrap itself in, it’s really an anti-democratic body where the basic principle of one vote per member isn’t actually valid in light of the veto right granted to the permanent members—the US, China, Russia, Britain and France—at the Security Council. They are the only ones with the authority to activate or prevent the charter’s operative articles—41 and 42—which permit the use of sanctions and military measures.

That’s no coincidence. When the Americans founded the organization at the end of World War II, they realized that if they wanted to secure their hegemony, they had to create a semblance of comradeship and equality and give each member a false representation of power. And that’s exactly what the General Assembly does: It allows countries with no real influence in international terms—military, political or economic—to feel as if they have some kind of influence.

It’s unclear whether Netanyahu or US President Donald Trump understand this link between the Security Council and the General Assembly—between where policy is made and where the main thing that is made is noise. But thanks to the possibility to let off diplomatic steam in the form of anti-Israel resolutions at the General Assembly, the Arab states, Turkey and Iran are essentially settling for symbolic victories—especially for internal needs—which reduce the pressure to act against Israel at the Security Council.

So instead of deciding to stop playing by the rules and looking for ways to punish states that voted against us, we should remember that as long as the General Assembly focuses on words against Israel, the Security Council will likely avoid taking action against Israel.

Dr. Yoav Fromer teaches politics and history at Tel Aviv University.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

What happens at the UN GA stays at the UN GA : http://ift.tt/2Db8Enm

Right-wing anti-corruption protest is just the tip of the iceberg

In recent weeks, week after week, I have been going to the left-wing protest. It’s easy to understand why a right-wing person would find it difficult to be there.

In the last elections, the Zionist Union won 34.26 percent of the votes in Tel Aviv, the city where an absolute majority of the protestors likely came from. Meretz won 13.03 percent of the votes. The Arab Joint List won 3.25 percent. Most of the Joint List voters in Tel Aviv are likely Hadash members. Hadash’s presence in the protest, however, at least according to the signs, is close to 50 percent. So the Right rightly needed a separate protest. 

Saturday’s right-wing anti-corruption protest in Jerusalem. Hundreds who represent thousands (Photo: Yoav Dudkevitch)

The poll published on Channel 13’s “Meet the Press” on Saturday evening should concern Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. First of all, 59 percent of the public believe the police, and only 27 percent believe Netanyahu. Second, the majority of the public believes Netanyahu should resign if the police recommend an indictment against him, both on fraud and breach of trust offenses and on bribery offenses. In other words, the prime minister’s horror speech last week was counterproductive. Even if we consider the polls’ standard deviation, a clear majority of the public is still on the law enforcement authorities’ side rather than on Netanyahu's side. The speech didn’t help Netanyahu; it hurt him. Where is the Right in the picture? Well, the majority clearly doesn’t include only left-wing people, but also a considerable part of Likud voters. The Right has the same problem as the Left: It is incapable of getting masses out on the streets. The masses aren’t going out to protest. That doesn’t mean they support Netanyahu. And when one of the prominent leaders of the national-religious Right, Rabbi Haim Druckman, issues a statement against the protest, the difficulty to speak out against Netanyahu grows. We should pay attention, however, to the fact that Druckman is doing exactly what the Left did to former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon during the disengagement from Gaza. He isn’t saying that Netanyahu is innocent and flawless. He is just saying that the Right must not do anything which would jeopardize the right-wing rule. He is keeping Netanyahu out of public criticism. In the past few months, Netanyahu himself has become less and less stately. Last week’s speech against police recommendations wasn’t directed at the public. Its purpose was to motivate his fool fans in Likud. And they are indeed becoming much more aggressive. But it’s counterproductive: As Netanyahu and his blind followers become more and more blatant and less and less stately, they lose more and more members of the liberal, thinking Right, which puts the national interest first. In general, the repeated attempts to urge the Right to launch a pro-Netanyahu protest against the Left were completely futile. I saw them there, again and again, in their wretchedness. It’s hard to say that there were several dozen of them there, because there weren’t. There were only few people, with a noisy microphone, which failed to cover up the disgrace.

Prime Minister Netanyahu's ‘horror speech’ last week was counterproductive (Photo: Motti Kimchi)

Likud has a significant stately component. Nationalism is stateliness too. His anti-stately approach goes against the Right’s entire doctrine. Even the ideological Right, in the difficult moments of the disengagement, eventually chose the stately approach. But Netanyahu, in a moment of personal pressure, chose an opposite approach. It isn’t helping him. On the contrary: Anyone paying attention to the discourse developing recently in the Right in general, and in Likud in particular, knows that the frustration there is on the rise. The things being said about Netanyahu, and not just behind closed doors, are far from expressions of unconditional support. Most importantly, they know that Netanyahu could have defended himself with slightly better arguments, and he has better arguments. But Netanyahu favors Netanyahu over stateliness. The Right that protested in Jerusalem on Saturday evening is only the tip of the iceberg. They are hundreds who represent thousands. One of Netanyahu's foolish followers referred to them as “useful idiots of the Left.” That’s a baseless claim and a baseless comparison, because the useful idiots—today and in the past—are the ones who support, defend and justify regimes of tyranny and terror and who are mainly characterized by blindness. That’s exactly what characterizes Netanyahu's foolish followers today. The right-wing people who are taking to the streets to defend the rule of law and to fight corruption are not the ones suffering from blindness. Netanyahu is waging a double battle, both legal and public. He already knows that he’s about to lose the first battle, once the police recommendations are published. His rivals are not the ones who are creating cracks in the Right that will lead to a loss in the public arena as well. It’s Netanyahu himself. It’s his conduct. It’s his anti-stateliness. He is bringing few people closer, but driving many others away.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Right-wing anti-corruption protest is just the tip of the iceberg : http://ift.tt/2ptRLSG