No need for Reform Jews to demand other 'fix' their religion

Many years ago, a delegation of Reform Jews visited Israel who took part in an interview with Yedioth Ahronoth. Our own. After the guests explained their positions and their beliefs, the then editor-in-chief, the late Dov Judkowski asked the editors of the newspaper to give their opinions.

Since the guests explained to us that their position is that the Jewish religion must march with the times and be more liberal—for example repeal laws on intermarriage and recognize marriages in which the wife is not Jewish and has not converted—and in other words, get rid of laws which are from a bygone era and which have no place in the world in which we live, I asked for permission to speak.

Women of the Wall (Photo: Amit Shabi)

I told the guests that these were the exact same arguments as those put forth by Paul the Apostle, commonly known as Saint Paul and also known by his Jewish name Saul of Tarsus. He was one of the central figures in the establishment and spreading of Christianity, who many see to this day as the true founder, and I added: “He too, only wanted to simplify the Jewish religion and adapt in to the spirit of the times.” There is no need to explain today what the disciples and followers of Saul of Tarsus brought about for Judaism. Expulsion, pogroms, demographic destruction, humiliation and oppression and the murder of millions of Jews has followed since the exile after the destruction of the Second Temple until the Holocaust. Anti-Semitism and hate crimes have never to this very day.

(Photo: Amit Shabi)

I do not observe all 613 commandments, only a small number of them, such as kashrut (dietary laws) and fast days, but I absolutely object to the religious reforms which are demanded by many Jews who live in the US and in other countries. Obviously, I also categorically reject smaller circles of zealots who do not recognize the State of Israel, in which some of them even live. But these extremists do not represent the Jewish religion and certainly not its foundations. In a poll that was conducted recently by the American Jewish Committee, a deep rift was exposed between Jews living in the US and in Israel. Only 12 percent of the American Jews polled described the relationship between US Jewry and Israel’s Jews as “family” and around one third stated that they felt no felt no closeness with Jews in Israel.

(Photo: Women of the Wall)

I would add to this poll a few questions that did not appear in it. For example, how many of the American Jews had visited Israel? According to various surveys, fewer than 20 percent have done so. In other words, the majority of them have not even bothered to visit the state of the Jewish people, in which more than 6.5 million of them live today. And how many Reform Jews made Aliyah to Israel? It is better not to mention the numbers. A vast majority, 90 percent of American Jews who immigrated to Israel—and they are welcome—are Orthodox Zionists who wish to live with their brethren without being required to “fix” their religion. So what is all the noise about surrounding the joint prayer services at the Western Wall, or surrounding the recognition of converts or other Reform and Conservative marriages? I do not know of any Jew who died as a result of separate prayer services or marriages that took place in the Rabbinate. In my opinion and that of the majority of Israelis—the majority of whom do not observe the commandments at all—this is a tradition of thousands of years, and what is wrong with preserving our ancient tradition?

Let's block ads! (Why?)

No need for Reform Jews to demand other 'fix' their religion : https://ift.tt/2wwI2wi

The parallel universe of Hassan Nasrallah

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah spoke Sunday in honor of the "Second Liberation Day on the Lebanese-Syrian border," in which the organization marked the Liberation of Lebanon from the Syrian rebels and during which he laid out the organization’s worldview: Hezbollah is a stabilizing force in the region. It is defending Lebanon, and defeated Israel and the rebels including ISIS. As far as Nasrallah is concerned, the Syrian civil is a failed American-Saudi-Zionist conspiracy.

 

Before you start laughing, you should ask the Arab-speaking Israelis among us how many of them believe the theory; you will be surprised by the response. Who is Nasrallah threatening this time (other than Israel)? And what is the conspiracy theory that is so persuasive in the Arab sector?

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah (Photo: EPA)

Nasrallah's speech delivered in classical Arabic was broadcast on a screen at the Hezbollah celebrations in al-Hermel in the Lebanon Valley, on the northeastern border with Syria, which until recently had been threatened by the Syrian rebels.

Nasrallah was of course careful not to leave his secure bunker, apparently located in Dahiya, the southern suburb of Beirut. It seems that he is afraid of the new enemies he has accumulated in the civil war even more than he is afraid of Israel. At the beginning of the speech, Nasrallah congratulated those present for the first anniversary of the organization's victory in this region and the liberation of the entire border area from the Syrian rebels. He praised the martyrs who sacrificed themselves, and saved the whole of the Lebanon Valley from the hands of Sunni jihad organizations. In his speech he raised the following questions: What would have happened if ISIS and Jabhat a-Nusra had won in Syria? What would have been the fate of the Middle East had ISIS won in Iraq? And what would these organizations do in Lebanon?

Hezbollah rally

Nasrallah described the appalling violence used by these Wahhabi organizations against their Sunni "brethren" in areas under their control, and scorned the Lebanese government for not joining the struggle against the rebels in Syria at the beginning of the civil war, because many in Lebanon supported them. Those who acted responsibly, in his view were the axis of resistance, i.e. Iran, the Syrian regime, and Hezbollah. According to Nasrallah, any Lebanese person who opposed their interference seven years ago now understands its importance for the rescue of Lebanon. In the speech, Nasrallah explained that Hezbollah's entry into Syria was a defensive war for Lebanon and not an invasion, and that the organization's victories in al-Qusayr, Kalmon, the Damascus suburbs, a-Zabdani, and Jarud Arsal near the Lebanese border were what prevented the invasion of Lebanon by those “Takfiri”—those who consider the rest of Muslims as infidels and cheapen their blood.

In his speech, Nasrallah emphasized the mobilization of Hezbollah youth and the enthusiasm they demonstrated in fighting. He explained that unlike previous generations in Hezbollah, the quality of the fighters stems from their high school and academic education as well. They are educated in the footsteps of Hussein Ben Ali, "the father of the martyrs," who was the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad and was willing to sacrifice himself in Karbala, Iraq, for the sake of justice. The Shi'ites blame the Sunnis for the murder of Hussein.

According to Nasrallah, the situation in Israel is the opposite: there is a crisis of enlistment for combat units due to poor motivation and the lack of a desire to sacrifice for the homeland, and tens of thousands of soldiers seek leave on mental health grounds. He cited Israeli experts who say Israel is not prepared for the next war, despite the IDF arming itself with the best military technology. At one point, Nasrallah raised his voice and claimed that following the "Israeli defeat" in the Second Lebanon War, Hezbollah had achieved deterrence and that since then Israel has not dared to attack Lebanon. He added that the American sanctions did not affect the organization at all and that the Shi'ites in Lebanon were living well and are not materialistic. The “second Liberation Day” celebrates the liberation of all of Lebanon from the Syrian rebels, while the “first Liberation Day" marked on May 25, is a holiday invented by Hezbollah to mark the liberation of Lebanon from the "Zionist enemy" after the Israeli withdrawal from south Lebanon in 2000. Thus Nasrallah presents Hezbollah as the shield of Lebanon against external invaders.

Israeli exit from south Lebanon, 2000 (Photo: Effi Shrir)

According to Nasrallah, the US is behind ISIS and assists them militarily. Washington has threatened to impose sanctions on Lebanon if Hezbollah continues to intervene in Syria.

According to Nasrallah, while Hezbollah, the Iraqi army (whose commanders are Shiite) and the Syrian army fought against ISIS, the US has actually been working on extending the lengthening of ISIS, just as it helped al-Qaeda in Afghanistan in the 1980s.

But according to Nasrallah, anyone who relied on American aid ultimately lost, as happened to the Shah in Iran, who was abandoned by the US. The US has no ideology, in Nasrallah’s eyes, but only economic interests, primarily oil. He added that Israel also abandons its friends when they no longer serve its purposes, as Israel abandoned the South Lebanon Army when it left Lebanon in 2000. Nasrallah specifically pointed to the joint US-Saudi military headquarters in northern Jordan, known as the Military Operations Center (MOC), which he says is controlling the war in Syria behind the scenes and in full coordination with Israel since 2013.

