by David Bedein
During the week before the Pennsylvania primary, The Bulletin met with Sen. Barack Obama's middle east advisers in Washington, Howard Guttman and former Californian Congressman Mel Levine, along with another Obama Middle East aide who spoke on condition of anonymity.
These are the questions The Bulletin posed to Mr. Obama's Middle East advisers and the responses that they provided:
1. How would a President Obama relate to the security threat posed by Saudi Arabia? [Declassified security reports confirm that Saudi Arabia continues to fund groups defined by the U.S. government as terrorist organizations, while Saudi Arabia maintains an active state of war against the state of Israel since 1948.]
None of Mr. Obama's advisers could answer this question.
2. Does Mr. Obama support President Bush's policy of arming the Saudis? [The Bush administration offers major arms sales to Saudi Arabia, despite its pro-terror posture]
Neither Guttman nor Levine could tell The Bulletin whether or not Mr. Obama supports the Bush arms sales to Saudi Arabia. They checked with Mr. Obama and could not get an answer.
3. Would a President Obama support the idea that Palestinian refugees should reside in UNRWA refugee camps, under the premise and promise of the "right of return," instead of being provided with decent living conditions?
While each of Mr. Obama's advisers emphasized that the candidate opposed the Palestinian "right of return," none of them could find out what Mr. Obama's position is concerning continuing American government funding for the UNRWA agency, which fuels the right of return.
4. Would a President Obama continue Mr. Bush's policy to arm the Fatah organization, since the armed forces of the Fatah are defined by American law as an illegal terrorist organization?
The Obama advisor who spoke on condition of anonymity answered that Mr. Obama wants to continue the policy of developing Fatah as a moderate entity.
5. Would a President Obama ask for a change in the proposed constitution of the Palestinian Fatah state, which is based on the Islamic sharia law, and not allow for juridical status for any religion other than Islam?
All three Obama advisers promised to check this out with the senator. None of them could provide an answer.
6. Would a President Obama restrain Israel from counterattacking in Gaza to put an end to the daily missile attacks from Gaza, as the Bush administration has done?
Mr. Obama's advisers responded that "Israel has a right to defend itself."
7. Would a President Obama recognize that Palestinian civilian casualties in Gaza are a direct result of their use of human shields?
Mr. Obama's advisers answered that "Sen. Obama regards the operations of terrorist organizations as intolerable."
8. Would a President Obama allow such a policy to continue where the Palestinian Authority (PA) continues to harbor terrorists suspected of murder and refuses to hand them over for trial, as the Clinton and Bush administrations have done?
Mr. Obama's advisers were more emphatic on this point, stating that Mr. Obama's policy would "oppose all attempts to harbor terrorists by the Palestinian Authority."
9. Would a President Obama condition future U.S. assistance on human rights and civil liberties reform in the PA, since the PA operates with no system of civil liberties or human rights?
In another emphatic statement, each of Mr. Obama's advisers stated that a President Obama would insist on the implementation of a policy that would stand up for human rights and civil liberties in the Palestinian Authority.
10. Would a President Obama ignore the plight of Christians who are persecuted in the PA, or would he champion the cause of the Christians to practice their religion freely in the PA, since the U.S. consulate in Jerusalem has refused to render assistance to Christians who are persecuted by the PA?
Mr. Obama's advisers promised an answer to The Bulletin with an answer to this question but did not do so.
11. What would the policy of a President Obama be to Syria in regard to Syria's continuing to host and support a plethora of terror groups?
All three of Obama's advisers indicated that they would review new directives to the Syrian government in this regard.
12. Would a President Obama support an effort to destroy the Syrian source of lethal narcotics in the Bekka Valley, since Syria continues to orchestrate the export of lethal narcotics to the world?
Mr. Obama's advisers could not answer this question.
13. Would a President Obama support an effort to force Israel to withdraw from Golan, since the Golan Heights was used by Syria between 1949 and 1967 to attack Israeli communities in Galilee?
All three of Mr. Obama's advisers answered that "Obama does not believe in pressuring Israel" on any matter related to Syria.
14. Which Middle East road map would a President Obama endorse: the road map of April 30, 2003, or that of May 25, 2003? [The second road map contains the reservations of Israel, which include detailed Israeli directives to disband terror groups as a precondition to continued negotiations.]
Mr. Obama's three advisers referred this policy question to a top adviser to Mr. Obama. However, they would not give an answer to this question to The Bulletin.
15. Would a President Obama continue the Clinton/Bush policy of ignoring the fact that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) never ratified the Oslo Accord and never canceled the PLO charter? [The Clinton and Bush administrations overlooked the fact that the PLO never ratified the Oslo Accord "declaration of principles," which required the PLO and Fatah to recognize Israel, denounce terror and cancel the PLO/Fatah charter, which calls for Israel's obliteration. It will be recalled that the PLO signed the Oslo Accords on the White House lawn on Sept. 13, 1993, and would not ratify these accords when the PLO executive convened on Oct. 6, 1993, in Tunis and would not cancel the PLO charter when the PNC convened on April 24, 1996.]
Mr. Obama's advisers concurred that a President Obama would insist on a formal PLO ratification of the Oslo Accords and cancellation of the PLO covenant.
16. Would a President Obama issue a directive that any aid to the PA require a cessation of calls to terrorism by the official Arabic language outlets of the PA? [The Clinton and Bush administration consistently ignored the message communicated by the newly constituted PA in the Arabic language, which has communicated a language of war on Israel since the inception of the PA in 1993.]
Mr. Obama's advisers said that Mr. Obama would institute "a policy of no tolerance of incitement."
17. Would a President Obama call for a cancellation of the PA educational curriculum, which inculcates the next generation to continue a war to liberate all of Palestine, which can be seen at www.edume.org?
Mr. Obama's advisers indicated that Mr. Obama would see this as part of a "policy of no tolerance for incitement."
18. Would a President Obama insist on future Israeli withdrawals, since the Gaza withdrawal indicates that Palestinians will use areas under their control to launch missile attacks against Israel?
The Obama adviser who spoke on condition of anonymity answered that the "Gaza and Lebanon precedent should be taken into consideration," considering the fact that Israel is ready for compromise.
Monday, April 21, 2008
The Philadelphia Bulletin: On the Eve of the Pennsylvania Primary, the Philadelphia Bulletin interviews Obama's Middle East Advisors
On the Eve of the Pennsylvania Primary, the Philadelphia Bulletin interviews Obama's Middle East Advisors
by David Bedein
During the week before the Pennsylvania primary, I met with Sen. Barack Obama's middle east advisers in Washington, Howard Guttman and former Californian Congressman Mel Levine, along with another Obama Middle East aide who spoke on condition of anonymity, in my capacity as the Middle East Correspondent of the Philadelphia Bulletin.
These are the questions The Bulletin posed to Mr. Obama's Middle East advisers and the responses that they provided:
1. How would a President Obama relate to the security threat posed by Saudi Arabia? [Declassified security reports confirm that Saudi Arabia continues to fund groups defined by the U.S. government as terrorist organizations, while Saudi Arabia maintains an active state of war against the state of Israel since 1948.]
None of Mr. Obama's advisers could answer this question.
2. Does Mr. Obama support President Bush's policy of arming the Saudis? [The Bush administration offers major arms sales to Saudi Arabia, despite its pro-terror posture]
Neither Guttman nor Levine could tell The Bulletin whether or not Mr. Obama supports the Bush arms sales to Saudi Arabia. They checked with Mr. Obama and could not get an answer.
3. Would a President Obama support the idea that Palestinian refugees should reside in UNRWA refugee camps, under the premise and promise of the "right of return," instead of being provided with decent living conditions?
While each of Mr. Obama's advisers emphasized that the candidate opposed the Palestinian "right of return," none of them could find out what Mr. Obama's position is concerning continuing American government funding for the UNRWA agency, which fuels the right of return.
4. Would a President Obama continue Mr. Bush's policy to arm the Fatah organization, since the armed forces of the Fatah are defined by American law as an illegal terrorist organization?
The Obama advisor who spoke on condition of anonymity answered that Mr. Obama wants to continue the policy of developing Fatah as a moderate entity.
5. Would a President Obama ask for a change in the proposed constitution of the Palestinian Fatah state, which is based on the Islamic sharia law, and not allow for juridical status for any religion other than Islam?
All three Obama advisers promised to check this out with the senator. None of them could provide an answer.
6. Would a President Obama restrain Israel from counterattacking in Gaza to put an end to the daily missile attacks from Gaza, as the Bush administration has done?
Mr. Obama's advisers responded that "Israel has a right to defend itself."
7. Would a President Obama recognize that Palestinian civilian casualties in Gaza are a direct result of their use of human shields?
Mr. Obama's advisers answered that "Sen. Obama regards the operations of terrorist organizations as intolerable."
8. Would a President Obama allow such a policy to continue where the Palestinian Authority (PA) continues to harbor terrorists suspected of murder and refuses to hand them over for trial, as the Clinton and Bush administrations have done?
Mr. Obama's advisers were more emphatic on this point, stating that Mr. Obama's policy would "oppose all attempts to harbor terrorists by the Palestinian Authority."
9. Would a President Obama condition future U.S. assistance on human rights and civil liberties reform in the PA, since the PA operates with no system of civil liberties or human rights?
In another emphatic statement, each of Mr. Obama's advisers stated that a President Obama would insist on the implementation of a policy that would stand up for human rights and civil liberties in the Palestinian Authority.
10. Would a President Obama ignore the plight of Christians who are persecuted in the PA, or would he champion the cause of the Christians to practice their religion freely in the PA, since the U.S. consulate in Jerusalem has refused to render assistance to Christians who are persecuted by the PA?
Mr. Obama's advisers promised an answer to The Bulletin with an answer to this question but did not do so.
11. What would the policy of a President Obama be to Syria in regard to Syria's continuing to host and support a plethora of terror groups?
All three of Obama's advisers indicated that they would review new directives to the Syrian government in this regard.
12. Would a President Obama support an effort to destroy the Syrian source of lethal narcotics in the Bekka Valley, since Syria continues to orchestrate the export of lethal narcotics to the world?
Mr. Obama's advisers could not answer this question.
13. Would a President Obama support an effort to force Israel to withdraw from Golan, since the Golan Heights was used by Syria between 1949 and 1967 to attack Israeli communities in Galilee?
All three of Mr. Obama's advisers answered that "Obama does not believe in pressuring Israel" on any matter related to Syria.
14. Which Middle East road map would a President Obama endorse: the road map of April 30, 2003, or that of May 25, 2003? [The second road map contains the reservations of Israel, which include detailed Israeli directives to disband terror groups as a precondition to continued negotiations.]
Mr. Obama's three advisers referred this policy question to a top adviser to Mr. Obama. However, they would not give an answer to this question to The Bulletin.
15. Would a President Obama continue the Clinton/Bush policy of ignoring the fact that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) never ratified the Oslo Accord and never canceled the PLO charter? [The Clinton and Bush administrations overlooked the fact that the PLO never ratified the Oslo Accord "declaration of principles," which required the PLO and Fatah to recognize Israel, denounce terror and cancel the PLO/Fatah charter, which calls for Israel's obliteration. It will be recalled that the PLO signed the Oslo Accords on the White House lawn on September 13, 1993, and would not ratify these accords when the PLO executive convened on October 6, 1993, in Tunis and would not cancel the PLO charter when the PNC convened on April 24, 1996.]
Mr. Obama's advisers concurred that a President Obama would insist on a formal PLO ratification of the Oslo Accords and cancellation of the PLO covenant.
16. Would a President Obama issue a directive that any aid to the PA require a cessation of calls to terrorism by the official Arabic language outlets of the PA? [The Clinton and Bush administration consistently ignored the message communicated by the newly constituted PA in the Arabic language, which has communicated a language of war on Israel since the inception of the PA in 1993.]
Mr. Obama's advisers said that Mr. Obama would institute "a policy of no tolerance of incitement."
17. Would a President Obama call for a cancellation of the PA educational curriculum, which inculcates the next generation to continue a war to liberate all of Palestine, which can be seen at www.edume.org?
Mr. Obama's advisers indicated that Mr. Obama would see this as part of a "policy of no tolerance for incitement."
18. Would a President Obama insist on future Israeli withdrawals, since the Gaza withdrawal indicates that Palestinians will use areas under their control to launch missile attacks against Israel?
The Obama adviser who spoke on condition of anonymity answered that the "Gaza and Lebanon precedent should be taken into consideration," considering the fact that Israel is ready for compromise.
by David Bedein
During the week before the Pennsylvania primary, I met with Sen. Barack Obama's middle east advisers in Washington, Howard Guttman and former Californian Congressman Mel Levine, along with another Obama Middle East aide who spoke on condition of anonymity, in my capacity as the Middle East Correspondent of the Philadelphia Bulletin.
These are the questions The Bulletin posed to Mr. Obama's Middle East advisers and the responses that they provided:
1. How would a President Obama relate to the security threat posed by Saudi Arabia? [Declassified security reports confirm that Saudi Arabia continues to fund groups defined by the U.S. government as terrorist organizations, while Saudi Arabia maintains an active state of war against the state of Israel since 1948.]
None of Mr. Obama's advisers could answer this question.
2. Does Mr. Obama support President Bush's policy of arming the Saudis? [The Bush administration offers major arms sales to Saudi Arabia, despite its pro-terror posture]
Neither Guttman nor Levine could tell The Bulletin whether or not Mr. Obama supports the Bush arms sales to Saudi Arabia. They checked with Mr. Obama and could not get an answer.
3. Would a President Obama support the idea that Palestinian refugees should reside in UNRWA refugee camps, under the premise and promise of the "right of return," instead of being provided with decent living conditions?
While each of Mr. Obama's advisers emphasized that the candidate opposed the Palestinian "right of return," none of them could find out what Mr. Obama's position is concerning continuing American government funding for the UNRWA agency, which fuels the right of return.
4. Would a President Obama continue Mr. Bush's policy to arm the Fatah organization, since the armed forces of the Fatah are defined by American law as an illegal terrorist organization?
The Obama advisor who spoke on condition of anonymity answered that Mr. Obama wants to continue the policy of developing Fatah as a moderate entity.
5. Would a President Obama ask for a change in the proposed constitution of the Palestinian Fatah state, which is based on the Islamic sharia law, and not allow for juridical status for any religion other than Islam?
All three Obama advisers promised to check this out with the senator. None of them could provide an answer.
6. Would a President Obama restrain Israel from counterattacking in Gaza to put an end to the daily missile attacks from Gaza, as the Bush administration has done?
Mr. Obama's advisers responded that "Israel has a right to defend itself."
7. Would a President Obama recognize that Palestinian civilian casualties in Gaza are a direct result of their use of human shields?
Mr. Obama's advisers answered that "Sen. Obama regards the operations of terrorist organizations as intolerable."
8. Would a President Obama allow such a policy to continue where the Palestinian Authority (PA) continues to harbor terrorists suspected of murder and refuses to hand them over for trial, as the Clinton and Bush administrations have done?
Mr. Obama's advisers were more emphatic on this point, stating that Mr. Obama's policy would "oppose all attempts to harbor terrorists by the Palestinian Authority."
9. Would a President Obama condition future U.S. assistance on human rights and civil liberties reform in the PA, since the PA operates with no system of civil liberties or human rights?
In another emphatic statement, each of Mr. Obama's advisers stated that a President Obama would insist on the implementation of a policy that would stand up for human rights and civil liberties in the Palestinian Authority.
10. Would a President Obama ignore the plight of Christians who are persecuted in the PA, or would he champion the cause of the Christians to practice their religion freely in the PA, since the U.S. consulate in Jerusalem has refused to render assistance to Christians who are persecuted by the PA?
Mr. Obama's advisers promised an answer to The Bulletin with an answer to this question but did not do so.
11. What would the policy of a President Obama be to Syria in regard to Syria's continuing to host and support a plethora of terror groups?
All three of Obama's advisers indicated that they would review new directives to the Syrian government in this regard.
12. Would a President Obama support an effort to destroy the Syrian source of lethal narcotics in the Bekka Valley, since Syria continues to orchestrate the export of lethal narcotics to the world?
Mr. Obama's advisers could not answer this question.