Assad meeting Iranian official (Photo: AP)

In the past year, the Americans have also abandoned the rebels in southern Syria and the region was recaptured by the Syrian regime. Nasrallah asked: Why does the United States oppose the war against al-Qaeda in Idlib, the last pocket of rebels in Syria? They are defined as terrorists by the international community. Nasrallah also called on the world to prepare for another "chemical show," meaning that the rebels in Idlib would claim that the Syrian regime was killing them with unconventional weapons. He claimed that the rebels would use this weapon against civilians in areas under their control in order to mobilize the international community to their advantage and provide an excuse for an American attack against the the axis of resistance. The International Court of Justice found that Hezbollah activists were involved in the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri . Nasrallah threatened elements in Lebanon who intend to cooperate with the tribunal: "Do not play with fire." The secretary general of Hezbollah spoke of the area east of the Euphrates in Syria which is controlled by the Kurds and advised them to continue negotiations with the Syrian government because the Americans would soon abandoned them as well, adding that the Americans had also abandoned the Palestinian Authority and that the trump administration plans to remove the matter of Jerusalem and the refugees from the agenda. According to Nasrallah, the triangle of evil is Trump, Netanyahu and Mohammed bin Salman, the Saudi crown prince — corrupt and greedy people who want to run the Middle East and eliminate the Palestinian issue. Nasrallah responded to the claim that Hezbollah had taken control of Lebanon and said that these were old accusations, ignoring the fact that Hezbollah is the largest political party in Lebanon, a party that is justifiably worthy of interfering in state affairs (more than 30 percent of Lebanese are Shi'ites). He also said that the purpose of this claim is to blame the organization for the economic crisis and other problems of Lebanon. He is careful not to mention Iran, which is the true boss in Lebanon today. Are you convinced?

The ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra phenomenon has become Hezbollah's most important tool to whitewash its crimes. Lebanese militias committed heinous crimes against the Sunni population in Iraq and Syria in the name of the war against ISIS.

Nasrallah did not save Lebanon, but on the contrary, he brought it into the war in Syria and caused the rebels to invade northern Lebanon in retaliation. He sent young Shiites to their deaths in order to continue receiving funds and support from Tehran and to train his fighters for the next war against Israel.

(Photo: AP)

It is important to note that it was not the assistance of Iran and Hezbollah that saved Assad from collapse in 2015. Had Russia not intervened in the war in Syria, Hezbollah would have been crowned the main culprit in attracting jihadist organizations into Lebanon and in the destruction of the state. That is also the reason Nasrallah removed any mention of Iran from his speech. He did not mention Russia either, in order to win credit for Putin's achievements. Lebanon's difficult economic situation is also largely due to the transformation of Lebanon into a Hezbollah-Land, a country subject to terrorism and drug trafficking, a country that spooks investors and is subject to international sanctions. The balance of deterrence that has been established since 2006 is the opposite of what Nasrallah described: It is Israel that created a situation in which Hezbollah no longer fulfills its goals — to attack it. As far as Hezbollah is concerned, those who fought ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra, that is, Hezbollah, Assad and Iran, are automatically on the good side, but in reality these are terrorist organizations fighting each other, and at the moment Hezbollah is on the winning side —thanks to the Russian intervention. Shiite terrorism is replacing Sunni terrorism. The worrisome phenomenon is Hezbollah's success on the propaganda level. Many of the Arabs in Lebanon, Syria and even Israel believe Nasrallah's words. As far as they are concerned, the war in Syria did not break out as a result of prolonged and severe repression, but rather because of an Israeli-American-Saudi conspiracy to topple Assad. As far as they are concerned, Hezbollah is not a cancer spreading throughout the body of Lebanon, but rather it is the one that saved Lebanon from the Jihad organizations. They believe that Israel was not neutral in the war in Syria, but rather supported the rebels against the regime while ignoring their affiliation with al-Qaeda. According to them, Israel and Saudi Arabia are working together to push aside the Palestinian issue and promote Trump's "deal of the century." Sounds delusional? Ask your Arab neighbors, and you will be surprised by their reactions. Dr. Yaron Friedman, is a Ynet commentator for Arab affairs, he is a graduate of the Sorbonne University in Paris, a lecturer on Islam and an Arabic teacher at the University of Haifa in the Middle East and Islamic Studies Department. His book “The Alawites — History, Religion and Identity” was published in English by Brill-Leiden in 2010.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

The parallel universe of Hassan Nasrallah : https://ift.tt/2Ny9Ruz

The joint struggle

A month after the enactment of the Nation-State Law, it is still difficult to assess how it will affect our lives as Arab citizens in the Jewish state.

 

The question, however, concerns not only its legal and constitutional implications, but also its anti-Arab, anti-democratic statement directed against us, led directly by cabinet ministers and the prime minister; it carries dangerous implications for the public discourse, andd leads to our identification as an enemy from within. 

 

 

Rabin Sq. protest aganist the law (Photo: Tal Shahar)

Arab society is leading a public and parliamentary protest, in Israel and around the world, against the law and calling for the protection of Arab society's status in its homeland, including its language as well as its rights.

But these protests were nearly completely ignored, until the mass demonstration in Tel Aviv on November eighth. This demonstration, in which more than 10,000 Jewish supporters took part alongside the Arab demonstrators, was harshly criticized, especially by the prime minister. Not for nothing.

It frightened him to see Arab society, whom he has always tried to disengage from Israeli society, insisting on swarming to Tel Aviv and demanding their right to full equality, without renouncing its Palestinian national identity. But Jewish voices opposing the law also frighten him. He understands that it is not merely delicate leftist who are demonstrating, but rather people whose country is very dear to them, who are acting in its favor and who genuinely fear the consistent harm done to democracy by the right wing, which I too find important despite the blind eye turned towards our discrimination and the crimes of occupation committed against our fellow Palestinians beyond the Green Line.

 

Amjad Shbita (Photo: Sikuy Organization)

Netanyahu is afraid, because he understands that his conduct does not leave his opponents many options: as Arab citizens, he leaves us no choice but to voice our cry to Israeli society and to the entire world. We will not agree to shut ourselves up in our communities and we will not volunteer for the execution of a political transfer.

The Jewish democratic forces will not remain indifferent, but will intensify their protest against the unrestrained gallop into a less democratic state with more and more fascist features. What frightens Netanyahu the most is that the joint protest proved that the conditions are ripe, more than ever, for connecting these two communities in a joint struggle with enormous potential for political change in Israel. The majority of the Arab public sees itself as part of the Palestinian people, and regards its partnership with progressive elements of Jewish society as a strategic goal for peace, equality and democracy. For decades, mainstream Israeli society has been able to respect this complexity and to cooperate on certain matters with Arab citizens and their political representatives.

(Photo: Tal Shahar)

 

The peak of the Jewish-Arab partnership was realized when the representatives of Arab society supported the 1993 Rabin government, despite Rabin’s military past, because of the peace process. The Rabin assassination, the events of October 2000 and the rise of the right, severely damaged this partnership.

The joint protest against the Nation-State Law has the potential of restoring the joint Jewish-Arab struggle, and Netanyahu is attacking it with incitement and divisiveness. The absurd thing is that those politicians whom he accuses of forgetting "what it means to be a Jew" and the media, whom he accuses of betrayal and of being leftists, are following him albeit being alarmed by his incitement against Arab citizens. A joint Arab-Jewish struggle can bring down the right and bring about fundamental change, but it will only happen if those Jewish politicians, who claim to be an alternative to the right, stop believing in Netanyahu's incitement and stop playing into his hands but rather see Arab citizens and their representatives as equal partners.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

The joint struggle : https://ift.tt/2C1867Y

Let the Palestinians make lemonade of Trump's lemons

Cutting aid to the Palestinians, cutting funding to UNRWA, and the Trump administration's declaration that it does not recognize the Palestinian "right of return," are all welcomed steps, because they will force the Palestinian Authority, Hamas and other factions in the PLO to adopt a more practical view on a permanent resolution to the conflict. Perhaps these moves could even cause the Palestinians to recalculate their own steps and come back to the negotiating table with a paradigm that would be closer to something Israel would consider acceptable.

But alongside the possibilities in these moves by Washington, we must first recognize the risks. The economic pressure, which is the result of cutting UNRWA's funding, will almost certainly cause a very serious and very real humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and to a lesser degree in Judea and Samaria as well.

In addition, the Palestinian leadership's response to Trump's declaration, which pulls the rug out from under the international legitimacy for the Palestinian "right of return" demand, will almost certainly spark violence on Gaza and West Bank streets, mostly on the backdrop of the battle over the PA leadership in the wake of Abbas's departure.

US President Donald Trump; Palestinian President Abbas (Photo: AFP)

Therefore, if the US, Israel—and perhaps also the Quartet—want to leverage the funding cuts and the canceling the recognition for the Palestinian "right of return" in order to achieve a groundbreaking positive result, this process must be done gradually and be accompanied by supplementary economic moves. Washington needs to gradually cut the funds the Palestinians receive either directly or through UNRWA over 3-4 years in a way that allows the supplementary economic moves to be implemented on the ground, giving the Palestinians in Gaza and in Judea and Samaria alternative sources of income and employment. Otherwise, cutting the funding will, in short order, bring to a humanitarian crisis in the strip that Israel has a supreme political and security interest in preventing. Such a crisis will lead to security tensions that Hamas would either initiate or be dragged into—and the rest is known. A similar conflict could develop in Judea and Samaria as well. There won't be a humanitarian crisis, but the worsening unemployment situation will serve as another incentive for unrest, which has been bubbling under the surface anyway. It will start with street protests—and the rest is known here as well. It could end with another mini-intifada, or perhaps even a full-blown intifada.

All of this could be avoided if the Trump administration announces a gradual reduction of funding, which will be done in tandem with a plan for economic investments and projects to establish electricity, water, health and education infrastructures in the strip and in Judea and Samaria, in order to replace the donations the Palestinians receive through UNRWA and other international bodies. Indirectly, such a "Marshall Plan" for Gaza and the West Bank could increase Palestinian motivation to reach a peaceful resolution to the conflict, and create internal processes within Palestinian society to allow this. On such a backdrop, the US withdrawing its recognition of the Palestinian "right of return" won't lead to such serious unrest.

The Gaza donor countries convened in Brussels Tuesday. This is an excellent opportunity to establish an international consortium—including Arab states—that would also supervise and ensure the economic investments are not funneled by Hamas to its military wing and that the Palestinian education system doesn't teach incitement.

Israel would be an active partner in such a consortium, but not as a regular member, rather a "facilitator." Meaning, the Israeli government won't fund or directly carry out the moves, but will do everything in its power to ensure the implementation of these moves will be done quickly through our ports and the border crossings under our control. Professional, engineering and mostly security consultation to the international consortium is necessary not just for effective implementation, but also to maintain our vital national security interests.

We can talk and bargain over everything else after there's a calm in the Gaza Strip (a return to the post-Protective Edge understandings), which will allow this process to begin. Calm currently prevails in the West Bank, where this process can start immediately. Then, when this process is already underway, serious negotiations could start over the captives and the bodies of the soldiers that need to be returned home, as well as all kinds of "arrangements."

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Let the Palestinians make lemonade of Trump's lemons : https://ift.tt/2Np5KAP

Im Tirtzu—from consciousness to reality

In an opinion piece published earlier this week on Ynetnews, the former director of the Shin Bet, Carmi Gillon, stated that Im Tirtzu is "the most influential movement in Israel in recent years." And I am pleased to agree with him.

Furthermore, in Gillon's analysis of the political climate in Israel, he stated that words shape reality; in other words, consciousness, and our beliefs, shape our perception of reality.

Since Im Tirtzu's establishment, there has been a refreshing change in the public discourse in Israel. After many long years, the nationalist and Zionist Israeli public has gotten an authentic civil society organization that unequivocally promotes values taught by pioneers like Herzl, Jabotinsky, Ben-Gurion and Berl Katznelson. First consciousness, then reality.

Im Tirtzu protesters (Photo: Ohad Zwigenberg)

Im Tirtzu is the leading voice against those who, in the words of poet Nathan Alterman, try to "dull his brain so that he will forget that justice is with him." This tactic, to uproot the belief in the justness of Zionism, is what prompted Im Tirtzu to come into being. And after more than a decade of activities, as Gillon stated, the fruits of our labor can easily be seen.

We succeeded in returning positive discourse surrounding Zionism to center stage in Israel—by conveying to students the understanding that freedom of speech and academic freedom is for everyone, not only for far-left professors; by returning the appreciation for IDF reservists nationwide; by assisting Israeli minorities to serve in the IDF or do national service; and by providing recognition to ultra-Orthodox who serve in the IDF.

We succeeded in restoring blue-and-white to campuses where the flag of the Palestine Liberation Organization became commonplace. We succeeded in assisting bereaved families and wounded IDF veterans to have their voices heard. Above all, we succeeded in providing a response for IDF soldiers in the face of unrelenting slander and persecution, which climaxed with the infamous Goldstone Report after Operation Cast Lead.

But there is still much work to be done, precisely because of the organization that Gillon proudly made a "modest contribution" to. The New Israel Fund, a foreign political organization registered in Israel as a foreign company, is aggressively working to harm the character of the state. The annual budget of the NIF is some $30 million, while the budget of Im Tirtzu is less than three percent of that.

Former Shin Bet director Carmi Gillon (Photo: Motti Kimchi)

Although Gillon admittedly did not "thoroughly examine the list of organizations benefiting from its funds," the NIF gives millions to NGOs that, inter alia, defame IDF soldiers, petition the courts against Israel's security policy, defend terrorists in courts, and lead the campaign of the delegitimization of Israel.

In the case of the NIF, it is money—not words—that inflict lethal wounds onto the Israeli public.

In recent weeks, we have witnessed a rise in activities by the NIF and its grantee organizations. One the one hand, they have engaged in activities against the freedom of expression of bereaved families who wrote a letter concerning Maj. Gen. Yair Golan and against the performance of artist Berry Sakharof in the Mount Hebron region.

On the other hand, they explicitly called on the public to join a protest together with the Arab High Follow-Up Committee, in which slogans like "with blood and spirit we will redeem Palestine" were chanted.

Whoever strives to live in a free, Jewish and democratic state, cannot stand aside and remain silent in the face of these activities.

Alon Schvartzer is the Director of Policy for Im Tirtzu.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Im Tirtzu—from consciousness to reality : https://ift.tt/2LAsagI

Reimagining Gaza while recognizing reality

Those who dream of peace must always reckon with reality. As a former IDF Division Commander who was stationed within Gaza, I know something of that reality, both inside the Strip, and among our own citizens, particularly those living near the Gaza border.