13. Would a President Obama support an effort to force Israel to withdraw from Golan, since the Golan Heights was used by Syria between 1949 and 1967 to attack Israeli communities in Galilee?
All three of Mr. Obama's advisers answered that "Obama does not believe in pressuring Israel" on any matter related to Syria.
14. Which Middle East road map would a President Obama endorse: the road map of April 30, 2003, or that of May 25, 2003? [The second road map contains the reservations of Israel, which include detailed Israeli directives to disband terror groups as a precondition to continued negotiations.]
Mr. Obama's three advisers referred this policy question to a top adviser to Mr. Obama. However, they would not give an answer to this question to The Bulletin.
15. Would a President Obama continue the Clinton/Bush policy of ignoring the fact that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) never ratified the Oslo Accord and never canceled the PLO charter? [The Clinton and Bush administrations overlooked the fact that the PLO never ratified the Oslo Accord "declaration of principles," which required the PLO and Fatah to recognize Israel, denounce terror and cancel the PLO/Fatah charter, which calls for Israel's obliteration. It will be recalled that the PLO signed the Oslo Accords on the White House lawn on September 13, 1993, and would not ratify these accords when the PLO executive convened on October 6, 1993, in Tunis and would not cancel the PLO charter when the PNC convened on April 24, 1996.]
Mr. Obama's advisers concurred that a President Obama would insist on a formal PLO ratification of the Oslo Accords and cancellation of the PLO covenant.
16. Would a President Obama issue a directive that any aid to the PA require a cessation of calls to terrorism by the official Arabic language outlets of the PA? [The Clinton and Bush administration consistently ignored the message communicated by the newly constituted PA in the Arabic language, which has communicated a language of war on Israel since the inception of the PA in 1993.]
Mr. Obama's advisers said that Mr. Obama would institute "a policy of no tolerance of incitement."
17. Would a President Obama call for a cancellation of the PA educational curriculum, which inculcates the next generation to continue a war to liberate all of Palestine, which can be seen at www.edume.org?
Mr. Obama's advisers indicated that Mr. Obama would see this as part of a "policy of no tolerance for incitement."
18. Would a President Obama insist on future Israeli withdrawals, since the Gaza withdrawal indicates that Palestinians will use areas under their control to launch missile attacks against Israel?
The Obama adviser who spoke on condition of anonymity answered that the "Gaza and Lebanon precedent should be taken into consideration," considering the fact that Israel is ready for compromise.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
A Diary of Insight in Middle East Reporting
by Arlene Kushner
"Carter's Destruction"
Today is the day that Jimmy Carter -in defiance of requests from several quarters that he not do so-is going to be meeting with officials from Hamas. To achieve peace, he maintains, it is necessary to speak with all sides.
The response to this from the Daily Star of Lebanon (of all places) is on the mark: "To many engagers the problem is mainly one of communication. If only everyone could just sit around a table and talk, things would work out. You can almost hear Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal gasping at the naiveté of such sweeping positivism, as he prepares to score points off his solemn American visitor."
Indeed. Carter is conferring legitimacy on a terrorist organization. And while he deludes himself that he can talk them into doing this or that, he serves, wittingly or unwittingly, as their "patsy."
There is a signal lesson here, for certain. For many on the left believe that by and large matters can be worked out if only everyone talks. But this is simply not the case. Carter has set back the already very tenuous efforts for peace in the Middle East. Evil is evil, and sometimes this must be recognized.
~~~~~~~~~~
Matters with Gaza are heating up again. What commentators are observing is that there is a new Hamas tactic, with squirmishes at the border rather than depending exclusively on the launching of rockets (although they are still launched as well). Hamas finds there is a better opportunity to kill Israelis this way: two were killed at Nahal Oz last week and three in the battle this week. Today the IDF foiled attempts by Hamas terrorists at Keren Shalom to enter Israel.
Certain aspects of this change in beh avior are particularly notable. One, that Hamas is taking its cue more and more from Hezbollah and acting like an organized military rather than a rag-tag group of guerillas.
Second is the opportunity for changing tactics and reorganizing which they availed themselves of. After the major operation about a month ago, there was a lull which was thought to be indicative of Israeli deterrence generated by the operation. If you remember, there was talk at that time about a ceasefire of sorts being arranged off the record.
Well, it was during that lull that they regrouped -- and this fact is of signal importance. Any "ceasefire" or "hudna" will give them a chance to strengthen themselves and ultimately only serve to our detriment. And whatever deterrence power we had seems to be lost with their new tactics.
~~~~~~~~~~
This is being to dawn on more of our decision makers, who realize that the current situation cannot continue. And so, there is talk again about a major operation -- similar to Operation Defensive Shield in Judea and Samaria in 2002. This would take place only after Bush visits in May The goal would be to clean out Gaza and take down Hamas.
However... there is still concern about an "exit strategy," which means there is not yet the recognition that we may have to maintain a presence for some time to come (indefinitely as far as I'm concerned). The reason Defensive Shield has had long term positive effects for us is because once we went back into areas that had been turned over to the PA, we retained the right to continue to run operations there to control the terrorist infrastructure.
What is being discussed is turning over Gaza to a third party. Bringing in the UN or the EU would be a disaster in a host of ways, but is not likely to happen, as none of these parties is exactly eager to be involved. The alternative is allowing Egypt to come in. Egypt, which is threatened by the radical Hamas at its border, has a vested interest. The problem is one of Egyptian long-term stability and intentions towards Israel. What happens if there's a change of regime and the Egyptians then seek to move from Gaza east into Israel within the Green Line?
Many may have forgotten, but Gush Katif was established in southern Gaza as a way to block movement of troops from Egypt up into Gaza, as this is the traditional way that enemy troops have entered the area.
~~~~~~~~~~
Yesterday I wrote about awards that Abbas was going to defer on two terrorists in our prisons. He has cancelled the plans to do this. And no other conclusion is possible other than that his growing awareness that this caused a furor and was not going to play well made him think twice.
~~~~~~~~~~
According to a survey just done by the University of Maryland and Zogby International, Nasrallah is the best loved leader in the Arab world, followed by Assad of Syrian. Says it all, I think.
~~~~~~~~~~
In another survey, done by the Gaza-based Institute of Development Studies, 44% of the residents of Gaza definitely want to leave, and 80% are thinking about it. Who can blame them? A smart policy would be to help them immigrate elsewhere.
~~~~~~~~~~
In a televised speech today to mark "Prisoners' Day," Abbas said there can be no peace deal with Israel unless all 8,500 prisoners are released. This is one of those things I hope he really means, because even Olmert cannot/would not do this.
~~~~~~~~~~
There is talk, still in its very early stages and facing several hurdles, of a merger between Kadima and Labor. The rationale for this is simple: neither party by itself, according to the polls, would top Likud. Merged into one new super-party, they very well might.
And so, there is also talk, also in very early stages, of a merger of Yisrael Beitenu with Likud, which would counter that.
~~~~~~~~~~
Posting: April 16, 2008
"Without End"
I begin by correcting a goof of major proportions (and thanking Dianne E. for picking it up). Martin Indyk has NOT joined the Obama team, Daniel Kurtzer has. The link I provided in connection with this item was correct. In a pre-Pesach haze, I simply mixed up one former US ambassador to Israel who was not a friend for us with another. Apologies.
~~~~~~~~~~
And speaking of a "pre-Pesach haze," this may be the last message I send before Pesach begins Saturday night. During the week of Pesach my postings will be sent infrequently, if at all.
To all on this list who will be celebr ating, I extend my wishes for a joyous and meaningful Pesach.
~~~~~~~~~~
Just when we think Abbas's terrorist predilections could not be more obvious, another incident comes to our attention.
According to Israel Radio, the Al Kuds Mark of Honor, the PLO's highest medal, will be given to two women terrorists who were complicit in killing Israelis: Ahlam Tamimi, involved in planning the suicide bombing of the Sbarro restaurant in Jerusalem, and Amra Muna, who seduced a young Israeli man over the Internet and then lured him to Ramallah where he was murdered.
Palestinian Minister for Prisoner Affairs Ashraf el Ajami said that his ministry gave PA President Mahmoud Abbas a comprehensive list of prisoners who were potential nominees, and Abbas's office made the choices from this list. The decision rests with the PA president.
~~~~~~~~~~
There have been at least 19 Kassams launched into Israel today.
There has been, as well, considerable activity between the IDF and Palestinians in Gaza, starting late last night and continuing into today.
In what was called a routine operation, troops had entered Gaza to target terrorists launching rockets. When a Givati Brigade near the border with Gaza identified several armed Palestinians approaching the fence at the border -- and suspected that they either intended to infiltrate into Israel (as had happened only days ago) or to plant an explosive device at the border -- they, too, moved into Gaza. Heavy exchange of gunfire ensued, as it became apparent that there was a Palestinian cover force that had not been identified. Ultimately, three of our soldiers from this Brigade were killed.
IDF officers are saying that it was a tactical error to not have identified the terrorist covering force before moving into the area, but that the impulse to engage with the terrorists who had been spotted was correct.
Meanwhile, the Palestinians are saying that these operations, which included two air strikes, have killed some 12 people, which includes five children. This claim should surprise no one: the IDF says the targets of the strikes were armed fighters.
~~~~~~~~~~
The convoluted fuel story: After the attack that killed two Israelis who worked at the fuel terminal at Nahal Oz last week, Israel stopped shipments of fuel into Gaza. The IDF rapidly identified a situation in which Hamas was deliberately stockpiling what fuel was had, in order to generate an artificial crisis. (Sound familiar?) The claim was that the electric generator in Gaza would have to be shut down for lack of fuel. (Note: This generator only supplies some 20% of the electricity of Gaza, with 70% coming from Israel.)
But the manufactured crisis seems to have worked, as Barak then made the decision to resume shipments -- only diesel for the power plant.
~~~~~~~~~~
According to Asharq Al-Awsat in London today, Olmert has offered the Palestinian 64% of Judea and Samaria, with a variety of shared options for Jerusalem.
This, of course, would have to be confirmed. But my cynical take is that this is actually good news if true. Because the PA will never ever accept only 64% of Judea and Samaria and the sharing of Jerusalem. Sad, indeed, that there is the hope that, once again, we will be saved by our enemies.
~~~~~~~~~~
The US has agreed to allow Israel to hook into its world wide radar system that would supply early warning of any ballistic missile launched at us from anywhere in the world. This is good news.
Israel, meanwhile, has just tested the Green Pine Radar system that showed itself capable of identifying and tracking a missile that mimics an advanced Iranian Shihab 3 ballistic missile carrying a split warhead and with advanced radar evading capabilities. The radar system ties into the Arrow missile defense system: Had a real threat been identified, the Arrow -- which has been shown effective in previous tests -- would have been activated.
~~~~~~~~~~
Posting: April 15, 2008
"What Does It Take?"
Abbas Zaki is no upstart within Palestinian politics. Long an influential member of Fatah, he sits on its powerful Central Committee. Additionally, he is the PLO's representative to Lebanon.
This, according to MEMRI is what Zaki said recently in the course of an interview on Lebanese TV:
"We believe wholeheartedly that the Right of Return is guaranteed by our will, by our weapons, and by our faith.
"The use of weapons alone will not bring results, and the use of politics without weapons will not bring results. We act on the basis of our extensive experience. We analyze our situation carefully. We know what climate leads to victory and what climate leads to suicide. We talk politics, but our principles are clear... We harvest U.N. resolutions, and we shame the world so that it doesn't gang up on us, because the world is led by people who have given their brains a vacation - the American administration and the neocons.
"The P.L.O. is the sole legitimate representative [of the Palestinian people], and it has not changed its platform even one iota. In light of the weakness of the Arab nation and the lack of values, and in light of the American control over the world, the P.L.O. proceeds through phases, without changing its strategy. Let me tell you, when the ideology of Israel collapses, and we take, at least, Jerusalem, the Israeli ideology will collapse in its entirety, and we will begin to progress with our own ideology, Allah willing, and drive them out of all of Palestine."
http://www.memritv.org/clip_transcript/en/1738.htm
~~~~~~~~~~
We who are vehemently opposed to current Israeli and American policy with regard to our negotiating a "two state solution" -- which would require us to surrender part of Jerusalem and all or most of Judea and Samaria -- feel, more often than not, that our words of warning fall on deaf ears. It makes little or no impact on those who persist in conceptualizing the PA as "moderate" when we speak of Jerusalem as the heart of our existence and our very raison d'être, which we are at risk of surrendering.
But now, here it is from the enemy. And I wonder if anyone will even bother to sit up and pay attention.
"When... we take, at least, Jerusalem, the Israeli ideology will collapse in its entirety, and we will begin to progress with our own ideology... and drive them out of all of Palestine."
It's time, way past time, for us to sit up and say, "Look you bums, this is ours and you are entitled to none of it.
It's time for us to remember that we HAVE an ideology and to adhere to it instead of the Palestinian narrative.
~~~~~~~~~~
Allow me, please, to clarify what I see as the major, and very significant, implications of the Zaki interview:
[] For us to surrender any part of Jerusalem, which is historically ours and which is, according to our own basic law, the undivided capital of Israel, would be to surrender the sense of who we are and what our entitlement is. It would be to cut out our own heart.
[] The Palestinians fully intend to continue to push for the (non-existent) "right of return," which would undermine us from within.
[] The Palestinians have never abandoned their "Phased Program," which was formulated after they realized the Arabs couldn't destroy Israel in a war. What it does is set out a policy of achieving a Palestinian state in all the land by stages instead, and using politics as a method of reaching the final goal.
This means there is no reason whatsoever to trust that an agreement struck with the PA would represent a final cessation of hostilities rather than a way station towards further hostilities.
And yet... and yet... there are those who insist on trusting it. "We must take chances for peace" is their watchword. And it is unbearable.
~~~~~~~~~~
More of what we're dealing w ith from inside:
Israeli MK Ahmed Tibi, Chair of the United Arab List, in attendance at the Doha Forum on Democracy in Qatar, registered as "Palestinian." The response within the Knesset, both to the left and the right, has been outrage, with the suggestion made that he might consider moving to Ramallah -- that his choice of identity was his to make, but that he could not have it both ways.
~~~~~~~~~~
There is so much to address that I've been mum on the subject of Obama, even as I shudder at the prospect of his becoming president. It would be an understatement to say that his support for Israel is shaky, no matter the superficial impression he lends and those whom he is able to fool. (There are always those who, for whatever reasons, are ready to be fooled.) The latest "name" advisor to join his camp is Martin Indyk, former US ambassador to Israel.
I recommend an article by Ed Lasky in The American Thinker, on the positions of Indyk vis-a-vis Israel, which are enough to make your hair stand on end if you love Israel. Just as the acorn falls close to the tree, so is the candidate likely of similar mind. Read it and be forewarned.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/04/obamas_new_foreign_policy_advi.html
~~~~~~~~~~
Posting: April 10, 2008
"From One Thing to the Next"
The very reputable Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, which has close ties with the Shin Bet, has released a report, "Hamas's Military Buildup in the Gaza Strip." It says that Hamas has an army of 20,000 armed men, many of whom were trained in trained in Iran and Lebanon. They have modeled themselves after Hezbollah, drawing lessons from the last war. The report details the brigades and the types of weapons they have.
The buildup is not expected to reach completion for some years yet.
You can read the report here:
http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/pdf/hamas_080408.pdf
My question, then, is whether we're going to sit here and wait for that completion. There's no one awake at the helm at the moment, unfortunately.
~~~~~~~~~~
It has now been released that the Israeli police arrested two young Palestinians in March who were in the country illegally and were planning to perpetrate a terrorist attack by putting poison in the food at the Ramat Gan restaurant where they worked.
They had been recruited by a cell of Al Aksa Brigades -- which you will please note, is part of the "moderate" Fatah. This particular cell is directed and financed by Hezbollah. So, note this as well: Fatah receives Hezbollah (which means Iranian) financial support.
Two men, one of them named Hani Ka'abi, from the Balata Refugee Campus in Nablus, were going to supply the slow acting, tasteless, colorless poison powder.
Warned the announcement from the prime minister's office with regard to this:
"It should be emphasized that the terrorist infrastructure headed by Hani Ka'abi is currently active in attempting to perpetrate other terrorist attacks, possibly with the assistance of other Palestinians illegally present in Israel."