I also believe that we must always scan the horizon for a solution to our conflict with the Palestinians, and at any point be prepared to consider new opportunities which may emerge—with the understanding that anything which creates the conditions for an improvement in the situation is worth considering, so long as it meets Israel’s strategic, humanitarian, and security goals. We, who pride ourselves on being a creative “Start-Up Nation” must not shy away from outside-the-box thinking. The New State Solution, is an initiative I therefore endorse. It seeks to establish a Palestinian state in Gaza and an adjoining section of the northern Sinai Peninsula. Such a state would enable economic growth along an expanded coastline and offer Gazans new hope. It would be akin to a modern-day Marshall Plan.

(Photo: AFP)

The reality of Gaza today is one of total stagnation. It has been that way for decades, but the Gazan people’s sense of hopelessness is being made more acute by the current economic hardship brought about by the Hamas rule of the area.

I recognize that many obstacles stand in the way to success for any plan to transform Gaza, including the likely resistance of Hamas toward prioritizing improvement of the lives of Gazans over seeking to bring about Israel's destruction. The outlook and goals of Hamas are certainly a problem, but if a plan has merit that plan should at least be put on the table, regardless of Hamas' resistance. Thereafter, we can discuss the "why nots." We should move beyond the stagnation stagnation, toward the implementation of a reality where Gazans can improve their lives, and even flourish. Let Hamas be made to respond. Beyond Hamas, let us even communicate with the people of Gaza themselves. Let us not write off Gaza until we have made our position, and the benefits of this approach, clear to both the leadership and the people, distinct form one another as they are. Hamas's stoking of tensions on the border may have helped to thrust the Gazan issue back in to the gaze of the world, but in reality, neither Hamas, nor the people they purport to represent, have gained much. Hamas is failing to alleviate poverty in the Strip and they are thus in a weakened position among its own constituents, a situation they attempt to manage by creating further violent confrontation with Israel, ultimately holding themselves in a cycle that leads nobody anywhere. In the configuration of the New State Solution, there is no need to think in terms of a win-lose deal. There is ample opportunity for all parties to gain. To set up factories, build new neighborhoods, improve education, and to bring benefit to the people of Gaza does not require any party to lose out. If the plan can be communicated directly to the people of Gaza, there is a chance that they will independently press Hamas to finally improve their dysfunctional and corrupt economy, to create educational opportunities, and to build them a better life. When Gazans come to see that their recent campaign to launch incendiary kites into Israel has accomplished little to improve their lot, they may yet reach a point where they will press their leaders to improve their lives. While it is not certain that authoritarian leadership as harsh as Hamas would be moved by popular sentiment, given how demonstrations against poverty have led to revolution throughout the Middle East, a clearly presented plan for economic betterment may indeed affect the discourse within Gaza. Toppling Hamas in a military campaign, an often-discussed alternative, is possible. It should be a last resort. Although we possess the military ability to do so, we cannot say with certainty who will fill the vacuum of power left by a Hamas departure, nor can we say with certainty what the will of the Palestinian people of Gaza would be if Hamas was removed, whether for Palestinian Authority governance, or something else. The use of force to eliminate Hamas would also likely result in high casualties and a public outcry which could only be placated if there were no better options. It is therefore preferable to present a plan from which even the Hamas government can gain. Hamas is interested in receiving substantial funds—they just want to redirect it to their goals. When pressed however, they should not be opposed to the idea of investment which lifts the burden from the lives of their people. If they are, let them respond to a formal offer from an international coalition with massive funding for infrastructure projects. Let them tell the world and their own people that they are not interested. Let them explain their rejection of a better future. I urge the readers to consider the New State plan. Imagine transforming just one of the cramped and unnecessarily squalid refugee camps of Gaza. Let us build a new neighborhood in the adjacent open sands of Sinai, where there is no threat to Israel’s population, and the land is not assigned to any pre-existing dispute. There is no lack of international goodwill and funding for the creation of a modern suburb in place of a 'refugee camp,' a place that can be a shining example to the world of urban planning, sustainability, improved quality of life, and beauty. In a phased approach, we can build a better future for Gazans, neighborhood by neighborhood. Since 1948, and despite the existence of UNWRA, a billion dollar a year branch of the UN dedicated only to the Palestinian refugees and their descendants—and with all the years of UNWRA budget allocations that have come and gone—next to nothing has progressed in these camps. Can that be viewed as reasonable?

(Photo: AFP)

  Why, for example, in the Bureij Refugee Camp, now a de facto neighborhood of Gaza, must 35,000 people still live without a sewage system, so that waste accumulates freely in the Wadi Gaza stream, poisoning the local environment? Surely we can break the status quo of such extreme impoverishment, born of extremism, and alter this equation entirely. Let us present a plan, a budget, and begin by rebuilding just one of these camps, within an implementation timeframe of five to ten years. With funds earmarked strictly and carefully to ensure they reach their intended purpose, the unemployed majority in Gaza will see an economic boon, through jobs created at a massive scale in the construction sector.

Before we say it is not possible, let us first put such a proposal on the table. Let us start conveying the plan to Hamas and to the Gazan people. Let us find the benefit for our regional neighbors. At minimum, let us uncover for the world who Hamas really is by way of their rejectionism. At maximum, let us transform the situation. Gaza need not remain this way as it is. We can build a better future for all.

Brigadier-General Shmuel Tzuker (Res.) is a former commander of the IDF’s Gaza Division, the Lebanon Division, and the Judea & Samaria Division. He was designated Deputy Director General of Production and Procurement for the Israel Ministry of Defense. He is a lecturer at Bar-Ilan University.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Reimagining Gaza while recognizing reality : https://ift.tt/2ofRG1L

The terrorists among us

The question isn't whether there are rotten apples among us. Of course there are. There's no need to understand them. There's no need to say they're in distress because of "what the other side is doing to us." There's no need to say they're suffering from mental issues.

  Because when eight young men check the identity of other young men, and then barbarically beat them as soon as they learn they're Arabs, there's no need to understand the motives, and there's certainly no need for calls along the lines of "In blood and fire we'll save Judea."

Arabs attacked in Kiryat Haim

These are terrorists. Everything we do to terrorists who harm Jews for being Jews, we should do to terrorists who harm Arabs for being Arabs.

Following the horrendous terror attack at the Charlie Hebdo magazine, many commentators and experts were interviewed in the European media. All of them, without exception, condemned the terrorists. However, many of them then added the word "but," which was followed by understanding, justifications and victim blaming. "But it's because of NATO's bombing in Iraq and Syria"; "But it's because the magazine offended Muslim sensitivities"; "But it's because of what Israel is doing to the Palestinians"; "But it's because of the discrimination they suffer from." There were a lot of justifications there. Author Salman Rushdie referred to them as the "But Brigade." Because anyone who condemns, but then immediately moves to "but," is not really condemning—he's supporting. This is exactly the story of those in the gray area between "understanding" and "justifying" terror attacks against Jews, and this is exactly where we must not be when dealing with Jewish terrorists.

funeral of Ahmad Muhammad Mahamid

There is also no need for generalizations. The fact that hundreds shouted "In blood and fire we'll save Palestine" at the funeral of Ahmad Muhammad Mahamid a week ago doesn't turn all Israeli Arabs to supporters of murder and terrorism. And the fact that among the Jewish public there are a few who carry out abominable acts, or support them, doesn't turn Israel into a racist and inciting state. There is official incitement in the Palestinian Authority against Israelis and Jews. Here and there, there is also incitement against Arabs in Israel. But it's like comparing apples and oranges. Palestinian terrorism is the result of incitement. The fact that Jewish terrorism—such as the murder of the Arab teen Mohammed Abu Khdeir—is a rare, very rare occurrence, is the result of the lack of incitement.

When there's anti-Arab violence, as there was last week, we need to destroy the evil from within. It's true that there's violence without nationalistic motivations, but there's no need to deny that this time the incident was nationalistic in nature. And the fact there is another kind of violence, a "regular" one, does not take away from the severity of the nationalistically motivated violence.