This means that hiring or in any way assisting illegal Palestinian workers is NOT a good idea. To my way of thinking, to increase the number of workers permitted into the country is all together not a good idea either.
But it's clear that Defense Minister Barak doesn't agree with me, as he is going to request of the Cabinet that the quota for Palestinian construction workers be increased by 5,000 (subject to security restrictions).
~~~~~~~~~~~
As Olmert and Barak proceed with various con cessions to the Palestinians, there is frequently discussion here about whether this is Olmert's initiative and Rice and Bush are coming along for the ride, or whether Bush and Rice, in particular, are pushing Israel into actions we'd rather not take.
Often, the consensus is that the initiative comes from Olmert, and often that assessment is not wrong. But here's a case where it isn't so:
The US (and I believe this winner came from the White House) has a new proposal: By the end of this year, Israel and the Palestinians should sign a general agreement on principles good for five years, that doesn't touch the issue of Jerusalem or the refugees. In the course of those five years, the Palestinians would have some "municipal sovereignty" in Jerusalem.
You know what this really is, don't you?
It's the "George Bush wants a legacy in his term, so he doesn't give a damn what happens later as long as a piece of paper is signed" proposal. It is outrageous. And outrageously stupid. So full of holes it could be used as a sieve.
~~~~~~~~~~
Allow me to point out just a few of the more egregious weaknesses in this plan:
What happens if there is no agreement at the end of five years and time has run out? Are the Palestinians going to be willing to go backwards?
Why should they have any "municipal sovereignty" if this was supposed to be shelf agreement that wouldn't activate until the PA had eradicated terror infrastructure?
How can there be a "part-way" agreement? Either there is a meeting of the minds for a Palestinian state, on all core issues, or there is not. Actually, going part way raises hopes that might later be dashed, fomenting violence.
~~~~~~~~~~
Ahmed Qurei has said "nothing doing." There has been no official word from Israel yet, but reports are that there is great reluctance to accept this plan. However, it is being said that the US might pressure both sides into taking it. Pressure both sides?
My thought: This is one point on which both sides can agree. They don't like what Washington is proposing and don't wish to sign on to it. They should convey a joint message that there will be no cooperation on this.
~~~~~~~~~~
The single positive note here is that this proposal indicates that negotiations are indeed not moving smoothly.
~~~~~~~~~~
In case you haven't had enough of George Bush for one day, let me add this: Reports are that as Bush plans his itinerary for his visit in May to celebrate our 60th Independence Day, he will be scrupulously avoiding the Kotel (Western Wall) because this would imply that it's part of Israel and that might infuriate the Palestinians.
Well, his decision infuriates me. How about you?
Maybe he needs to hear what you think about this:
Fax: 202-456-2461 Comment Line: 202-456-1111
comments@whitehouse.gov
~~~~~~~~~~
Latest on that Sharm el-Sheikh conference that Bush (sorry, that name again) wants when he's here in May: Israel will not be invited. It is to be a US-Arab meeting only, with Abbas, Mubarak and Abdullah.
~~~~~~~~~~
In case you haven't heard: Israel's enemy, Jimmy Carter, apparently has plans to meet Hamas chief Mashaal in Damascus next week. The State Department is trying to discourage him.
~~~~~~~~~~
Posting: April 9, 2008
"Attack"
Somewhere between four and seven terrorists -- breaking through a fence -- entered Israel from the center of Gaza today and made their way to the Nahal Oz fuel terminal, where they killed two civilians who worked at the terminal: Oleg Lipson, 37,and Lev Charniak, 53; both from Beersheba. It is speculated that this was intended to be a kidnapping and that only a swift response by the IDF on the scene prevented this.
Responsibility has been claimed by Islamic Jihad, the Popular Resistance Committees and splinter group of Fatah -- Mujahideen Brigades. Israel says, however, that, as Hamas rules the area, Hamas is to be held responsible.
The irony is that Gaza receives much of its fuel via this terminal, and that the two men killed were involved in that process. Four million liters of gasoline and diesel oil, and an unlimited supply of cooking fuel, enter Gaza via the Nahal Oz crossing every week.
Investigation is now on-going.
~~~~~~~~~~
Egypt, for its part, is vastly uneasy because of renewed threats by Hamas to breach the border and enter the Sinai again as happened in January.
Said an unidentified Egyptian official: "[Egypt] will not take lightly the protection of its frontiers against any attempt to violate them, no matter who they are. Egypt's borders are a red line you cannot cross. Egypt is capable of responding to any attempt to violate its frontiers."
Egypt, I will say, can be -- and if pushed, will be -- tough on those entering Egyptian territory.
The Egyptian Foreign Ministry expressed "profound amazement" at the Hamas threats in light of efforts Egypt has made "to lift the blockade on the Gaza Strip and reach a truce allowing Palestinians from Gaza to live a normal life."
It warned that inappropriate actions would "damage the Palestinian cause."
~~~~~~~~~~
What was actually said yesterday, by Khahil al-Hayya, described as a senior member of Hamas, was "all options are open to break the siege. I expect that what will happen next will be greater than what happened before, not only against the Egyptian border, but against all the crossings."
This constitutes a threat against Israel, as well.
~~~~~~~~~~
According to an unsettling report by Mate Binyamin regional council deputy head Moti Yogev, the IDF has begun collecting weapons from the armories of communities in Judea and Samaria - even personal weapons the army provided to settlers for self-defense.
"These steps are being carried out, surprisingly, at the same time that unprecedented steps are being taken to ease the security restrictions on Palestinians, including lifting roadblocks and other impediments that undermine the security of the residents of Judea and Samaria," Yesha Council of settlements head Dani Daya wrote to Maj.-General Gadi Shamni of the Central Command.
An IDF source said the decision to c ollect the arms was made because several break-ins that occurred at armories over the past few years.
Aaron Lerner of IMRA has it right: "So if you think that the IDF suddenly strips the armories today simply because of something that has been going on for years please contact IMRA at once for our special early bird special sale of the Brooklyn Bridge."
I will remind everyone that very recently an attempted terrorist attack near Shilo was stopped because one of the intended victims was carrying a personal weapon, which he used.
~~~~~~~~~~
Olmert and Abbas met in Jerusalem on Monday in an attempt to further negotiations. Reports indicate that it ended in "mutual recriminations."
Yesterday chief negotiators Tzipi Livni and Ahmed Qurie met and discussed "core issues."
~~~~~~~~~~
Yesterday, as well, Yossi Beilin announced that when Bush comes here in May he also would like to do a summit meeting at Sharm el-Sheihk that would be a follow-up to Annapolis. Beilin expressed the opinion that, unless something concrete had been accomplished, such a meeting would be foolish. "It's an idiotic idea to hold another hollow summit."
I would say that's about right.
Today Jerusalem officials, who say planning is in the early stages and that no date has been set and no invitations extended, confirm Bush's intentions in the matter. Bush will be here May 14-16 in honor of Israel's 60th. (Those of us who live in Jerusalem shudder at the anticipation of another visit from the US president, which totally freezes the city.)
According to Beilin, Bush and Egyptian President Mubarak would host the summit, with Olmert, Abbas and Jordan's King Abdullah invited.
Oh joy.
~~~~~~~~~~
I am reluctant to return to this subject, because I feel there is much of greater significance to discuss. But briefly here I believe it's appropriate:
Former president Moshe Katzav had entered into a plea bargain with the attorney general nine months ago, with regard to the charges against him of sexual impropriety; the charge of rape was dropped and lesser charges were put in place. At that point the women who had made the original accusations were outraged.
Now, as Katzav was scheduled to come before the court, he decided to renounce the plea bargain and go to trial in order to prove his innocence. Attorney General Mazuz called this "shocking," and indicated that the prosecution would likely to return to an indictment that included the more severe charges.
~~~~~~~~~~
Returning to the unsubstantiated report I referred to on Monday, with regard to Fatah and Hamas having secretly reached an agreement for a unity government: We would have to "wait and see," I had concluded. That remains my conclusion after checking with two Arabic-speaking Israelis "in the know."
One, a journalist, said the report wasn't true.
But the second, an academic, said something different: Fatah and Hamas are always talking, he said. But he remains doubtful that they will achieve a final and stable agreement.
Could they reach an agreement, even temporarily, that might upset the negotiations? I asked.
That was possible he conceded. We spoke a bit about Abbas's vulnerability and weakness, which he termed as being between the "rock of Israel and the hard place of Hamas." That is, Abbas's autonomous options are minimal to non-existent and there is possibility that he might attempt to go with Hamas as a way of resolving his difficulties.
Wait and see...
~~~~~~~~~~
Posting: April 7, 2008
"Hints of War"
We are now in the midst of the largest National Home Front Training Exercise ever undertaken in Israel. Beginning yesterday, and extending until tomorrow, it was designed to allow various agencies to practice coordination and appropriate response in case of a war emergency that reaches the home front (which undoubtedly the next war will). A variety of scenarios are being rehearsed: conventional and non-conventional rockets hitting Israel, chemical-biological incidents, etc. There will be field drills and a nationwide siren sounded as a test tomorrow (except in the area of Sderot, where sirens are not tests).
The sense that our nation is prepared is enormously important.
It was stated up front that this was not planned in relation to any particular current event, i.e., the tension in the north. But this is how our enemies are reading it -- as a muscle flexing meant to be a threat.
~~~~~~~~~~
And, predictably, an Iranian official stated that "The states of the region must closely watch the Israeli drill. These provocative actions should be brought to the attention of the relevant officials in the international community."
In response, National Infrastructure Minister Binyamin Ben Eliezer, not known for cautious and judicious speech, commented that "an Iranian strike on Israel will lead to an Israeli response that will devastate the Iranian nation."
~~~~~~~~~~
On Friday, Internal Security Minister Avi Dichter was accompanying a group from the Canada Israel Committee to the area adjacent to Gaza. When they climbed to Givat Nazmit, a popular observation point, in order to survey the area, a sniper shot at the group, wounding Dichter's personal assistant, Mati Gil. The IDF responded immediately, shooting at the source of the fire until it stopped.
A statement quickly came from Hamas saying they were responsible and had been aiming at Dichter himself. Later there were claims that an al-Qaida group was responsible. There were also various opinions voiced as to whether the sniper would have known Dichter was there, or whether he was simply aiming at a large group.
~~~~~~~~~~
By late last week the IDF reported removal of 10 roadblocks -- near Tulkarm, Nablus (Shechem) and Kalkilya.
An obviously distressed Israeli security official commented that, "There is no doubt that the removal of the roadblocks will make it easier on terrorists to carry out attacks and then escape back to the territories, but the decision was made at government level."
While a PA security official claimed, "not one roadblock has been removed. Maybe the IDF removed roadblocks in its own bases, but not in the Palestinian Authority and certainly not in the West Bank."
If we can't win anyway, why even bother?
~~~~~~~~~~
Allow me, please, to share here some of the most recent happenings in the PA:
PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad was cited in the journal al-Rai, in Kuwait, on Saturday as saying: "There is no solution for the troubles in Gaza, or for the rockets being fired from it. All we can do is transfer funds to the Gaza Strip."
Transfer funds? The PA pays certain salaries to people in Gaza. But of course none of it gets into Hamas hands, right?
~~~~~~~~~~
A dozen Al Aksa gunmen who had agreed to go to a PA prison in exchange for being taken off the Israeli wanted list have escaped from the prison (actually, for the second time). They ran because they were being beaten by a guard.
The PA put out a call asking them to return voluntarily. Nothing doing, was their answer. We returned voluntarily the first time we ran, but not now.
Said an Israeli spokesperson: "It's clear that dealing effectively with terrorism by the PA government is an integral element in the peace process. These people escaping from jail is a matter of concern to Israel." I would think so.
~~~~~~~~~~
Fatah old-timers (Arafat cronies who have been in charge through to the present) are expressing new concerns about the threat of a coup by the "young guard, "reports Khaled Abu Toameh in the Post. This is hardly a new scenario, but has been growing more intense in recent weeks, as Fatah is preparing for its first General Conference since 1989, at which time new leaders are supposed to be elected.
The recent scandals that have emerged within Fatah -- which involve the old guard and documents suggesting the embezzlement of millions -- have exacerbated the tensions. But the younger people challenging the old timers are afraid that Abbas will not permit them to assume new positions. In fact, it has been suggested that the tensions will prevent the conference from taking place at all.
From his prison cell, Marwan Barghouti is believed to have a good deal to do with the movement to oust the old timers. (Which makes it clear why Abbas is in no rush to see him released in the course of a prisoner exchange.)
All of this internal unrest impinges upon the ability of the Fatah-dominated PA to conduct negotiations with Israel.
~~~~~~~~~~
From one source I have picked up this information, which still requires confirmation: Reportedly, Hamas and Fatah have been negotiating for the last few weeks and are on the verge of reaching the framework for an accord that would lead to a unity government.
This would require Olmert to break off all talks, even if Abbas at this point did not. (And it is likely that Abbas would, because Hamas, which would have the upper hand, would not be a party to negotiations.)
While, as I said, this requires further confirmation, it strikes me as likely because Abbas knows how weak he is (how close to being toppled by Hamas in Judea and Samaria) and because he doesn't really want a two-state solution anyway. It cannot be emphasized enough how much the political discourse in the Palestinian areas has radicalized, and how little support Abbas has for striking a deal, even within his own Fatah party, which remains committed to Israel's destruction. The young guard may be anti-corruption, but that doesn't mean they want to deal with us.
What is more, I noted not long ago that after the signing of the accord in Yemen, which committed the two sides to talk further, it suddenly became strangely quiet, with no further news reports on what was happening. (Right after the signing, Abbas hedged, and I saw that as potentially a way for him to play both ends against the middle.) So, when I now read that Abbas has chosen to do this in secret, it does not strike me as surprising in the least. Presumably, Abbas, who had promised Bush he wouldn't deal with Hamas, hopes to extract maximum benefits from the US before tipping his hand.
It may be (it seems to be) that the pressure from Rice to give the maximum to Abbas was a last, desperate attempt to show him that he's better off negotiating with Israel. But what would be most disturbing, should it be true, is the suggestion that Rice knew, as she made those concessions, that Abbas was already in the process of talking with Hamas but chose not to deal with it as it would have resulted in considerable embarrassment to her.
If this turns out to be so, it means she was making concessions hoping to still lure Abbas away, but mindful of the fact that what was offered might in the end come into Hamas hands. This would have the makings of her undoing, I would say.
It would probably be too much to hope, that this might teach the US invaluable lessons: That the promises of the Palestinians cannot be trusted. And that ideology trumps economy (that is, that the Arabs cannot be bribed into making peace).
I will refrain from further speculation here and go into "wait and see" mode.
~~~~~~~~~~
That splendid Israeli-Arab (Muslim) journalist Khaled Abu Toameh, who reports so accurately and incisively for the Post, recently gave a talk at the University of Oregon in which he said that two, if not three, generations of Palestinians would have to be educated for peace before the situation would change.
I had recently said I thought it would take at least a generation. Now I see I was being optimistic.
"Carter's Destruction"
Today is the day that Jimmy Carter -in defiance of requests from several quarters that he not do so-is going to be meeting with officials from Hamas. To achieve peace, he maintains, it is necessary to speak with all sides.
The response to this from the Daily Star of Lebanon (of all places) is on the mark: "To many engagers the problem is mainly one of communication. If only everyone could just sit around a table and talk, things would work out. You can almost hear Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal gasping at the naiveté of such sweeping positivism, as he prepares to score points off his solemn American visitor."
Indeed. Carter is conferring legitimacy on a terrorist organization. And while he deludes himself that he can talk them into doing this or that, he serves, wittingly or unwittingly, as their "patsy."
There is a signal lesson here, for certain. For many on the left believe that by and large matters can be worked out if only everyone talks. But this is simply not the case. Carter has set back the already very tenuous efforts for peace in the Middle East. Evil is evil, and sometimes this must be recognized.
~~~~~~~~~~
Matters with Gaza are heating up again. What commentators are observing is that there is a new Hamas tactic, with squirmishes at the border rather than depending exclusively on the launching of rockets (although they are still launched as well). Hamas finds there is a better opportunity to kill Israelis this way: two were killed at Nahal Oz last week and three in the battle this week. Today the IDF foiled attempts by Hamas terrorists at Keren Shalom to enter Israel.