And the fact that inside Israel there is Arab violence against Jews—even if it's a rare occurrence—does not justify leniency when it comes to violence against Arabs. The violence must be eradicated with a firm hand. No forgiveness. No understanding. And if the punishment of Jewish hooligans is lesser by even an inch than the punishment of Arab hooligans under similar circumstances—that would be racism and the encouragement of violence.

It's important to remember one more thing: words have meaning. The common delusion that "we need to let them blow off steam" is untrue. Because there is a difference between claims of discrimination, even if they're not true, and justifying terrorism—both directly and indirectly, both Arab and Jewish terrorism. So the lines should be moved. Sometimes inciters must be silenced to prevent violence. That is perhaps not the only way to prevent the next incident, but it is definitely a measure that needs to be implemented.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

The terrorists among us : https://ift.tt/2odvqoY

Words can kill

This week I made a modest contribution to the New Israel Fund. I received a nice thank-you note from them to which I responded that it should be forwarded to the Im Tirtzu movement.

 

The thunderous war drums of Im Tirtzu, terrorizing all those who think differently then them, have awakened me from the pleasant snooze of summer vacation to the chaos that is taking over every decent part of the Jewish, egalitarian and democratic State of Israel.

Carmi Gilon (Photo: Ido Erez)

Im Tirtzu is, in my opinion, the most influential movement in Israel in recent years. In a style reminiscent of the global anti-Semitism movement, the Jewish Im Tirzu persecutes other Jews systematically, using the darkest instincts of the human soul. It is successfully sowing divisions between the Jews of Israel, from the right to the left, and dismantling the unifying partnership of the Zionist initiative, for which we have established a state that can triumph over its enemies and has produced a prosperous society. It succeeds in separating the Jewish citizens of Israel from the minorities living among them. For 70 years there has been no equality of opportunity for all the citizens of Israel, but at least in the spirit of the Declaration of Independence we aspired to it. We succeeded in living in peace with the vast majority of Arabs, who, even in difficult times, refrained from engaging in terror against us. Now, under the influence of Im Tirtzu, everyone, including our allies in the defense of state security, have become officially inferior citizens. It succeeds in causing division between Orthodox Jews and secular, Reform and Conservative Jews, thereby causing world Jewry, especially the younger generations, to disengage from their fateful connection with the State of Israel and to establish new Jewish communities in the Diaspora that are proud of their Jewishness but without any Israeli character. It succeeds in a process of systematic demonization to turn organizations that love Israel, whose only sin is that they love differently, into persecuted figures, who are forced into a defensive position.

Im Tirtzu's logo

It successfully destroys the reputation of exceptional people, Zionists and patriots, whose contribution to guaranteeing Israel's security and its scientific, economic and cultural achievements is invaluable. Major General Yair Golan is only the most recent of them. It has succeeded in setting the political agenda for Prime Minister Netanyahu, his ministers and the Knesset members around them, to pass the Nation State Law, to divide Israel into two separate states of different world views, and perhaps, in the future, into two states with a physical border between them. My great fear is that the next stage of incitement will lead to physical violence against leftists, the non-Orthodox, and minorities in Israel. Two political murders, whose perpetrators admitted to being influenced by the prevalent public atmosphere, took place in Israel. In 1983, Yona Avrushmi, a follower of Rabbi Meir Kahane, threw a grenade at Peace Now marchers who were protesting the Sabra and Shatila massacre and calling for the dismissal of Defense Minister Ariel Sharon. Emil Grunzweig was killed and 12 others wounded. Yigal Amir claimed from the outset that he decided to assassinate Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin as a representative of his community, and against the background of rabbinical rulings and provocative chants of "banish Rabin with blood and fire" by right-wing leaders. Im Tirtzu's incitement reminds me of the incitement that preceded those political murders. And it has already been said that words can kill. The wake-up call I received led me to find a way, an easy one, to express my opinion, by a deed, and to donate money to the New Israel Fund. I did not thoroughly examine the list of organizations benefiting from its funds, and I assume that if I did, I would find organizations that I do not identify with. I contributed to the fund because in my opinion, it has become, because of Im Tirtzu and its henchmen in the Knesset, a symbol for the struggle of all the Jews in Israel who identify with the Declaration of Independence and the Zionist spirit and believe in democracy and equality.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Words can kill : https://ift.tt/2wrvUf1

Netanyahu options to answer questions via Instagram

"Ask me a question"—this is the title of a new feature that drove those who live their lives on Instagram wild, and was launched this week for the first time by the Prime Minister's digital media department.

Their enthusiasm for this indulgent format is as predictable as Netanyahu's, because which politician would not want to spare himself the hell known in the journalistic circles as the “follow-up question"—the same matryoshka doll that begins with a question such as "Are you a fan of Beitar Jerusalem?", leads to questions such as "What do you think of the racist chants heard among the team’s fans?", and concludes with an insightful query "So the Arabs do not flock to the stadiums?"

What kind of public official does not dream about being eternally exempt from the obligation to give detailed and elaborate responses to the electorate?

(Photo: Reuters)

 

This warm shower of questions poured unobtrusively, aiming precisely for that lukewarm spot, one which neither boils nor freezes, from the shower faucet of prime minister's men and advisers, who will decide which questions to publish and which questions you will never hear about.

That is how this feature works—the respondent has full control over which questions to answer and to publish. For Netanyahu, this is a dream deal since it does not involve journalists, it gives him full control of the content, allows him to only talk about issues he wants to talk about, and most importantly, it makes him seem as cool as he always dreamed of being, when he was still dependent on a goodwill of the mainstream media’s editors.

Netanyahu does not feel obligated to answer difficult questions, especially when it comes to the Israeli media—hostile relations with which are well documented, but he still has the urge to provide answers.

He wants both—to feel that he can provide a solution to a conflict, and also decide what the conflict will be. For example, he almost never expresses himself on social issues, except statements on special budgets or five-year plans, but he ignites discussions on the Iranian nuclear issue, or any other security issue for that matter, at any opportunity.

In a different world, Netanyahu could have been a president of an American pro-Trump news company, but in our small country he has to do everything himself. Including pretending to be an independent media outlet that strives to be pluralistic, open, diverse and fresh.

Judging by the choice of questions and answers that have been published so far, Netanyahu's dream news cycle includes all the elements that have been missing from the Israeli media’s coverage of him and his family—slogans about settlements, promises on security topics, one or two remarks about his nutrition or sleeping habits and Yalla Beitar Yalla.

(Photo: GPO/Amos Ben Gershom)

There’s not a word about his son’s education, restraining his wife, a long term agreement with the Palestinians, neglecting the country’s periphery, betrayal of the Druze and Bedouin communities, or simply a question about the high cost of living.

The generic appeal of Instagram’s “Ask me a question” feature is like a pretty good joke at the expense of the respondent. For instance, a Prime Minister who can not bear to answer journalists' questions.

The Prime Minister's strong fondness for social networks is understandable, photoshop software works great not only for teenage girls but for politicians as well since everybody wants to polish the reality.

However, Netanyahu, seems to be convinced that his pasta preferences will eliminate the need to talk about polarization and discrimination on a way to another two Knesset seats. His young friends, the cool kids behind a keyboard, whisper to him that they know what the young people like—it's probably not long, drawn out questions about issues that “suck.”