Certain aspects of this change in beh avior are particularly notable. One, that Hamas is taking its cue more and more from Hezbollah and acting like an organized military rather than a rag-tag group of guerillas.
Second is the opportunity for changing tactics and reorganizing which they availed themselves of. After the major operation about a month ago, there was a lull which was thought to be indicative of Israeli deterrence generated by the operation. If you remember, there was talk at that time about a ceasefire of sorts being arranged off the record.
Well, it was during that lull that they regrouped -- and this fact is of signal importance. Any "ceasefire" or "hudna" will give them a chance to strengthen themselves and ultimately only serve to our detriment. And whatever deterrence power we had seems to be lost with their new tactics.
~~~~~~~~~~
This is being to dawn on more of our decision makers, who realize that the current situation cannot continue. And so, there is talk again about a major operation -- similar to Operation Defensive Shield in Judea and Samaria in 2002. This would take place only after Bush visits in May The goal would be to clean out Gaza and take down Hamas.
However... there is still concern about an "exit strategy," which means there is not yet the recognition that we may have to maintain a presence for some time to come (indefinitely as far as I'm concerned). The reason Defensive Shield has had long term positive effects for us is because once we went back into areas that had been turned over to the PA, we retained the right to continue to run operations there to control the terrorist infrastructure.
What is being discussed is turning over Gaza to a third party. Bringing in the UN or the EU would be a disaster in a host of ways, but is not likely to happen, as none of these parties is exactly eager to be involved. The alternative is allowing Egypt to come in. Egypt, which is threatened by the radical Hamas at its border, has a vested interest. The problem is one of Egyptian long-term stability and intentions towards Israel. What happens if there's a change of regime and the Egyptians then seek to move from Gaza east into Israel within the Green Line?
Many may have forgotten, but Gush Katif was established in southern Gaza as a way to block movement of troops from Egypt up into Gaza, as this is the traditional way that enemy troops have entered the area.
~~~~~~~~~~
Yesterday I wrote about awards that Abbas was going to defer on two terrorists in our prisons. He has cancelled the plans to do this. And no other conclusion is possible other than that his growing awareness that this caused a furor and was not going to play well made him think twice.
~~~~~~~~~~
According to a survey just done by the University of Maryland and Zogby International, Nasrallah is the best loved leader in the Arab world, followed by Assad of Syrian. Says it all, I think.
~~~~~~~~~~
In another survey, done by the Gaza-based Institute of Development Studies, 44% of the residents of Gaza definitely want to leave, and 80% are thinking about it. Who can blame them? A smart policy would be to help them immigrate elsewhere.
~~~~~~~~~~
In a televised speech today to mark "Prisoners' Day," Abbas said there can be no peace deal with Israel unless all 8,500 prisoners are released. This is one of those things I hope he really means, because even Olmert cannot/would not do this.
~~~~~~~~~~
There is talk, still in its very early stages and facing several hurdles, of a merger between Kadima and Labor. The rationale for this is simple: neither party by itself, according to the polls, would top Likud. Merged into one new super-party, they very well might.
And so, there is also talk, also in very early stages, of a merger of Yisrael Beitenu with Likud, which would counter that.
~~~~~~~~~~
Posting: April 16, 2008
"Without End"
I begin by correcting a goof of major proportions (and thanking Dianne E. for picking it up). Martin Indyk has NOT joined the Obama team, Daniel Kurtzer has. The link I provided in connection with this item was correct. In a pre-Pesach haze, I simply mixed up one former US ambassador to Israel who was not a friend for us with another. Apologies.
~~~~~~~~~~
And speaking of a "pre-Pesach haze," this may be the last message I send before Pesach begins Saturday night. During the week of Pesach my postings will be sent infrequently, if at all.
To all on this list who will be celebr ating, I extend my wishes for a joyous and meaningful Pesach.
~~~~~~~~~~
Just when we think Abbas's terrorist predilections could not be more obvious, another incident comes to our attention.
According to Israel Radio, the Al Kuds Mark of Honor, the PLO's highest medal, will be given to two women terrorists who were complicit in killing Israelis: Ahlam Tamimi, involved in planning the suicide bombing of the Sbarro restaurant in Jerusalem, and Amra Muna, who seduced a young Israeli man over the Internet and then lured him to Ramallah where he was murdered.
Palestinian Minister for Prisoner Affairs Ashraf el Ajami said that his ministry gave PA President Mahmoud Abbas a comprehensive list of prisoners who were potential nominees, and Abbas's office made the choices from this list. The decision rests with the PA president.
~~~~~~~~~~
There have been at least 19 Kassams launched into Israel today.
There has been, as well, considerable activity between the IDF and Palestinians in Gaza, starting late last night and continuing into today.
In what was called a routine operation, troops had entered Gaza to target terrorists launching rockets. When a Givati Brigade near the border with Gaza identified several armed Palestinians approaching the fence at the border -- and suspected that they either intended to infiltrate into Israel (as had happened only days ago) or to plant an explosive device at the border -- they, too, moved into Gaza. Heavy exchange of gunfire ensued, as it became apparent that there was a Palestinian cover force that had not been identified. Ultimately, three of our soldiers from this Brigade were killed.
IDF officers are saying that it was a tactical error to not have identified the terrorist covering force before moving into the area, but that the impulse to engage with the terrorists who had been spotted was correct.
Meanwhile, the Palestinians are saying that these operations, which included two air strikes, have killed some 12 people, which includes five children. This claim should surprise no one: the IDF says the targets of the strikes were armed fighters.
~~~~~~~~~~
The convoluted fuel story: After the attack that killed two Israelis who worked at the fuel terminal at Nahal Oz last week, Israel stopped shipments of fuel into Gaza. The IDF rapidly identified a situation in which Hamas was deliberately stockpiling what fuel was had, in order to generate an artificial crisis. (Sound familiar?) The claim was that the electric generator in Gaza would have to be shut down for lack of fuel. (Note: This generator only supplies some 20% of the electricity of Gaza, with 70% coming from Israel.)
But the manufactured crisis seems to have worked, as Barak then made the decision to resume shipments -- only diesel for the power plant.
~~~~~~~~~~
According to Asharq Al-Awsat in London today, Olmert has offered the Palestinian 64% of Judea and Samaria, with a variety of shared options for Jerusalem.
This, of course, would have to be confirmed. But my cynical take is that this is actually good news if true. Because the PA will never ever accept only 64% of Judea and Samaria and the sharing of Jerusalem. Sad, indeed, that there is the hope that, once again, we will be saved by our enemies.
~~~~~~~~~~
The US has agreed to allow Israel to hook into its world wide radar system that would supply early warning of any ballistic missile launched at us from anywhere in the world. This is good news.
Israel, meanwhile, has just tested the Green Pine Radar system that showed itself capable of identifying and tracking a missile that mimics an advanced Iranian Shihab 3 ballistic missile carrying a split warhead and with advanced radar evading capabilities. The radar system ties into the Arrow missile defense system: Had a real threat been identified, the Arrow -- which has been shown effective in previous tests -- would have been activated.
~~~~~~~~~~
Posting: April 15, 2008
"What Does It Take?"
Abbas Zaki is no upstart within Palestinian politics. Long an influential member of Fatah, he sits on its powerful Central Committee. Additionally, he is the PLO's representative to Lebanon.
This, according to MEMRI is what Zaki said recently in the course of an interview on Lebanese TV:
"We believe wholeheartedly that the Right of Return is guaranteed by our will, by our weapons, and by our faith.
"The use of weapons alone will not bring results, and the use of politics without weapons will not bring results. We act on the basis of our extensive experience. We analyze our situation carefully. We know what climate leads to victory and what climate leads to suicide. We talk politics, but our principles are clear... We harvest U.N. resolutions, and we shame the world so that it doesn't gang up on us, because the world is led by people who have given their brains a vacation - the American administration and the neocons.
"The P.L.O. is the sole legitimate representative [of the Palestinian people], and it has not changed its platform even one iota. In light of the weakness of the Arab nation and the lack of values, and in light of the American control over the world, the P.L.O. proceeds through phases, without changing its strategy. Let me tell you, when the ideology of Israel collapses, and we take, at least, Jerusalem, the Israeli ideology will collapse in its entirety, and we will begin to progress with our own ideology, Allah willing, and drive them out of all of Palestine."
http://www.memritv.org/clip_transcript/en/1738.htm
~~~~~~~~~~
We who are vehemently opposed to current Israeli and American policy with regard to our negotiating a "two state solution" -- which would require us to surrender part of Jerusalem and all or most of Judea and Samaria -- feel, more often than not, that our words of warning fall on deaf ears. It makes little or no impact on those who persist in conceptualizing the PA as "moderate" when we speak of Jerusalem as the heart of our existence and our very raison d'être, which we are at risk of surrendering.
But now, here it is from the enemy. And I wonder if anyone will even bother to sit up and pay attention.
"When... we take, at least, Jerusalem, the Israeli ideology will collapse in its entirety, and we will begin to progress with our own ideology... and drive them out of all of Palestine."
It's time, way past time, for us to sit up and say, "Look you bums, this is ours and you are entitled to none of it.
It's time for us to remember that we HAVE an ideology and to adhere to it instead of the Palestinian narrative.
~~~~~~~~~~
Allow me, please, to clarify what I see as the major, and very significant, implications of the Zaki interview:
[] For us to surrender any part of Jerusalem, which is historically ours and which is, according to our own basic law, the undivided capital of Israel, would be to surrender the sense of who we are and what our entitlement is. It would be to cut out our own heart.
[] The Palestinians fully intend to continue to push for the (non-existent) "right of return," which would undermine us from within.
[] The Palestinians have never abandoned their "Phased Program," which was formulated after they realized the Arabs couldn't destroy Israel in a war. What it does is set out a policy of achieving a Palestinian state in all the land by stages instead, and using politics as a method of reaching the final goal.
This means there is no reason whatsoever to trust that an agreement struck with the PA would represent a final cessation of hostilities rather than a way station towards further hostilities.
And yet... and yet... there are those who insist on trusting it. "We must take chances for peace" is their watchword. And it is unbearable.
~~~~~~~~~~
More of what we're dealing w ith from inside:
Israeli MK Ahmed Tibi, Chair of the United Arab List, in attendance at the Doha Forum on Democracy in Qatar, registered as "Palestinian." The response within the Knesset, both to the left and the right, has been outrage, with the suggestion made that he might consider moving to Ramallah -- that his choice of identity was his to make, but that he could not have it both ways.
~~~~~~~~~~
There is so much to address that I've been mum on the subject of Obama, even as I shudder at the prospect of his becoming president. It would be an understatement to say that his support for Israel is shaky, no matter the superficial impression he lends and those whom he is able to fool. (There are always those who, for whatever reasons, are ready to be fooled.) The latest "name" advisor to join his camp is Martin Indyk, former US ambassador to Israel.
I recommend an article by Ed Lasky in The American Thinker, on the positions of Indyk vis-a-vis Israel, which are enough to make your hair stand on end if you love Israel. Just as the acorn falls close to the tree, so is the candidate likely of similar mind. Read it and be forewarned.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/04/obamas_new_foreign_policy_advi.html
~~~~~~~~~~
Posting: April 10, 2008
"From One Thing to the Next"
The very reputable Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, which has close ties with the Shin Bet, has released a report, "Hamas's Military Buildup in the Gaza Strip." It says that Hamas has an army of 20,000 armed men, many of whom were trained in trained in Iran and Lebanon. They have modeled themselves after Hezbollah, drawing lessons from the last war. The report details the brigades and the types of weapons they have.
The buildup is not expected to reach completion for some years yet.
You can read the report here:
http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/pdf/hamas_080408.pdf
My question, then, is whether we're going to sit here and wait for that completion. There's no one awake at the helm at the moment, unfortunately.
~~~~~~~~~~
It has now been released that the Israeli police arrested two young Palestinians in March who were in the country illegally and were planning to perpetrate a terrorist attack by putting poison in the food at the Ramat Gan restaurant where they worked.
They had been recruited by a cell of Al Aksa Brigades -- which you will please note, is part of the "moderate" Fatah. This particular cell is directed and financed by Hezbollah. So, note this as well: Fatah receives Hezbollah (which means Iranian) financial support.
Two men, one of them named Hani Ka'abi, from the Balata Refugee Campus in Nablus, were going to supply the slow acting, tasteless, colorless poison powder.
Warned the announcement from the prime minister's office with regard to this:
"It should be emphasized that the terrorist infrastructure headed by Hani Ka'abi is currently active in attempting to perpetrate other terrorist attacks, possibly with the assistance of other Palestinians illegally present in Israel."
This means that hiring or in any way assisting illegal Palestinian workers is NOT a good idea. To my way of thinking, to increase the number of workers permitted into the country is all together not a good idea either.
But it's clear that Defense Minister Barak doesn't agree with me, as he is going to request of the Cabinet that the quota for Palestinian construction workers be increased by 5,000 (subject to security restrictions).
~~~~~~~~~~~
As Olmert and Barak proceed with various con cessions to the Palestinians, there is frequently discussion here about whether this is Olmert's initiative and Rice and Bush are coming along for the ride, or whether Bush and Rice, in particular, are pushing Israel into actions we'd rather not take.
Often, the consensus is that the initiative comes from Olmert, and often that assessment is not wrong. But here's a case where it isn't so:
The US (and I believe this winner came from the White House) has a new proposal: By the end of this year, Israel and the Palestinians should sign a general agreement on principles good for five years, that doesn't touch the issue of Jerusalem or the refugees. In the course of those five years, the Palestinians would have some "municipal sovereignty" in Jerusalem.
You know what this really is, don't you?
It's the "George Bush wants a legacy in his term, so he doesn't give a damn what happens later as long as a piece of paper is signed" proposal. It is outrageous. And outrageously stupid. So full of holes it could be used as a sieve.
~~~~~~~~~~
Allow me to point out just a few of the more egregious weaknesses in this plan:
What happens if there is no agreement at the end of five years and time has run out? Are the Palestinians going to be willing to go backwards?
Why should they have any "municipal sovereignty" if this was supposed to be shelf agreement that wouldn't activate until the PA had eradicated terror infrastructure?
How can there be a "part-way" agreement? Either there is a meeting of the minds for a Palestinian state, on all core issues, or there is not. Actually, going part way raises hopes that might later be dashed, fomenting violence.
~~~~~~~~~~
Ahmed Qurei has said "nothing doing." There has been no official word from Israel yet, but reports are that there is great reluctance to accept this plan. However, it is being said that the US might pressure both sides into taking it. Pressure both sides?
My thought: This is one point on which both sides can agree. They don't like what Washington is proposing and don't wish to sign on to it. They should convey a joint message that there will be no cooperation on this.
~~~~~~~~~~
The single positive note here is that this proposal indicates that negotiations are indeed not moving smoothly.
~~~~~~~~~~
In case you haven't had enough of George Bush for one day, let me add this: Reports are that as Bush plans his itinerary for his visit in May to celebrate our 60th Independence Day, he will be scrupulously avoiding the Kotel (Western Wall) because this would imply that it's part of Israel and that might infuriate the Palestinians.
Well, his decision infuriates me. How about you?
Maybe he needs to hear what you think about this:
Fax: 202-456-2461 Comment Line: 202-456-1111
comments@whitehouse.gov
~~~~~~~~~~
Latest on that Sharm el-Sheikh conference that Bush (sorry, that name again) wants when he's here in May: Israel will not be invited. It is to be a US-Arab meeting only, with Abbas, Mubarak and Abdullah.
~~~~~~~~~~
In case you haven't heard: Israel's enemy, Jimmy Carter, apparently has plans to meet Hamas chief Mashaal in Damascus next week. The State Department is trying to discourage him.
~~~~~~~~~~
Posting: April 9, 2008
"Attack"
Somewhere between four and seven terrorists -- breaking through a fence -- entered Israel from the center of Gaza today and made their way to the Nahal Oz fuel terminal, where they killed two civilians who worked at the terminal: Oleg Lipson, 37,and Lev Charniak, 53; both from Beersheba. It is speculated that this was intended to be a kidnapping and that only a swift response by the IDF on the scene prevented this.
Responsibility has been claimed by Islamic Jihad, the Popular Resistance Committees and splinter group of Fatah -- Mujahideen Brigades. Israel says, however, that, as Hamas rules the area, Hamas is to be held responsible.
The irony is that Gaza receives much of its fuel via this terminal, and that the two men killed were involved in that process. Four million liters of gasoline and diesel oil, and an unlimited supply of cooking fuel, enter Gaza via the Nahal Oz crossing every week.
Investigation is now on-going.
~~~~~~~~~~
Egypt, for its part, is vastly uneasy because of renewed threats by Hamas to breach the border and enter the Sinai again as happened in January.
Said an unidentified Egyptian official: "[Egypt] will not take lightly the protection of its frontiers against any attempt to violate them, no matter who they are. Egypt's borders are a red line you cannot cross. Egypt is capable of responding to any attempt to violate its frontiers."
Egypt, I will say, can be -- and if pushed, will be -- tough on those entering Egyptian territory.
The Egyptian Foreign Ministry expressed "profound amazement" at the Hamas threats in light of efforts Egypt has made "to lift the blockade on the Gaza Strip and reach a truce allowing Palestinians from Gaza to live a normal life."
It warned that inappropriate actions would "damage the Palestinian cause."
~~~~~~~~~~
What was actually said yesterday, by Khahil al-Hayya, described as a senior member of Hamas, was "all options are open to break the siege. I expect that what will happen next will be greater than what happened before, not only against the Egyptian border, but against all the crossings."
This constitutes a threat against Israel, as well.
~~~~~~~~~~
According to an unsettling report by Mate Binyamin regional council deputy head Moti Yogev, the IDF has begun collecting weapons from the armories of communities in Judea and Samaria - even personal weapons the army provided to settlers for self-defense.
"These steps are being carried out, surprisingly, at the same time that unprecedented steps are being taken to ease the security restrictions on Palestinians, including lifting roadblocks and other impediments that undermine the security of the residents of Judea and Samaria," Yesha Council of settlements head Dani Daya wrote to Maj.-General Gadi Shamni of the Central Command.
An IDF source said the decision to c ollect the arms was made because several break-ins that occurred at armories over the past few years.
Aaron Lerner of IMRA has it right: "So if you think that the IDF suddenly strips the armories today simply because of something that has been going on for years please contact IMRA at once for our special early bird special sale of the Brooklyn Bridge."
I will remind everyone that very recently an attempted terrorist attack near Shilo was stopped because one of the intended victims was carrying a personal weapon, which he used.
~~~~~~~~~~
Olmert and Abbas met in Jerusalem on Monday in an attempt to further negotiations. Reports indicate that it ended in "mutual recriminations."
Yesterday chief negotiators Tzipi Livni and Ahmed Qurie met and discussed "core issues."
~~~~~~~~~~
Yesterday, as well, Yossi Beilin announced that when Bush comes here in May he also would like to do a summit meeting at Sharm el-Sheihk that would be a follow-up to Annapolis. Beilin expressed the opinion that, unless something concrete had been accomplished, such a meeting would be foolish. "It's an idiotic idea to hold another hollow summit."
I would say that's about right.
Today Jerusalem officials, who say planning is in the early stages and that no date has been set and no invitations extended, confirm Bush's intentions in the matter. Bush will be here May 14-16 in honor of Israel's 60th. (Those of us who live in Jerusalem shudder at the anticipation of another visit from the US president, which totally freezes the city.)
According to Beilin, Bush and Egyptian President Mubarak would host the summit, with Olmert, Abbas and Jordan's King Abdullah invited.
Oh joy.
~~~~~~~~~~
I am reluctant to return to this subject, because I feel there is much of greater significance to discuss. But briefly here I believe it's appropriate:
Former president Moshe Katzav had entered into a plea bargain with the attorney general nine months ago, with regard to the charges against him of sexual impropriety; the charge of rape was dropped and lesser charges were put in place. At that point the women who had made the original accusations were outraged.
Now, as Katzav was scheduled to come before the court, he decided to renounce the plea bargain and go to trial in order to prove his innocence. Attorney General Mazuz called this "shocking," and indicated that the prosecution would likely to return to an indictment that included the more severe charges.
~~~~~~~~~~
Returning to the unsubstantiated report I referred to on Monday, with regard to Fatah and Hamas having secretly reached an agreement for a unity government: We would have to "wait and see," I had concluded. That remains my conclusion after checking with two Arabic-speaking Israelis "in the know."
One, a journalist, said the report wasn't true.
But the second, an academic, said something different: Fatah and Hamas are always talking, he said. But he remains doubtful that they will achieve a final and stable agreement.
Could they reach an agreement, even temporarily, that might upset the negotiations? I asked.
That was possible he conceded. We spoke a bit about Abbas's vulnerability and weakness, which he termed as being between the "rock of Israel and the hard place of Hamas." That is, Abbas's autonomous options are minimal to non-existent and there is possibility that he might attempt to go with Hamas as a way of resolving his difficulties.
Wait and see...
~~~~~~~~~~
Posting: April 7, 2008
"Hints of War"
We are now in the midst of the largest National Home Front Training Exercise ever undertaken in Israel. Beginning yesterday, and extending until tomorrow, it was designed to allow various agencies to practice coordination and appropriate response in case of a war emergency that reaches the home front (which undoubtedly the next war will). A variety of scenarios are being rehearsed: conventional and non-conventional rockets hitting Israel, chemical-biological incidents, etc. There will be field drills and a nationwide siren sounded as a test tomorrow (except in the area of Sderot, where sirens are not tests).
The sense that our nation is prepared is enormously important.
It was stated up front that this was not planned in relation to any particular current event, i.e., the tension in the north. But this is how our enemies are reading it -- as a muscle flexing meant to be a threat.
~~~~~~~~~~
And, predictably, an Iranian official stated that "The states of the region must closely watch the Israeli drill. These provocative actions should be brought to the attention of the relevant officials in the international community."
In response, National Infrastructure Minister Binyamin Ben Eliezer, not known for cautious and judicious speech, commented that "an Iranian strike on Israel will lead to an Israeli response that will devastate the Iranian nation."
~~~~~~~~~~
On Friday, Internal Security Minister Avi Dichter was accompanying a group from the Canada Israel Committee to the area adjacent to Gaza. When they climbed to Givat Nazmit, a popular observation point, in order to survey the area, a sniper shot at the group, wounding Dichter's personal assistant, Mati Gil. The IDF responded immediately, shooting at the source of the fire until it stopped.
A statement quickly came from Hamas saying they were responsible and had been aiming at Dichter himself. Later there were claims that an al-Qaida group was responsible. There were also various opinions voiced as to whether the sniper would have known Dichter was there, or whether he was simply aiming at a large group.
~~~~~~~~~~
By late last week the IDF reported removal of 10 roadblocks -- near Tulkarm, Nablus (Shechem) and Kalkilya.
An obviously distressed Israeli security official commented that, "There is no doubt that the removal of the roadblocks will make it easier on terrorists to carry out attacks and then escape back to the territories, but the decision was made at government level."
While a PA security official claimed, "not one roadblock has been removed. Maybe the IDF removed roadblocks in its own bases, but not in the Palestinian Authority and certainly not in the West Bank."
If we can't win anyway, why even bother?
~~~~~~~~~~
Allow me, please, to share here some of the most recent happenings in the PA:
PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad was cited in the journal al-Rai, in Kuwait, on Saturday as saying: "There is no solution for the troubles in Gaza, or for the rockets being fired from it. All we can do is transfer funds to the Gaza Strip."
Transfer funds? The PA pays certain salaries to people in Gaza. But of course none of it gets into Hamas hands, right?
~~~~~~~~~~
A dozen Al Aksa gunmen who had agreed to go to a PA prison in exchange for being taken off the Israeli wanted list have escaped from the prison (actually, for the second time). They ran because they were being beaten by a guard.
The PA put out a call asking them to return voluntarily. Nothing doing, was their answer. We returned voluntarily the first time we ran, but not now.
Said an Israeli spokesperson: "It's clear that dealing effectively with terrorism by the PA government is an integral element in the peace process. These people escaping from jail is a matter of concern to Israel." I would think so.
~~~~~~~~~~
Fatah old-timers (Arafat cronies who have been in charge through to the present) are expressing new concerns about the threat of a coup by the "young guard, "reports Khaled Abu Toameh in the Post. This is hardly a new scenario, but has been growing more intense in recent weeks, as Fatah is preparing for its first General Conference since 1989, at which time new leaders are supposed to be elected.
The recent scandals that have emerged within Fatah -- which involve the old guard and documents suggesting the embezzlement of millions -- have exacerbated the tensions. But the younger people challenging the old timers are afraid that Abbas will not permit them to assume new positions. In fact, it has been suggested that the tensions will prevent the conference from taking place at all.
From his prison cell, Marwan Barghouti is believed to have a good deal to do with the movement to oust the old timers. (Which makes it clear why Abbas is in no rush to see him released in the course of a prisoner exchange.)
All of this internal unrest impinges upon the ability of the Fatah-dominated PA to conduct negotiations with Israel.
~~~~~~~~~~
From one source I have picked up this information, which still requires confirmation: Reportedly, Hamas and Fatah have been negotiating for the last few weeks and are on the verge of reaching the framework for an accord that would lead to a unity government.
This would require Olmert to break off all talks, even if Abbas at this point did not. (And it is likely that Abbas would, because Hamas, which would have the upper hand, would not be a party to negotiations.)
While, as I said, this requires further confirmation, it strikes me as likely because Abbas knows how weak he is (how close to being toppled by Hamas in Judea and Samaria) and because he doesn't really want a two-state solution anyway. It cannot be emphasized enough how much the political discourse in the Palestinian areas has radicalized, and how little support Abbas has for striking a deal, even within his own Fatah party, which remains committed to Israel's destruction. The young guard may be anti-corruption, but that doesn't mean they want to deal with us.
What is more, I noted not long ago that after the signing of the accord in Yemen, which committed the two sides to talk further, it suddenly became strangely quiet, with no further news reports on what was happening. (Right after the signing, Abbas hedged, and I saw that as potentially a way for him to play both ends against the middle.) So, when I now read that Abbas has chosen to do this in secret, it does not strike me as surprising in the least. Presumably, Abbas, who had promised Bush he wouldn't deal with Hamas, hopes to extract maximum benefits from the US before tipping his hand.
It may be (it seems to be) that the pressure from Rice to give the maximum to Abbas was a last, desperate attempt to show him that he's better off negotiating with Israel. But what would be most disturbing, should it be true, is the suggestion that Rice knew, as she made those concessions, that Abbas was already in the process of talking with Hamas but chose not to deal with it as it would have resulted in considerable embarrassment to her.
If this turns out to be so, it means she was making concessions hoping to still lure Abbas away, but mindful of the fact that what was offered might in the end come into Hamas hands. This would have the makings of her undoing, I would say.
It would probably be too much to hope, that this might teach the US invaluable lessons: That the promises of the Palestinians cannot be trusted. And that ideology trumps economy (that is, that the Arabs cannot be bribed into making peace).
I will refrain from further speculation here and go into "wait and see" mode.
~~~~~~~~~~
That splendid Israeli-Arab (Muslim) journalist Khaled Abu Toameh, who reports so accurately and incisively for the Post, recently gave a talk at the University of Oregon in which he said that two, if not three, generations of Palestinians would have to be educated for peace before the situation would change.
I had recently said I thought it would take at least a generation. Now I see I was being optimistic.
Friday, April 4, 2008
"April Fools" Piece in the NYTimes Mimimizes Fatah/PA Anti-semitism
by Professor Gil Troy
I usually don't like playing bash-the-journalist. I try avoiding the ritualistic Tirade against the Times, which keeps pro-Israel New York Times readers' blood flowing. But an April 1, 2008 front-page article was so ridiculous it could have been an April Fools joke. "IN GAZA, HAMAS'S FIERY INSULTS TO JEWS COMPLICATE PEACE EFFORT," the headline ever so delicately proclaimed - as if there was much of a peace effort with Hamas to complicate, and as if the bombs raining down on Sderot or hundreds of cold-blooded murders over the years did not first "complicate" matters. Even the usually hostile International Herald Tribune reprinted the article under a more accurate headline "HAMAS RATCHETS UP ANTI-JEWISH RHETORIC."
Equally absurd, the one line the Times website highlighted pronounced: "While the Palestinian Authority under Fatah has made significant, if imperfect, efforts to end incitement against Jews, Hamas feels no such restraint." Moral obtuseness is one of the great crimes of our times and of the Times. The editors too easily forgive Fatah's "imperfections" in fighting anti-Semitism.
Steven Erlanger's article unintentionally illustrates how Hamas has helped sanitize Fatah and the Palestinian Authority in the eyes of gullible Westerners. The article admits, again in surprisingly delicate language, that "the Palestinian Authority of Fatah also causes some concern - its textbooks, for example, rarely recognize the state of Israel." Erlanger ignores the systematic anti-Semitism preached in Palestinian mosques, broadcast on PA TV, weaved into so many cartoons, and permeating the culture of what they call martyrdom, what we call terrorism. Fatah's Al-Aqsa Martyrs' brigade celebrated the recent Merkaz HaRav massacre as a "heroic operation."
The Times article implies that since the 1993 Oslo Accords, mainstream Palestinian leaders opposed anti-Semitic incitement. Tragically, the opposite is true. It represents one of the Oslo Peace Process's great betrayals. While many Israelis went beyond demonization to try incorporating the Palestinian narrative into their worldviews, while Israel's Ministry of Education introduced Palestinian national poets into Israel's curriculum, the PA under Fatah systematically tried to delegitimize Israel - and demonize Jews. Palestinian culture since the 1990s has marinated more than ever in this culture of hatred, with monstrous results for Israelis and Palestinians.
The rise of Hamas has helped many Palestinian Authority leaders wear the mask of moderation, legitimized by a perverted law of bogus averaging. The Hamas ideology of genocidal extremism and criticism of Mahmoud Abbas for being accommodating does not make Fatah moderate. Moderation is not just a relative term; you should be somewhat temperate to earn the label. It was Abbas, not Hamas, who recently accused Israel of committing "more than a holocaust," in Gaza, comparing 100 people killed during justified military moves with six million systematically slaughtered. It was Abbas the alleged moderate who has threatened further violence unless Israel meets his demands. And it is Abbas the supposed suppressor of incitement who, despite presiding over a political system that lacks free speech, nevertheless grants freed expression to rank anti-Semitism.
The Times article had other howlers, including the following sentence: "Intended to indoctrinate the young to its brand of radical Islam, which combines politics, social work and military resistance, including acts of terrorism, the programs of Al Aksa television and radio, including crucial Friday sermons, are an indication of how far from reconciliation Israelis and many Palestinians are" (emphasis added). Beyond the law of bogus averaging we see the tic of false equivalence. Ending a sentence about Hamas incitement with a phrase about reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians put the moral onus on both. This amoral unequal equivalence blames the victim along with the hater.
The article also views Hamas's anti-Semitism in a vacuum. Beyond one reference to Hizbullah and the mention of Hamas's "brand of radical Islam," Erlanger overlooked how typical such rhetoric has become throughout the Arab world. In fact, given that newspapers usually emphasize the exceptional, the innocent reader would finish the piece not realizing how many Arab newspapers regularly caricature Jews in the most despicable of ways, how many Muslim preachers every Friday preach against Jews in the harshest of ways, and how the Koranic characterization of Jews as "apes and pigs" has become routinized as discourse in the most disturbing of ways.
Unfortunately this foolish April article reflects a broader phenomenon. The recent State Department report charting Global anti-Semitism ignored PA incitement. Israel itself, both in its Foreign Ministry and in some university departments monitoring anti-Semitism, frequently overlooks PA and Fatah incitement. More broadly, many tend to minimize the ubiquity of the hatred, and how it is frequently linked with an appalling -- and equally genocidal -- anti-Americanism.