He listens to them and trusts them as they twitter, publish posts and drag him into fun Q&A games with the general public. There is no reason for him not to attend this party, the DJ plays the kind of music the prime minister likes.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Netanyahu options to answer questions via Instagram : https://ift.tt/2BQXiZI

Hit-and-run Yisrael Katz-style

The good news in the fiasco over the construction of the Yehudit Bridge is that the transportation minister is willing to deal with matters that have to do with the ministry he has been heading for no less than nine years. It's just that when you watch Yisrael Katz's appearances on news programs—normally after one security incident or another—there's almost no mention of issues like worsening traffic congestion, failing public transportation, works on Shabbat, and more. No. The minister wants to be the prime minister, and in Israel the prime minister must speak with an authoritative voice about Iran and Syria, and not about bad buses and traffic jams. So Katz brandishes his Security Cabinet membership and the empty title of "minister of intelligence." He leaves the Transportation Ministry on the side of the road.

But the Shabbat crisis du jour gave Katz an opportunity to demonstrate the same determination that has earned him the nickname "The Bulldozer" by some of his supporters: The Tel Aviv municipality and the Ayalon Highways Co. have examined the matter and found that a complex engineering project done over a main traffic artery requires work during the Shabbat—which was also approved by the Labor Ministry and the Israel Police. Haredi politicians, with the backing of the Haredi media, protested (not exactly loudly) the violation of the status quo. What will "The Bulldozer" do? Will he take the same position he took in the train Shabbat works affair—which almost led to early elections—or perhaps he got the hint after that about who he shouldn't mess with if he is still planning on getting to the Prime Minister's Office?

Yisrael Katz (Photo: Marc Israel Sellem)

Katz didn't even leave any time for a healthy dose of tensions, and first thing Wednesday morning he ordered the planned works cancelled. In one of his excuses, he claimed that "the manner chosen for the construction of the bridge appears problematic and could seriously and disproportionately harm the general public during the weekend." Such consideration, such concern. Because if the works are done during the week, when half of the country is trying to get to work/school/the army/home without exploding with frustration, the traffic jams that will be created in the busiest road in Israel won't constitute "serious and disproportionate harm the general public." No way. It'll be fun to spend time with the thousands of pissed off drivers who will be moving at the pace of peace talks. We could get to know new people and compose songs with our car horns. Furthermore, if Katz is so alert to the suffering of the "general public" on the weekend, it's a wonder he doesn't order the immediate operations of public transportation on Shabbat. After all, the lack of such public transportation on the weekend is only one of the reasons masses of Israelis buy cars—those who could afford it, of course—so they could do something on the day of rest and perhaps visit relatives living far away or enjoy a nice trip outside their area of residence. Someone who talks about "serious and disproportionate harm" in the context of transportation on the weekend should remember the poor, who pay the price of the Shabbat every week, year round.

The planned Yehudit Bridge (Photo: Hen Architects)

In addition, the government's conduct is ridiculous when considering the Olympic flexibility it demonstrated during the Giro d'Italia race. As you may remember, about three months ago the land was awash with cycling mania when the prestigious race landed in Israel. Roads were blocked, ushers and police secured, and the masses went out to watch the wonder—and not on a week day. Then, for some reason, there was no climbing the barricades or unconditional surrender, but rather quite the extravagant enjoyment of the positive PR and the appearance of a normal country. It's a shame the current planned works were not called "Giro d'Bridge." Maybe then it would've gone quietly. But it appears Katz doesn't really want quiet. Early elections are going to be called soon and sometimes, maybe, the Netanyahu era would end, so it's a shame to get in trouble today with tomorrow's coalition. To him, this is an ideal chance to signal the Haredi politicians that everything is back to normal. Let Yair Lapid and Avi Gabbay to make some noise in the media and online—a government with the Haredi parties is more realistic and therefore more important. But first, it appears, Katz has to do penance. After all, we're in the month of forgiveness, Elul, aren't we?

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Hit-and-run Yisrael Katz-style : https://ift.tt/2OWsIQa

The division in Hamas over the agreement with Israel

Barring any last-minute changes, Hamas is expected to sign a ceasefire agreement with Israel next week in Cairo, after a week's break in talks because of Eid al-Adha. Work on the main principles of the agreement has already been completed, and only a handful of minor demands are left to be ironed out. Hamas deputy chairman Saleh al-Arouri is expected to sign the agreement on behalf of Hamas, after he was allowed to visit Gaza for discussions on the deal—which in an unprecedented manner saw most of Hamas's political leadership convening in the strip.

Yahya Sinwar; Saleh al-Arouri (Photo: AP)

The Hamas leadership was able to reach decisions despite the years-long tensions between Hamas leader in Gaza Yahya Sinwar and al-Arouri. They are two strong, aggressive and prominent figures in Hamas with different—at times clashing—personalities. Sinwar is a restless man who follows his gut, tends to leave the Hamas councils out of the decision-making and prefers to work in smaller circles. Al-Arouri, on the other hand, has a long-term strategic outlook and always seeks achievements for the entire Palestinian population, not just for Hamas supporters. Al-Arouri is thinking about the opportunities Hamas could have on the day after Mahmoud Abbas, when the ultimate goal is Hamas taking over the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and from there the Palestinian Authority as well. While al-Arouri's views are similar to former Hamas leader Khaled Mashal's vision, al-Arouri is far more hawkish and a jihadist mindset.

In the discussions held by the Hamas leadership in Gaza, it was Sinwar who pushed for a more strict position in the negotiations over the arrangement in the strip and the ceasefire with Israel. Sinwar insisted Hamas should not make any compromises in an effort to maximize the achievements it could get.

UN envoy Nickolay Mladenov meets with the Hamas leadership

Al-Arouri took a more compromising approach, as he is looking at a far bigger picture than Sinwar, who is only responsible for the Gaza Strip. Al-Arouri wants to have something to show for on the day after Abbas's departure, achievements Hamas can claim for the entire Palestinian people, despite the fact Hamas doesn't have a proper plan for the day after the Palestinian president.

In the middle is Hamas leader Ismail Haniyah, who is constantly trying to mediate between the two and find the middle ground. Since Hamas has kept its discussions under a cloak of complete secrecy, it's hard to tell exactly which approach got the upper hand, but in light of comments from Hamas officials that the agreement was in the "final stretch," it's safe to assume al-Arouri's more compromising approach is the one the organization chose to adopt.

It's important to remember that al-Arouri has gotten a lot of power and authorities in Hamas since being made the no.2 man in the organization. He's in charge of the terror group's foreign policy, the ties with Hezbollah and Iran, and Hamas's coffers. All of these fields of responsibility give him a lot of influence.

Hamas leaders meet in Gaza (Photo: EPA)

Throughout the "March of Return" campaign and the violent rounds of fighting that broke out during this campaign, it was unclear where exactly Hamas's military wing stands on the spectrum between a popular struggle and an all-out war against Israel.

In hindsight, it appears the military wing supported the organization's overarching strategy, contributing by bringing military force to the protests in the form of sabotaging the border fence and attempts to infiltrate Israel.

Furthermore, Hamas's research & development teams abandoned for a time the attempts to improve the Qassam rockets and instead conducted tests on ways to make incendiary kites and balloons fly further away and carry a more effective incendiary device.

The military wing realized that another war in the strip will lead to a similar or worse situation than the present, and so Hamas decided that going to war with Israel would only happen if there is an internal public protest in Gaza that forces the organization to move the focus outwards, toward Israel.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

The division in Hamas over the agreement with Israel : https://ift.tt/2o3bg11

Erdan's happy trigger finger

Minister Gilad Erdan wants more armed citizens on Israel's streets. There's no harm in trying. "Trained citizens who carry a firearm in the public space," the public security minister said, "contribute to the sense of security, constitute an important line of defense against lone-wolf terror attacks, and in practice serve as the incidental boosters of strength, and in that way bolster public safety." One can't help but be impressed by this statement, which was made to justify a plan that would allow anyone who underwent a ground forces' military training to carry a gun.

 

The minister's statement begins and ends with security. And what begins with the "sense of security"—meaning, in the psychological sphere—ends with the ontological sphere—guns "bolster public safety." In between there's pseudo-scientific babbling.