Too many Westerners are becoming like the iconic frog who, rather than being thrown into a pot of boiling water and jumping out, was burned to death as cold water, gradually heated, eventually turned deadly. Too many have become systematically desensitized by the steady discharge of genocidal anti-Semitism. Vitriolic Jew hatred has become so much a part of the background in the Arab world and much of the Muslim world that many have become gradually desensitized to it. And, as we saw during the terrorist wave against Israel that began in 2000, a constant onslaught slowly, gradually diffuses the outrage as people start accepting the unacceptable, tolerating the intolerable. When you add to this the journalistic compulsion to give two sides to every story, no matter how lopsided, and the broader political delusion that there is a broad Palestinian commitment to the anemic peace process, some of the ugliness now permeating Palestinian national culture ends up ignored or sanitized.
We cannot afford to be so lethargic in facing Hamas hatred or Fatah incitement. We have seen too many examples of words feeding violence; we have buried too many innocents whose killers became heroes. A culture of hate breeds more hatred, more violence. Ignoring it, minimizing it, or excusing it feeds the fires rather than dousing them as needed.
Gil Troy is a professor of history at McGill University in Montreal. He is the author of "Why I Am A Zionist" published by Gefen
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
"Tension in the North"
Posting: April 2, 2008
"Tension in the North"
A report by a 'top military intelligence officer" to the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee yesterday included a warning that Hezbollah is getting ready for new violence along the border with Israel.
A "change in preparedness" south of the Litani River has been detected, which UNIFIL is unable to prevent. While UNIFIL monitors open areas, it is prohibited from entering southern Lebanese villages and towns without coordination with the Lebanese army, and it is precisely in these areas that Hezbollah is increasing operations, with operatives dressed as civilians. (The ultimate outcome of this situation is painfully easy to predict, as we take on Hezbollah operatives and are condemned for hitting "civilians.")
This report clarifies Defense Minister Barak's motives in touring the northern border yesterday and making a statement that "Israel is the strongest country in the region, and I wouldn't recommend that anyone provoke us. Hezbollah is becoming stronger, but so are we. The IDF is prepared for all eventualities. We watch the pastoral calm, and we know that other things are seething beneath the surface."
~~~~~~~~~~
While, today, al-Quds al-Arabi, in London, has reported that Damascus is summoning its reserves and concentrating its forces along the Lebanese border in anticipation of an Israeli attack on Hezbollah and Syria.
This has been denied by a member of Syrian's National Security Committee, which says Hezbollah is quite capable of taking care of itself.
None the less, Barak is taking it all seriously enough so that he has cancelled a trip out of the country. And Deputy Chief of Staff Maj. Dan Harel said today that "anyone who attempts to attack Israel should bear in mind that the response will be harsh and painful." Both, however, at one and the same time, have indicated that nothing is imminent.
The paper additionally said that Hezbollah is currently refraining from exacting revenge for the murder of Mughniyeh at this time, so as to not give Israel an "excuse" to attack. If this is true, it would be a significant indicator of Israeli deterrence.
~~~~~~~~~~
I offer here two cautionary notes regarding not believing everything you hear (or read):
In an interview published yesterday in Al Aayam, a Palestinian paper, Khaled Mashaal, political head of Hamas in Damascus says that Hamas accepts a state defined by '67 lines. Not spoken, but implied here is that Hamas accepts Israel within the Green Line. His source for this is the Prisoners Document, which was drafted in Israeli prison by Hamas and Fatah prisoners, calling for a Palestinian state on all the territories occupied in 1967, with Jerusalem as its capital.
However (and this is a huge 'however'), the document says nothing about accepting the right of Israel to exist within those '67 lines.
~~~~~~~~~~
The second incident involves WHO (the World Health Organization) of the UN. At a press conference yesterday in Jerusalem, Ambrogio Manenti, the head of WHO in Gaza and the West Bank, said that Israeli policy with regard to bringing Gazans who require medical treatment into Israel was "inhumane."
Manenti's charge is that sick Gazans have to wait so long for security clearance that they die before they can be brought in.
Col. Nir Press, commander of the IDF's Gaza Coordination and Liaison Administration, responded to these charges, saying that they were "one-sided, inaccurate and misleading."
He pointed out that while stringent security checks were necessary because on occasion there are attempts to smuggle suicide bombers into Israel using the ruse of illness, over 90% of those requesting treatment in Israeli hospitals receive clearance. And the other 10% is provided with an opportunity to utilize a shuttle across Israel to go into Jordan for treatment.
To illustrate the problem, Manenti had highlighted five cases of Gazans who had allegedly died waiting for clearance. Press said, however, that all five had clearance to come into Israel and two in fact had received treatment in Israel; the others had been held up by internal factors inside of Gaza and not by lack of clearance.
In 2007, 7,226 permits were granted to sick Palestinians to travel to Israel, an increase of over 50% from 2006 when 4,754 were allowed in. in the first quarter of 2008, 2,000 ill persons from Gaza have already been brought to Israeli hospitals. I recently wrote the story of premature twins of a Palestinian mother from Gaza, in Barzelai hospital in Ashkelon, who were brought into the bomb shelter when a Katyusha was shot near the hospital from Gaza.
~~~~~~~~~~
Yet one other concession that Barak has indicated willingness to consider, at the prodding of Rice, is the granting of permission for the PA to monitor the Gaza side of the Erez and Karni crossings into Israel, if the violence stops. In this, he is would be on a collision course with the IDF, which is adamantly opposed. Two officers have spoken out: OC Southern Command Maj.-Gen. Yoav Galant and Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories Maj.-Gen. Yussef Mishlev.
As one defense official rightly explained it, "How can we let Abbas deploy forces there while Hamas is in control of Gaza?" Indeed, how can we? There is the suggestion that even Barak, who said it would be "considered," knows we cannot.
~~~~~~~~~~
Posting: April 1, 2008
"Surreal"
Even in the irrational environment with which we are coping, this gets a "most surreal" award:
Khaled Mashaal, political head of Hamas in Damascus, has given an interview. He explained that Israel has turned down an offer to restrict the attacks on both sides -- that is, by Israel and by Hamas in Gaza -- to only military targets, leaving civilians out of it.
This is a blatant set up, of course. For we here in Israel truly have military bases that might be targets and areas that are exclusively civilian. We are careful not to merge the two. But Hamas puts its terrorist activities and weapons inside civilian areas on purpose. Thus, if Israel were to commit to never attacking where there are civilians, there would be no opportunity to attack terrorists for fear of accidental injury to civilians. Hamas would have perfect cover and a free ride to do as it wished.
But read further for the surreal part of Mashaal's statement. Implying that with their current weapons Hamas would find it difficult to accurately target just military bases, even if that were its intention, he then said:
"We have primitive weapons. I ask the international community and the Americans to give us more advanced weapons so we can shoot more accurately."
I am not making this up.
Several things need to be clarified with regard to this:
Yes, Kassams are relatively simple home-made rockets. But they are also now in possession of Grad Katyushas and other more sophisticated weapons, and working every day to improve the accuracy even of the Kassam. When they hit places like Sderot, it is not because they aimed for a military base and accidentally hit civilians -- they are aiming directly for that civilian population; the inaccuracy means they can't be sure if they will hit a school, or a house three blocks away.
Mashaal maintains that Hamas has the right and the obligation to keep shooting to combat the "occupation." "This is ordinary behavior" -- as the Americans fought the British during the revolution, and the French fought the Nazis.
~~~~~~~~~~
Mashaal also alluded to the third party negotiations with Israel on the release of Shalit, claiming that Hamas was ready to strike a deal but that Israel is the stumbling block. We refuse, you see, to OK everyone on Hamas's list of 1,000 prisoners it demands be released.
It should be noted that Marwan Barghouti, a Fatah terrorist leader, was on the list.
~~~~~~~~~~
Lastly, Mashaal had words for Abbas: "We invite Mr. Abbas to come for unconditional talks in Gaza. Talks on how to address the reasons for the split, to return Gaza and the West Bank to unity and solve the security problem."
I believe it is only a matter of time until there are overt, public dealings (negotiations and cooperation at least if not a full unity gov't) between Fatah and Hamas. Abbas is currently playing both ends against the middle, avoiding that overt contact so that American largesse continues. But the fact that there is no overt contact doesn't mean that there is nothing going on in back rooms between the two groups.
What I noticed is that the agreement signed in Yemen has totally disappeared from the radar screen. Fatah backed off, saying there were "errors" in the signing, but to the best of my knowledge didn't totally disavow the understanding. And then, nothing further reported.
~~~~~~~~~~
We must return to Rice and Barak and Olmert, for the scenario in which they are actors has not yet played itself out.
After finishing meetings here in Israel, and amidst a flurry of very "optimistic" statements about how well things were going and the possibility that there might be an agreement before Bush comes in May, Rice went off to meet with Abbas.
Even on the plane, as I understand it, she began to question our sincerity in enacting all of the concessions that Barak presented her with. She indicated that the US would be watching us very closely to make sure we did what we have said we would, and quickly. In fact, she has charged General Fraser with monitoring this.
"General Fraser will be following up on the specifics and will be also... making certain that in fact there are 50 [roadblocks] and they are being removed."
A nasty tone, after her expression of being "amazed " at what we offered. But will the US also be closely monitoring PA progress in stopping terrorism? She didn't say so.
~~~~~~~~~~
To provide further evidence of our sincerity, Barak then made another announcement: He is considering allowing PA forces into Hevron and Tulkarm after the 700 already announced are deployed in Jenin. Hevron is the worst of options, as there is a Jewish community there, which is not the case in Jenin or Tulkarm. And that Jewish community recognizes this as a direct threat to their security.
"It would be extremely dangerous," said community spokesperson David Wilder. "The community is already under constant attack." He revealed that shots were recently fired at his apartment, leaving a hole in his son's closet. "Today a rock was thrown into the home of a family that lives next to me... The violence is continuing."
~~~~~~~~~~
Additionally, the announcement was made that we have already removed two roadblocks in the Jericho area and are also removing the Rimonim roadblock near Ramallah. The Yesha council expressed anger at this. The change in the situation, allowing Palestinians more "freedom of movement," means they will be free to come into areas where presently they do not have access, and there is likely to be an increase in weapon smuggling. There is concern, as well, about drive-by shootings.
Yesterday, there was an attempted terrorist attack at a hitchhikers station near the community of Shilo. A Palestinian -- not immediately recognizable as such -- approached two Israelis at the junction. When he suddenly shouted "Alah Akbar" ("God is great" -- the standard cry of terrorists attempting to kill Jews) and pulled out a knife in an attempt to stab them, one of the Israelis -- Erez Bar-On of Ofra -- stepped back, took out his personal gun and shot him. Police later discovered a second knife on the terrorist, a student from Birzeit University, who died.
Bar-On, in interview, expressed great disapproval of the government decision, saying that providing Palestinians with more freedom of movement increases the likelihood of such incidents.
~~~~~~~~~~
You may remember the story of David Landau, who was then, but no longer is, editor of Haaretz: At a dinner with Condoleezza Rice some months ago, he advised Rice to "rape" Israel, meaning forcing us into things we would not want to do.
Yisrael Medad, on his blog site today recounts this:
"I ran into David Landau yesterday at a funeral. I told him that he should watch the way he talks, referring to 'raping Israel' and all that. "He smiled and retorted: 'I meant what I said and I understand Condi Rice has taken my advice.'"
No comment is necessary.
~~~~~~~~~~
When Rice met here with Olmert, he told her (and I'll get to this below) that Israel would continue to build in major existing communities in Judea and Samaria as well as in neighborhoods of Jerusalem beyond the Green Line. In the subsequent press conference with Abbas, Rice lambasted us for this, saying that it was counter productive to "peace." (Note that she didn't lambaste the PA, when making her statement to the press here, for failure to clamp down on terrorism.)
What is happening -- which I've described before -- is that Olmert is caught between demands of Rice and demands of Shas. The only time he really says no to Rice (and it shows he can do so if he wishes to!) is when his coalition is threatened. Shas threatens to leave if building isn't done.
And so there has now been an announcement that 600 units will go up in Pisgat Ze'ev, a northern Jerusalem neighborhood. (I confess that this confuses me a bit, as I am sure I read about this some weeks ago; perhaps it was not finalized until now.) And there is word that Olmert has assured Shas that the freeze on building in the major community of Betar Illit, which is beyond Jerusalem, will be lifted as well, and that 800 units will go up there.
Shas members are patting themselves on the back for these accomplishments, and pointing to them, once again, as a reason to stay in the coalition. In point of fact, more would be accomplished if they left the coalition.
~~~~~~~~~~
It is always to the good when Olmert is put in the position of resisting Rice's demands, and shows willingness to protect our right to build in Jewish areas. Israel's stance is that we have a right to build within eastern Jerusalem and Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria that we are likely to keep in a settlement, and that this is consistent with international understandings.
"It is not true that we are building in violation of our obligations," Olmert said to his Kadima faction at a meeting in the Knesset. "We are not building new settlements, everyone must understand this... "
"We don't hide our views on Jerusalem and major settlement blocs, we are being honest about everything throughout the negotiations," he said.
I would truly like to think this is so. The PA is demanding our return to the '67 lines, and word has come out that our negotiators are getting ready to accede to this -- which would be a horror. If we are truly holding out for Jerusalem and major settlement blocs, there will be no deal, because the PA simply does NOT compromise.
All of this said, and with acknowledgement to Shas for putting Olmert in this position, it must be noted that Shas is taking heat from its haredi (ultra-Orthodox) constituency, which is looking for more housing. The neighborhoods in which Olmert has approved building are thus haredi, and will serve Shas's constituency.
~~~~~~~~~~
As to Rice's enthusiastic prediction that there might be an agreement by May, she has since backed off on this, and Olmert, as well, has made statements discouraging expectations of a quick agreement.
What is being sought is a general outline of what a Palestinian state would be like in terms of borders, control of Jerusalem and resolution of the refugee issue. This is to be called a Declaration of Principles, and it is supposed to be shelved until all pertinent road map commitments are met. As this requires the PA to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure and cease incitement, it means, in theoretical terms, no enactment of the principles, as least for a generation or more, as I said the other day.
But in reality this is an extremely dangerous process -- I believe so and every serious analyst I have read also says so. Once we've established the "principle" of a Palestinian state, the international community (and this very much includes the US), will cut the PA slack -- as the PA is ALWAYS cut slack -- and we will be pressured to give them that state before they've met their obligations. Thus it is fervently to be hoped that no agreement is reached in principle.
It is being said that "real progress" is being made in the negotiations, but no one outside the immediate process really knows what this means. The expectation is that because the PA cannot and will not compromise, that issues of control of eastern Jerusalem (including the Jewish quarter and the Temple mount) and "return" of refugees will present insurmountable obstacles to finalizing an agreement.
Yoel Marcus, writing in Haaretz, suggests that the clearest indication that the negotiations are mostly hot air is the silence from Shas.
~~~~~~~~~~
Yesterday, to the surprise of many, Barak made a comment about leaving the coalition after all. He is, however, definitely full of hot air with regard to the reason he is giving: that Olmert is accountable for failures during the Lebanon war and that this remains unfinished business because the PM hasn't resigned. This is true enough, but if this were Barak's true concern, he would have pulled out right after Winograd was released.
Never-the-less, Barak, in a meeting with bereaved parents of soldiers, declared, "Elections in two or three years are not a possibility."
I would say he's moving according to his own timetable for maneuvering himself into position to be the next prime minister. One might even speculate as to how his dealings with Rice might have been structured to meet his own agenda.
Amir Peretz who is former chair of Labor and former defense minister, attacked Barak at a Labor faction meeting, saying he was out of touch with reality: "You have an obsession with being prime minister, but you have no agenda. What is your economic agenda? What is your social agenda? What is your political agenda?"
Polls, it must be noted, have Netanyahu and Likud well ahead of Barak and Labor.
~~~~~~~~~~
It has been revealed by a Japanese newspaper, Asahi Shimbun, that when Olmert was in Japan in February, he told officials that last September the IDF operation into Syria targeted a nuclear facility built with North Korea's help.
~~~~~~~~~~
I do not report on a daily basis regarding the attacks on Israel from Gaza, but please don't imagine that it is quiet. On some days 15 or 20 rockets may be launched. Today two mortars hit in the Ashkelon region, causing light injuries.
~~~~~~~~~~
In a talk at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs yesterday, Professor Robert Wishtrich of Hebrew University stated that the UK is the center of European anti-Semitism. There is historical precedent for this, it didn't evolve in modern times: Since medieval times, Britain has been rife with anti-Semitism.
~~~~~~~~~~
Posting: March 30, 2008
"Deplorable"
Well, it was unlikely that Rice, who is here, would have readily walked away without further concessions from Israel for the sake of the "peace process." Some concessions, of some sort, from our craven, appeasing government. But what has taken place is above and beyond.
After Rice met with Defense Minister Barak and PA Prime Minister Fayyad here in Jerusalem, she actually said she was "amazed" by the gestures being advanced by Israel. I don't wonder at her amazement, as this sort of one-sided, tushy-kissing effort to be nice to an entity that in fact wishes us gone is quite breath-taking. But, rather than being "amazed," I'm just plain shocked. And outraged.
Rice announced that a number of concrete actions will be taken to improve the situation.
~~~~~~~~~~
Take a deep breath before reading this list of Barak's major offers:
[] The establishment of a Palestinian city (or series of neighborhoods) north of the town of al-Bireh, outside of Ramallah, to be paid for by a Jordanian businessman, to alleviate housing shortages in the Ramallah area. It would house tens of thousands of Palestinians.
This strikes me as most offensive of all. After the PA screams bloody murder about building a few hundred units in existing communities, and just one day after Abbas lied about this and said we were doing unprecedented building, we make this offer?
[] Increasing the number of laborers allowed into Israel to 5,000.
[] Taking down one checkpoint and 50 roadblocks, in order to ease the movement of Palestinians between the cities of Jenin, Tulkarm, Kalkilya and Ramallah.
As I remember, these roadblocks went up because easy movement between these cities allowed weapons to be transported.
[] Easing of restrictions on Palestinian public figures.
But just about a week ago a Palestinian official was caught smuggling large numbers of phones from Jordan.
[] Easing security checks for Palestinian businessmen.
Of course, a businessman would never aid a terrorist.
Barak further suggested:
[] Upgrading the infrastructure for aiding the Palestinians waiting at the crossings, the cost of which is estimated at NIS 8.3 million.
[] Transferring 325 cars and logistic equipment from the IDF to the Palestinian security organizations, including generators, blankets and first aid kits.
~~~~~~~~~~
I have on occasion commented that our leaders who take such actions are crazy. But I've been cautioned by some readers to avoid saying that, because truly crazy people are absolved of responsibility for their actions -- and the comment is on the mark.
What I will say, instead, is that this is very sick, but that Barak remains fully responsible for his decisions.
~~~~~~~~~~
You may be wondering what the PA will be offering in all of this. After all, Fayyad and Barak met together to put forward suggests to improve the situation.
Well, it was agreed that the Palestinian security forces must assume "greater responsibility."
I did not note a precise delineation of responsibility for what.
They also agreed to step up efforts to "prevent terror."
Again, that vagueness. Nothing that could be quantified or measured -- the way Barak's promises on taking down 50 roadblocks or allowing 5,000 laborers into Israel can be measured.
I heard tonight, by the way, from a very reliable source that Rice said today that the US would be watching Israel closely to see that these commitments were honored.
But the Palestinians? Hey, they can say they made an effort to prevent terror, they gave it their best.
~~~~~~~~~~
And Fayyad? This particular son of a bitch refused to make a public statement with Olmert and Rice. Take all that's offered, but not be seen to be too close to Israeli leader, who is an enemy of Palestine, after all. The photo op would not have served him in the street, which admires Hamas.
~~~~~~~~~~
And as if this is not bad enough, Barak and Olmert are making gestures to Syria regarding resuming peace negotiations.
From a military perspective this is a disaster. I heard Maj. Gen (res) Yaakov Amidror -- former Commander of the IDF's National Defense College and currently with the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs -- speak on a panel sponsored by Likud Anglo tonight. As Syria's demand for peace is return of the Golan Heights, his assessment was that negotiating peace with Syria might mean we would ultimately find ourselves fighting Iranians in the Galil.
Another panel member, Dan Diker -- Director of the Institute for Contemporary Affairs and a Senior Foreign Policy Analyst at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs -- made this incisive observation: Timing is everything. We have just seen that heads of major Arab countries are snubbing Syria by not participating in the conference in Damascus. And now? Now is the time we pick to undercut that message and confer legitimacy on Syria by reaching out to Assad?
A theme of this panel was the recognition that concessions don't work. Israel, in 1993, had the notion that the more we gave the more the world would respect us. But the reverse has happened, as the world has lost respect for us and has stopped understanding that we have legitimate rights in this land. As we fail to stand up for ourselves, it is the Palestinian narrative that is being internalized internationally.
~~~~~~~~~~
One last comment before closing: I heard it tonight from an American with major contacts (as I've hard it before from an international lawyer here with Washington DC connections): Rice is running the show, and she's doing the work of Saudi Arabia. But Bush's attitude towards Israel is not the same as Rice's. He is being seriously misled: By Rice, whom he trusts, and by the PA leaders, whose lovely words of peace he trusts, and by the Israeli leaders, who tell him how much we're willing to give up.
It may be futile. But it must be attempted at every juncture, calling on every possible political contact, sending every possible message: Bush needs to be provided with the realities.
~~~~~~~~~~
Posting: March 29, 2008
Motzei Shabbat (after Shabbat)
"Regarding Abbas"
An Arab summit is being held in Damascus this weekend, but is being boycotted by several Arab nations: Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon. The refusal to come was meant clearly to send a message of displeasure to Syria for its association with Iran, and its support of Hamas and Hezbollah.
According to an AP report that ran in the Post:
"'There are now two axes - Iran, Syria, Hamas and Hezbollah are on one side and the rest are on the other,' said Wahid Abdel-Meguid of the Cairo-based Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies.
"Arab summits are all about protocol and symbolism, and in that language, the show of disdain from top US-allies Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan could not be more clear.
"In an unprecedented move, they are sending minor officials rather than their heads of state - or even their prime ministers or foreign ministers.
"Even Yemen's President Ali Abdullah Saleh decided Friday not to come, sending his vice president in his place... 'Syria is losing friends, one after the other,' said Mansour Hayal, a Yemeni political analyst."
~~~~~~~~~~
Uh huh... But guess who didn't shun the conference? Our "moderate peace partner," Mahmoud Abbas. Tells us a great deal about which side he's on.
And let me share with you what he said at the conference:
"The coming couple of months are decisive. If we don't reach a solution by the end of this year, it means the whole region will be on the verge of a new era of tension and loss of confidence in peace.
"The last few months have witnessed unprecedented Israeli escalation in settlement expansion in Jerusalem and the West Bank. It has become clear that the Israeli government is imposing on the ground the political solution that it wants.
"Negotiations cannot continue under the Israeli bulldozers swallowing our land and building settlements and under the daily Israeli military operations."
He spoke of Israel "brutally" killing innocent Palestinians in Gaza, and he asked those present to "think seriously of Arab... protection for our people," by which he meant troops.
~~~~~~~~~~
You'll forgive my absolutely undiplomatic and impolitic response. This son of a bitch lies through his teeth. "Unprecedented Israeli escalation in settlement expansion"?
Olmert had -- most regrettably --caved completely and put a freeze on any building in eastern Jerusalem or Judea and Samaria. That freeze was lifted minimally, and only in line with what had been approved well prior to Annapolis, because of Olmert's fear of losing his coalition. I do not believe for a second that Abbas doesn't know this. He is inciting.
~~~~~~~~~~
But this charge allows me to return briefly here to the issue of settlements and why they do not constitute a stumbling block to peace.
First, it must be noted that the underlying assumption here -- which is outrageous -- is that everything outside the Green Line "belongs" to the PA, and is thus area upon which we have no right to build. That I've recently exposed as fallacious in terms of history and international law. Israel's final borders have yet to be negotiated.
What I want to advance here are a few other perspectives, which the world would do well to consider.
-- When Sharon decided to withdraw from Gaza in 2005, he pulled out all of the settlements of Gush Katif. I am not applauding this; I, in fact, deplore what happened. But it did happen, and it provides evidence for the fact that if there is Israeli intent withdrawals are possible.
My own position most strongly is that there should be no withdrawals and we should stand on our rights to the land. But the international community should begin to realize that stopping all construction is not necessary for peace negotiations to continue. Instead of making the "settlements" the whipping boy, let there first be a total elimination of terrorism, and let there be sincere negotiations with genuine desire on the other side for a two-state solution. Then let Israel and her genuine peace partner work out what should be relinquished by Israel and what not. Before that day comes (and we're talking more than a generation from now at a minimum), to demand of Israel that there be no building to accommodate natural growth in existing communities is nonsense. And natural growth in existing communities is all that has been sanctioned.
Then too, there is this thought: Why is it assumed by the international community that the PA has a right to a territory that is Judenrein? They charge us with apartheid, but this demand, which truly reflects apartheid thinking, elicits no reproach. It is a given: They want the land, and so Jews can't live there. Why is it that there would be hell to pay if we tried to move out all Arabs living in Israel, but that the same standard doesn't apply to the PA? Why cannot it be said that those Jews who remain in areas that would be going to the PA would be offered the option of remaining?
I feel driven to clarify again that I am not advocating any of this. I am merely pointing out the double standard that is at work and the unreasonable approach that is being taken with regard to this matter.
-- I will add here that while there is screaming about our building in eastern Jerusalem, Arabs are doing a huge amount of illegal building to which scant attention is paid. Double standard indeed!
~~~~~~~~~~
Let's return to Abbas for just a moment. With everything else, according to Khaled Abu Toameh, reporting in yesterday's Post, Abbas's Fatah is contending with an unprecedented rash of scandals that further weakens it.
"Remarked [a] Fatah representative: 'Fatah has lost much of what's left of its credibility. If we hold a free election in the West Bank tomorrow, it's almost certain that Hamas will win.'"
The scandals include accusations that Ahmed Qurei, who heads the PA negotiating team, deposited $3 million of PLO money in his accounts. Additionally, large shipments of expired medicine that had been illegally smuggled into the West Bank have been confiscated, with "dozens of physicians, pharmacists and officials from the PA's Ministry of Health are currently being interrogated for their alleged role in the medicine scandal, which is believed to have resulted in the death of many patients."
For details on these scandals and others see:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1206632349492&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
~~~~~~~~~~
Posting: March 28, 2008
"Dangerous Stupidity"
The stupidity alluded to here pertains both to US and Israeli policy. And it is with regard to the practice of continuing to arm and train Fatah forces in Judea and Samaria.
There is some very irrational notion that it is necessary to "strengthen" Fatah so it can prevent a Hamas takeover. However, the evidence from the recent past provides absolutely no reason to believe that giving Fatah more weapons and more training is going to turn them into a fighting machine that will keep Hamas at bay and that will help to keep Israel safe from terrorists. In fact, the opposite is glaringly obvious to anyone who wishes to pay attention.
Repeatedly over the years since the PA was established, there have been incidents in which weapons and training provided by the US with Israeli sanction were turned against Israel. The very first time this happened was in 1996 and the severity of such situations increased with the second intifada starting in 2000.
~~~~~~~~~~
But that's just one factor of concern. The other is the vast likelihood that these weapons will end up in Hamas hands. That's precisely what happened in Gaza. Fatah was heavily armed by the US so that it might stand against Hamas. When Hamas routed Fatah, they acquired these weapons, which are now being utilized against Israel, and which will make that eventual major operation in Gaza more difficult than it otherwise would have been. Hamas is now in possession of such Fatah equipment as machine guns, thousands of assault rifles, personnel carriers and night vision goggles.
~~~~~~~~~~
What must be understood here -- what is of MAJOR concern -- is the fact that Fatah was not defeated in Gaza because of Hamas superiority. Fatah had better training, better equipment, and a larger number of troops in the field. What they lacked was the will to fight Hamas.
Consider this information from my report on Fatah from in January:
After the rout, The Observer interviewed Abu Obieda, head of the military wing of Hamas, who said, "I expected it to take one month. That is what we planned for and trained for. But then at the beginning all of the Fatah commanders escaped their compounds in ambulances and left for Egypt. They left their men to die. Who could do that?"
Amir Tahiri, reporting in the NY Post, confirmed this, saying that even the four chief bases, claimed to be impregnable, fell within hours as the defenders fled, leaving their equipment behind.
While according to the Economist, Abbas did not declare a state of emergency until his own Gaza house (very large and elaborate, it should be noted) was being ransacked. Middle level officers complained about a lack of leadership: "We had no orders to fight except in self defense."
~~~~~~~~~~
That was in Gaza. Now in Judea and Samaria, even US generals have begun to complain about the lack of effort on the part of the PA to take on terrorism. This is something I've been writing about for months: the reports that security officers say they aren't given orders to shoot at terrorists, etc.
This pattern persists because Fatah (the PA) has no stomach for this fight. As they see it, Hamas and Fatah are all part of the Palestinian people, and there is at heart no disapproval of Hamas terrorism within the ranks of Fatah. The goals are the same, it is only the methods that vary, like a "good cop, bad cop" routine.
Months ago, the assessment of Israeli intelligence was that Hamas was as strong as Fatah in Judea and Samaria. Since then, Hamas has strengthened further and it is clearly understood that only the IDF stands between the PA and a Hamas takeover.
~~~~~~~~~~
Yet, in spite of this, the US, which saw its policy fail so badly in Gaza, and which is in possession of information regarding Hamas strength in Judea and Samaria, and PA failure to fight terrorism... the US decides to adopt precisely the same policy that backfired in Gaza and to back the same losers all over again. The US is funding weapon supplies and training for the PA.
Where are the brains of Rice and company? Where is Bush in all of this? They are setting themselves up for a situation that is doomed to fail. They are making it possible for Hamas to secure better weapons than they would otherwise have had, and ultimately they -- US officials! -- are going to be responsible for Israeli deaths.
And those who head the Israeli government? They behave like US lackeys, instead of officials of a sovereign state. They give statements about how Israeli security must be their first concern, but they don't act in accord with these statements.
~~~~~~~~~~
Now it is in the news that Defense Minister Barak has expressed to the US concern that Hamas may take over Judea and Samaria, and that Israeli gestures to the US may backfire.
Well, good morning! But why didn't he register this concern BEFORE making the gestures. Why didn't he flatly refuse to make the gestures (which are blatantly said to be gestures to the US) because his first responsibility is to protect Israel?
Yet Israel has signed on to allowing the PA to have armored personnel carriers, night vision goggles and a whole lot more.
All in the interests of peace, you understand.
~~~~~~~~~~
Rice is due here tomorrow night. She is coming to push that moribund "peace process." And we must ask, here too, why she thinks Fatah is a viable peace partner for Israel, given the parameters outlined above.
What is particularly infuriating is that she is being "even handed," criticizing both Israel and the PA for "failures" to live up to their commitments. But what she criticizes Israel for are such things as not taking down "illegal outposts," while with the PA the criticism is not fighting terrorism.
These are not parallel issues. The bottom line is that without an elimination of terrorist infrastructure there will be no peace here. Everything else must be on hold until that is accomplished.
As to the issues of communities established beyond the Green Line being an "obstacle to peace," I will discuss this further in the next posting.
"Tension in the North"
A report by a 'top military intelligence officer" to the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee yesterday included a warning that Hezbollah is getting ready for new violence along the border with Israel.
A "change in preparedness" south of the Litani River has been detected, which UNIFIL is unable to prevent. While UNIFIL monitors open areas, it is prohibited from entering southern Lebanese villages and towns without coordination with the Lebanese army, and it is precisely in these areas that Hezbollah is increasing operations, with operatives dressed as civilians. (The ultimate outcome of this situation is painfully easy to predict, as we take on Hezbollah operatives and are condemned for hitting "civilians.")
This report clarifies Defense Minister Barak's motives in touring the northern border yesterday and making a statement that "Israel is the strongest country in the region, and I wouldn't recommend that anyone provoke us. Hezbollah is becoming stronger, but so are we. The IDF is prepared for all eventualities. We watch the pastoral calm, and we know that other things are seething beneath the surface."
~~~~~~~~~~
While, today, al-Quds al-Arabi, in London, has reported that Damascus is summoning its reserves and concentrating its forces along the Lebanese border in anticipation of an Israeli attack on Hezbollah and Syria.