The trained citizens (who underwent basic training 30 years ago) are not armed with guns, they are "carrying firearms." They are not walking the streets armed, but the "public space." They are not unskilled gun-slingers (skill doesn't mean the ability to operate a gun—this can be taught in five minutes—but the ability to identify a security threat and deal with it in a level-headed manner—this you don't learn in Givati's basic training), they are "incidental boosters of strength" (oh, the wording, the wording... everything can be done with it).

Erdan firing a gun (Photo: Erdan's Facebook page)

Erdan is not concerned that like in the United States (or in the Wild East behind the Green Line), armed citizens would open fire at "incidental" suspects, "incidental" passersby, or at each other. On the contrary, as far as Erdan is concerned, the thousands (and perhaps tens of thousands) of new armed citizens make up a nice addition to his not-big-enough-fiefdom. They're actually part of the security forces under his control—"an important line of defense against lone-wolf terror attacks."

So what's the problem with the minister's plan? After all, my criticism of his wording skills is not a good enough reason to disqualify the plan, especially as wording skills are a matter of taste.

After the Police Investigation Unit announced there was no evidence that Yaqoub Abu al-Qiyan, who was shot by police officers in Umm al-Hiran, was planning to carry out a car-ramming attack, for example, the minister declared that "I feel that there's a higher probability that this was a car-ramming attack." This wording: Feelings, probability, denial of facts—in short, it's a matter of taste, both in the selection of the words and in the inclination to open fire, whether it's necessary or not.

But back to the point. What's wrong with arming tens of thousands of additional unskilled citizens? The problem is that a sane country—which is not the US—seeks to disarm its citizens. Those who are supposed to use "firearms in the public space" are members of the security forces, who have the required skills and training and who are under the supervision of their commanders. All of the other armed citizens could indeed aid in certain cases, but in many cases they make a mountain out of a molehill and hurt innocent people. Even the truly skilled often have a hard time deciding when to use a weapon (see: the Umm al-Hiran incident), not to mention the 1998 alumni of Givati basic training.

Here, of course, is not where the problem ends. Erdan's assumption is that all gun carriers—who will join the police officers, security guards and many armed soldiers already on the streets of Israel—see their main purpose as serving as his reservists. They carry weapons to stop lone-wolf attacks. The problem is, it's not entirely clear whether this is how they see themselves.

If we can learn something from the US, it's that a weapon in the hands of unskilled people is frequently used to settle scores, to commit murder inside the family, to resolve neighborly disputes, to end road disagreements and a thousand and one other matters in which it would've been better if the sides had been unarmed.

This is why modern nations are very cautious when it comes to arming citizens. A weapon in the wrong hands is dangerous to the carrier and to those around him.

At times, I must admit, there is no choice. At times the security problem is such that it's not possible to recruit enough police officers to handle it. The catch is, this isn't the situation in Israel. It's hard to claim its streets are flooded with attackers, and that the dangerous remedy proposed by the public security minister is the only solution to this problem. So what can we say? That Erdan wants Israel to be like America. The question is—is that what we want?

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Erdan's happy trigger finger : https://ift.tt/2wjq2Ve

Don't deter IDF soldiers from doing their duty

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Op-ed: While investigating suspicions of unlawful use of weapons is vital, the IDF's Criminal Investigation Division might not be the most suitable body to do so, as it hurts soldiers' morale and can deter them from using their weapons when the need arises. Don't deter IDF soldiers from doing their duty : https://ift.tt/2OXZyA3

The bluff of a Gaza sea port in Cyprus

There is an urban legend surrounding the negotiations over the "arrangement" between Israel and Hamas about plans to build a dock for the Gaza Strip in Cyprus. But such a dock means establishing a sea port to all intents and purposes in Gaza, and I can't recall the current Israeli government agreeing to such a thing.

If a port in Cyprus is supposed to replace the Kerem Shalom crossing, for example, then we're talking about massive amounts of goods. Just on Wednesday and Thursday of last week—by no means peak activity time at the crossing—40 tons of goods went into the strip. In 2017, 160,000 trucks went into Gaza through Kerem Shalom. It's safe to assume the amount of goods coming in through a port in Cyprus would be bigger, and there is no way to unload cargo at this magnitude other than by building a sea port in Gaza.

Even if they call it a "pier" or a "harbor," it would still be a sea port and a symbol of Hamas sovereignty in Gaza. Because for cargo ships—even relatively small ones—that are laden with containers and cargo—including gas and fuel—to be able to unload their goods in the strip, a fortune would have to be invested in deepening the marina there. A dock will have to be built—with cranes, storage spaces, communication systems, naval radar, infrastructure to guide the ships and other elements required for the operation of a sea port.

The existing Gaza port (Photo: EPA)

 Those who think it would be possible to unload goods from ships arriving from Cyprus and anchoring several hundreds of meters from the shore by means of small vessels, are living in the 1960s. Back then, cement sacks were lowered onto fishing boats, which then sailed to Gaza. It won't work with tens of thousands of containers arriving every year. The sea port in Cyprus is the grandchild of the Gaza sea port idea, which was born in the Oslo Accords. At the time, the Israeli defense establishment opposed the idea of building such a port, which could be used to bring in weapons and terrorists. In 2000, construction began on a port in Sheikh Ijlin, in southern Gaza, but what was built there was bombed in the beginning of the second intifada, and the idea of the port was buried under the wreckage. But talk of a sea port, like talk about an arrangement, pop up every time Israel is in a bind over a ceasefire with Hamas. Last time it happened immediately after Operation Protective Edge, as part of the Cairo agreements. Of course nothing came of it.

In 2016, the port idea came up again, this time in its Cypriot version. At the time it was brought back up because of concern in the IDF over how the humanitarian situation in the strip would affect the security situation.

The Navy claimed it could ensure no contraband is transported from Cyprus to Gaza. But the problem was and remains the supervision of the dock in Cyprus. Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ya'alon objected to the idea, because they believed leaving the supervision to international elements in Cyprus would be exploited by Hamas to smuggle forbidden equipment into the strip.

The existing Gaza port (Photo: EPA)

  Building a dock for the strip in Cyprus would require state-of-the-art equipment and skilled international teams to check every container. Who can guarantee that Israel's demand of complete supervision is met? Who will supervise the supervisors? After all, Israel has bad experience with international supervision. The Palestinian Authority and the Egyptians weren't too "crazy" about the idea either, as the negotiations in 2016 were held with the Erdogan government, and the idea being broached was a Palestinian dock in the Turkish Cyprus and under Turkish auspices. Since then, the Cyprus port idea has been left up in the air, like Minister Katz's artificial island idea. In June 2017, Defense Minister Lieberman said that "a sea port in Gaza would be rewarding terrorism. We can't protect our security via remote control." In May 2018, in the wake of the inflamed tensions along the Gaza border, Lieberman traveled Cyprus, where he was reported to be discussing a Palestinian dock in Cyprus—a report he didn't deny. Did something change? Has Hamas promised to stop its armament?

A port is a sign of sovereignty, and Israel does not recognize a Hamas state in the strip. This government, certainly on the eve of elections, will not make any decisions about a sea port, but will continue blowing hot air everywhere.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

The bluff of a Gaza sea port in Cyprus : https://ift.tt/2OVJA9P

Only the Likud Party can do it

On Saturday night, several hundred residents from communities on the Gaza border protested at Rabin Square. It was the fourth Saturday protest in the square—it was preceded by the LGBT community, the Druze and the Arabs. But despite the fact most Israelis share the concern for the Gaza border residents, their security, their mental fortitude and the fate of their fields—the crowd at their protest was rather thin. This is not a good time for those in the national consensus. Consensus has gone out of fashion: If there's no disagreement, there is no interest.

Who would've thought, the most right-wing government in Israel's history is seeking an agreement with the terror organization it has sworn to destroy. It is negotiating the details of this agreement while under fire, doing the very thing its ministers have criticized others for in the past. It's not hard to imagine what would've happened if a center-left government had acted the same. The word "betrayal" would've been on everyone's lips—from the head of the opposition to the last of the radio personalities. Photos of the prime minister in the robes of Hamas founder Sheikh Ahmed Yassin would've been plastered over every town square. Ministers and their families would've come under violent attacks on social media, at public events, in their homes.

Fortunately, we're living under a right-wing government. These graves scenarios are not happening and will not be happening. Bennett will take a little jab at Lieberman in an effort to get more votes and promote himself as the next defense minister. Everyone, even his voters, know where this criticism is coming from and how quickly it will disappear.

Prime Minister Netanyahu (Photo: Ohad Zwigenberg)

 "Only the Likud Party can do it," we said when Menachem Begin conceded the entire Sinai Peninsula and paved the way for a Palestinian political entity in the land of Israel; "only the Likud Party can do it," we said when Benjamin Netanyahu conceded 13 percent of the West Bank and Ariel Sharon evacuated the settlements in Gaza and in the northern Samaria. When it comes to the Israeli-Arab conflict, the right-wing governments have more room to maneuver, a lot more than center-left governments do. The left-wing can make promises, the right-wing can keep them.

This determination raises an interesting question: What is this "base" everyone's talking about? What does it expect of its leaders, and what would it punish them for? Likud's "base" hates anyone who criticizes Netanyahu.

Anat Rosilio, a researcher at the Berl Katznelson foundation, monitors expressions of hatred online. A list of 100 words and phrases makes up the Lexicon of Hatred. Normally, Arabs, the Left and the New Israel Fund are the stars of the show; the media as well.

She found that when Ministers Regev and Levin and the close associate Natan Eshel slammed the Druze, and when Netanyahu shared the false accusations of right-wing organization Im Tirtzu on his Facebook page, the Druze immediately turned from national heroes to enemies of the state. Every three and a half minutes, an expression of hatred against them was posted online. Later, when the attacks from the top stopped, the expressions of hatred disappeared. "The expressions disappeared, but the narrative remains the same," Rosilio told me.

Druze protesters at Rabin Square (Photo: AFP)

In other words, Netanyahu can lead his "base" just as well as his "base" is leading him. His major supporters are not impressed with the talks he's having with an Arab terror organization, but as long as his rhetoric remains anti-Arab, anti-Left, anti-elite and anti-media, they will blindly follow him. The spell of the words and the personal loyalty overcome the ideological aversion. Trump's supporters are the same: the rhetoric is the supreme test, it is the litmus paper that distinguishes Left and Right, not the decisions in practice. That is why the discourse is about an "arrangement" and not an "agreement": An agreement is a paper that is signed, a joint photo op with flags on both sides. The arrangement is done on the ground, without stopping either side from carrying on promising to destroy the other. On a positive note, this provides Netanyahu and his ministers with a convenient basis for a pragmatic policy concerning the conflict as well as for military restraint; they don't always take advantage of this freedom, but they know it's at their disposal—to be used to reach an arrangement with Hamas, for example. On a negative note, he's pushing them to incite, to oust, to sabotage the internal Israeli unity and to undermine any institution that does not accept their authority—the Supreme Court, the State Attorney's Office, the police, the free media. The Israelis who do not belong to this "base" earn quite a bit and lose a lot. It's doubtful this deal is beneficial.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Only the Likud Party can do it : https://ift.tt/2N60O3U

What do the three players stand to gain from the Gaza ceasefire deal?

It appears Israel and the government in Gaza are nearing an agreement on an "arrangement," and that is a good thing. Out of all of the alternatives Israel faces, this is the "lesser of evils."

The main factor that makes this agreement possible is the change to the Egyptian position. Until recently, the Egyptians demanded that as part of the agreement the Hamas government must agree to give up its authorities—including security—to the Palestinian Authority, tying the agreement with Israel to the internal Palestinian reconciliation. Hamas was in no way willing to swallow this bitter pill. And so, despite the fact both Israel and Hamas have a shared interest to reach a ceasefire, it could not be achieved because of the joint demand from Cairo and Ramallah.

Gaza protest (Photo: EPA)

Recently, the Egyptians have given up that demand, and instead they are willing to settle for Hamas committing to stop its aid to the ISIS branch operating in the northern Sinai Peninsula. This is a price Hamas can afford to pay.

And so in this situation, the three players—Israel, Hamas and Egypt—are all focusing, and rightly so, only on the narrow, most vital interests. For Israel, that interest is of course quiet on the border; Egypt will get the isolation of ISIS in the Sinai; while Hamas will get a form of legitimacy and a promise of economic aid.

(Photo: AP)

It's important to understand Hamas would not have been able to accept the formula of "quiet for quiet," because in such a case it would've been left to deal with a worsening economic crisis entirely on its own. Israel has erred for a long time in refusing to recognize that. The Israeli position, which was somewhat sanctimonious, was to emphasize its willingness to send hundreds of trucks carrying food into the Gaza Strip every day. It's not enough. When the unemployment rate in the strip reaches 60-70 percent, the residents have no purchasing power even if the food does arrive. Moreover, to prevent further exacerbation of the economic and humanitarian crisis in Gaza, there must be infrastructure for that. You can't have a state (and Gaza has been a de facto independent state for 12 years now) with electricity that runs only five hours a day, no water in the tap, overflowing sewage and hundreds of destroyed buildings.

Kerem Shalom border crossing (Photo: AFP)

The moment Israel, Egypt, and gradually some parts of the international community, have given up the political aspiration of reinstating Abbas in Gaza, a real opportunity was created both to reach an agreement with Hamas and to rehabilitate the infrastructure in that miserable enclave. The promise of a long-term quiet won't be achieved solely based on Israel's power of deterrence, but also by convincing the donor countries to condition their aid for infrastructure on Hamas's commitment to keep the peace. Therefore, Israel needs to encourage European nations and Arab states to reach agreements with the government in Gaza (yes, with the government there, and not behind its back) on vital projects of infrastructure, while at the same time caution Hamas that if the peace is not kept, Israel would go back to attacking with full strength, and then all of the efforts and money invested in rehabilitating the strip would go down the drain. Instead of dodging and stuttering and continuing to recite that we won't talk to a terror organization, it's better to acknowledge the reality according to which Gaza is a state and has a stable government, which was elected in a fairly democratic manner.

Ismail Haniyeh and Saleh al-Arouri (Photo: EPA)

In this regard, we should also consider the regular contradiction in our position. When an errant organization like Islamic Jihad is shooting rockets at Israel, Israeli officials are quick to say that "We consider Hamas responsible for keeping the peace." We're willing to recognize Hamas's authority to run the military matters in the strip, but unwilling to recognize its authority to run the civilian matters. What's the logic in that? It's better to see reality as it is, favor the use of one giant stick along with one giant carrot, and focus on what's truly important to us. And a word on the MIAs and POWs: It is precisely a broad agreement that could facilitate the return of our sons for a reasonable price of freed terrorists. The explanation is simple: When there are several topics on the table, the different players' priorities are different. What matters most to one side, could matter less to the other, and vice versa. In such a way, it's easier to achieve mutual concessions. The MIAs and POWs issue is the only issue in which the other side—whether it's Hezbollah or Hamas—has more leverage than we do. That is why it must not be isolated and discussed separately. As evidence to that is the price we paid in the Gilad Shalit deal.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

What do the three players stand to gain from the Gaza ceasefire deal? : https://ift.tt/2N2H558