This has been denied by a member of Syrian's National Security Committee, which says Hezbollah is quite capable of taking care of itself.
None the less, Barak is taking it all seriously enough so that he has cancelled a trip out of the country. And Deputy Chief of Staff Maj. Dan Harel said today that "anyone who attempts to attack Israel should bear in mind that the response will be harsh and painful." Both, however, at one and the same time, have indicated that nothing is imminent.
The paper additionally said that Hezbollah is currently refraining from exacting revenge for the murder of Mughniyeh at this time, so as to not give Israel an "excuse" to attack. If this is true, it would be a significant indicator of Israeli deterrence.
~~~~~~~~~~
I offer here two cautionary notes regarding not believing everything you hear (or read):
In an interview published yesterday in Al Aayam, a Palestinian paper, Khaled Mashaal, political head of Hamas in Damascus says that Hamas accepts a state defined by '67 lines. Not spoken, but implied here is that Hamas accepts Israel within the Green Line. His source for this is the Prisoners Document, which was drafted in Israeli prison by Hamas and Fatah prisoners, calling for a Palestinian state on all the territories occupied in 1967, with Jerusalem as its capital.
However (and this is a huge 'however'), the document says nothing about accepting the right of Israel to exist within those '67 lines.
~~~~~~~~~~
The second incident involves WHO (the World Health Organization) of the UN. At a press conference yesterday in Jerusalem, Ambrogio Manenti, the head of WHO in Gaza and the West Bank, said that Israeli policy with regard to bringing Gazans who require medical treatment into Israel was "inhumane."
Manenti's charge is that sick Gazans have to wait so long for security clearance that they die before they can be brought in.
Col. Nir Press, commander of the IDF's Gaza Coordination and Liaison Administration, responded to these charges, saying that they were "one-sided, inaccurate and misleading."
He pointed out that while stringent security checks were necessary because on occasion there are attempts to smuggle suicide bombers into Israel using the ruse of illness, over 90% of those requesting treatment in Israeli hospitals receive clearance. And the other 10% is provided with an opportunity to utilize a shuttle across Israel to go into Jordan for treatment.
To illustrate the problem, Manenti had highlighted five cases of Gazans who had allegedly died waiting for clearance. Press said, however, that all five had clearance to come into Israel and two in fact had received treatment in Israel; the others had been held up by internal factors inside of Gaza and not by lack of clearance.
In 2007, 7,226 permits were granted to sick Palestinians to travel to Israel, an increase of over 50% from 2006 when 4,754 were allowed in. in the first quarter of 2008, 2,000 ill persons from Gaza have already been brought to Israeli hospitals. I recently wrote the story of premature twins of a Palestinian mother from Gaza, in Barzelai hospital in Ashkelon, who were brought into the bomb shelter when a Katyusha was shot near the hospital from Gaza.
~~~~~~~~~~
Yet one other concession that Barak has indicated willingness to consider, at the prodding of Rice, is the granting of permission for the PA to monitor the Gaza side of the Erez and Karni crossings into Israel, if the violence stops. In this, he is would be on a collision course with the IDF, which is adamantly opposed. Two officers have spoken out: OC Southern Command Maj.-Gen. Yoav Galant and Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories Maj.-Gen. Yussef Mishlev.
As one defense official rightly explained it, "How can we let Abbas deploy forces there while Hamas is in control of Gaza?" Indeed, how can we? There is the suggestion that even Barak, who said it would be "considered," knows we cannot.
~~~~~~~~~~
Posting: April 1, 2008
"Surreal"
Even in the irrational environment with which we are coping, this gets a "most surreal" award:
Khaled Mashaal, political head of Hamas in Damascus, has given an interview. He explained that Israel has turned down an offer to restrict the attacks on both sides -- that is, by Israel and by Hamas in Gaza -- to only military targets, leaving civilians out of it.
This is a blatant set up, of course. For we here in Israel truly have military bases that might be targets and areas that are exclusively civilian. We are careful not to merge the two. But Hamas puts its terrorist activities and weapons inside civilian areas on purpose. Thus, if Israel were to commit to never attacking where there are civilians, there would be no opportunity to attack terrorists for fear of accidental injury to civilians. Hamas would have perfect cover and a free ride to do as it wished.
But read further for the surreal part of Mashaal's statement. Implying that with their current weapons Hamas would find it difficult to accurately target just military bases, even if that were its intention, he then said:
"We have primitive weapons. I ask the international community and the Americans to give us more advanced weapons so we can shoot more accurately."
I am not making this up.
Several things need to be clarified with regard to this:
Yes, Kassams are relatively simple home-made rockets. But they are also now in possession of Grad Katyushas and other more sophisticated weapons, and working every day to improve the accuracy even of the Kassam. When they hit places like Sderot, it is not because they aimed for a military base and accidentally hit civilians -- they are aiming directly for that civilian population; the inaccuracy means they can't be sure if they will hit a school, or a house three blocks away.
Mashaal maintains that Hamas has the right and the obligation to keep shooting to combat the "occupation." "This is ordinary behavior" -- as the Americans fought the British during the revolution, and the French fought the Nazis.
~~~~~~~~~~
Mashaal also alluded to the third party negotiations with Israel on the release of Shalit, claiming that Hamas was ready to strike a deal but that Israel is the stumbling block. We refuse, you see, to OK everyone on Hamas's list of 1,000 prisoners it demands be released.
It should be noted that Marwan Barghouti, a Fatah terrorist leader, was on the list.
~~~~~~~~~~
Lastly, Mashaal had words for Abbas: "We invite Mr. Abbas to come for unconditional talks in Gaza. Talks on how to address the reasons for the split, to return Gaza and the West Bank to unity and solve the security problem."
I believe it is only a matter of time until there are overt, public dealings (negotiations and cooperation at least if not a full unity gov't) between Fatah and Hamas. Abbas is currently playing both ends against the middle, avoiding that overt contact so that American largesse continues. But the fact that there is no overt contact doesn't mean that there is nothing going on in back rooms between the two groups.
What I noticed is that the agreement signed in Yemen has totally disappeared from the radar screen. Fatah backed off, saying there were "errors" in the signing, but to the best of my knowledge didn't totally disavow the understanding. And then, nothing further reported.
~~~~~~~~~~
We must return to Rice and Barak and Olmert, for the scenario in which they are actors has not yet played itself out.
After finishing meetings here in Israel, and amidst a flurry of very "optimistic" statements about how well things were going and the possibility that there might be an agreement before Bush comes in May, Rice went off to meet with Abbas.
Even on the plane, as I understand it, she began to question our sincerity in enacting all of the concessions that Barak presented her with. She indicated that the US would be watching us very closely to make sure we did what we have said we would, and quickly. In fact, she has charged General Fraser with monitoring this.
"General Fraser will be following up on the specifics and will be also... making certain that in fact there are 50 [roadblocks] and they are being removed."
A nasty tone, after her expression of being "amazed " at what we offered. But will the US also be closely monitoring PA progress in stopping terrorism? She didn't say so.
~~~~~~~~~~
To provide further evidence of our sincerity, Barak then made another announcement: He is considering allowing PA forces into Hevron and Tulkarm after the 700 already announced are deployed in Jenin. Hevron is the worst of options, as there is a Jewish community there, which is not the case in Jenin or Tulkarm. And that Jewish community recognizes this as a direct threat to their security.
"It would be extremely dangerous," said community spokesperson David Wilder. "The community is already under constant attack." He revealed that shots were recently fired at his apartment, leaving a hole in his son's closet. "Today a rock was thrown into the home of a family that lives next to me... The violence is continuing."
~~~~~~~~~~
Additionally, the announcement was made that we have already removed two roadblocks in the Jericho area and are also removing the Rimonim roadblock near Ramallah. The Yesha council expressed anger at this. The change in the situation, allowing Palestinians more "freedom of movement," means they will be free to come into areas where presently they do not have access, and there is likely to be an increase in weapon smuggling. There is concern, as well, about drive-by shootings.
Yesterday, there was an attempted terrorist attack at a hitchhikers station near the community of Shilo. A Palestinian -- not immediately recognizable as such -- approached two Israelis at the junction. When he suddenly shouted "Alah Akbar" ("God is great" -- the standard cry of terrorists attempting to kill Jews) and pulled out a knife in an attempt to stab them, one of the Israelis -- Erez Bar-On of Ofra -- stepped back, took out his personal gun and shot him. Police later discovered a second knife on the terrorist, a student from Birzeit University, who died.
Bar-On, in interview, expressed great disapproval of the government decision, saying that providing Palestinians with more freedom of movement increases the likelihood of such incidents.
~~~~~~~~~~
You may remember the story of David Landau, who was then, but no longer is, editor of Haaretz: At a dinner with Condoleezza Rice some months ago, he advised Rice to "rape" Israel, meaning forcing us into things we would not want to do.
Yisrael Medad, on his blog site today recounts this:
"I ran into David Landau yesterday at a funeral. I told him that he should watch the way he talks, referring to 'raping Israel' and all that. "He smiled and retorted: 'I meant what I said and I understand Condi Rice has taken my advice.'"
No comment is necessary.
~~~~~~~~~~
When Rice met here with Olmert, he told her (and I'll get to this below) that Israel would continue to build in major existing communities in Judea and Samaria as well as in neighborhoods of Jerusalem beyond the Green Line. In the subsequent press conference with Abbas, Rice lambasted us for this, saying that it was counter productive to "peace." (Note that she didn't lambaste the PA, when making her statement to the press here, for failure to clamp down on terrorism.)
What is happening -- which I've described before -- is that Olmert is caught between demands of Rice and demands of Shas. The only time he really says no to Rice (and it shows he can do so if he wishes to!) is when his coalition is threatened. Shas threatens to leave if building isn't done.
And so there has now been an announcement that 600 units will go up in Pisgat Ze'ev, a northern Jerusalem neighborhood. (I confess that this confuses me a bit, as I am sure I read about this some weeks ago; perhaps it was not finalized until now.) And there is word that Olmert has assured Shas that the freeze on building in the major community of Betar Illit, which is beyond Jerusalem, will be lifted as well, and that 800 units will go up there.
Shas members are patting themselves on the back for these accomplishments, and pointing to them, once again, as a reason to stay in the coalition. In point of fact, more would be accomplished if they left the coalition.
~~~~~~~~~~
It is always to the good when Olmert is put in the position of resisting Rice's demands, and shows willingness to protect our right to build in Jewish areas. Israel's stance is that we have a right to build within eastern Jerusalem and Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria that we are likely to keep in a settlement, and that this is consistent with international understandings.
"It is not true that we are building in violation of our obligations," Olmert said to his Kadima faction at a meeting in the Knesset. "We are not building new settlements, everyone must understand this... "
"We don't hide our views on Jerusalem and major settlement blocs, we are being honest about everything throughout the negotiations," he said.
I would truly like to think this is so. The PA is demanding our return to the '67 lines, and word has come out that our negotiators are getting ready to accede to this -- which would be a horror. If we are truly holding out for Jerusalem and major settlement blocs, there will be no deal, because the PA simply does NOT compromise.
All of this said, and with acknowledgement to Shas for putting Olmert in this position, it must be noted that Shas is taking heat from its haredi (ultra-Orthodox) constituency, which is looking for more housing. The neighborhoods in which Olmert has approved building are thus haredi, and will serve Shas's constituency.
~~~~~~~~~~
As to Rice's enthusiastic prediction that there might be an agreement by May, she has since backed off on this, and Olmert, as well, has made statements discouraging expectations of a quick agreement.
What is being sought is a general outline of what a Palestinian state would be like in terms of borders, control of Jerusalem and resolution of the refugee issue. This is to be called a Declaration of Principles, and it is supposed to be shelved until all pertinent road map commitments are met. As this requires the PA to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure and cease incitement, it means, in theoretical terms, no enactment of the principles, as least for a generation or more, as I said the other day.
But in reality this is an extremely dangerous process -- I believe so and every serious analyst I have read also says so. Once we've established the "principle" of a Palestinian state, the international community (and this very much includes the US), will cut the PA slack -- as the PA is ALWAYS cut slack -- and we will be pressured to give them that state before they've met their obligations. Thus it is fervently to be hoped that no agreement is reached in principle.
It is being said that "real progress" is being made in the negotiations, but no one outside the immediate process really knows what this means. The expectation is that because the PA cannot and will not compromise, that issues of control of eastern Jerusalem (including the Jewish quarter and the Temple mount) and "return" of refugees will present insurmountable obstacles to finalizing an agreement.
Yoel Marcus, writing in Haaretz, suggests that the clearest indication that the negotiations are mostly hot air is the silence from Shas.
~~~~~~~~~~
Yesterday, to the surprise of many, Barak made a comment about leaving the coalition after all. He is, however, definitely full of hot air with regard to the reason he is giving: that Olmert is accountable for failures during the Lebanon war and that this remains unfinished business because the PM hasn't resigned. This is true enough, but if this were Barak's true concern, he would have pulled out right after Winograd was released.
Never-the-less, Barak, in a meeting with bereaved parents of soldiers, declared, "Elections in two or three years are not a possibility."
I would say he's moving according to his own timetable for maneuvering himself into position to be the next prime minister. One might even speculate as to how his dealings with Rice might have been structured to meet his own agenda.
Amir Peretz who is former chair of Labor and former defense minister, attacked Barak at a Labor faction meeting, saying he was out of touch with reality: "You have an obsession with being prime minister, but you have no agenda. What is your economic agenda? What is your social agenda? What is your political agenda?"
Polls, it must be noted, have Netanyahu and Likud well ahead of Barak and Labor.
~~~~~~~~~~
It has been revealed by a Japanese newspaper, Asahi Shimbun, that when Olmert was in Japan in February, he told officials that last September the IDF operation into Syria targeted a nuclear facility built with North Korea's help.
~~~~~~~~~~
I do not report on a daily basis regarding the attacks on Israel from Gaza, but please don't imagine that it is quiet. On some days 15 or 20 rockets may be launched. Today two mortars hit in the Ashkelon region, causing light injuries.
~~~~~~~~~~
In a talk at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs yesterday, Professor Robert Wishtrich of Hebrew University stated that the UK is the center of European anti-Semitism. There is historical precedent for this, it didn't evolve in modern times: Since medieval times, Britain has been rife with anti-Semitism.
~~~~~~~~~~
Posting: March 30, 2008
"Deplorable"
Well, it was unlikely that Rice, who is here, would have readily walked away without further concessions from Israel for the sake of the "peace process." Some concessions, of some sort, from our craven, appeasing government. But what has taken place is above and beyond.
After Rice met with Defense Minister Barak and PA Prime Minister Fayyad here in Jerusalem, she actually said she was "amazed" by the gestures being advanced by Israel. I don't wonder at her amazement, as this sort of one-sided, tushy-kissing effort to be nice to an entity that in fact wishes us gone is quite breath-taking. But, rather than being "amazed," I'm just plain shocked. And outraged.
Rice announced that a number of concrete actions will be taken to improve the situation.
~~~~~~~~~~
Take a deep breath before reading this list of Barak's major offers:
[] The establishment of a Palestinian city (or series of neighborhoods) north of the town of al-Bireh, outside of Ramallah, to be paid for by a Jordanian businessman, to alleviate housing shortages in the Ramallah area. It would house tens of thousands of Palestinians.
This strikes me as most offensive of all. After the PA screams bloody murder about building a few hundred units in existing communities, and just one day after Abbas lied about this and said we were doing unprecedented building, we make this offer?
[] Increasing the number of laborers allowed into Israel to 5,000.
[] Taking down one checkpoint and 50 roadblocks, in order to ease the movement of Palestinians between the cities of Jenin, Tulkarm, Kalkilya and Ramallah.
As I remember, these roadblocks went up because easy movement between these cities allowed weapons to be transported.
[] Easing of restrictions on Palestinian public figures.
But just about a week ago a Palestinian official was caught smuggling large numbers of phones from Jordan.
[] Easing security checks for Palestinian businessmen.
Of course, a businessman would never aid a terrorist.
Barak further suggested:
[] Upgrading the infrastructure for aiding the Palestinians waiting at the crossings, the cost of which is estimated at NIS 8.3 million.
[] Transferring 325 cars and logistic equipment from the IDF to the Palestinian security organizations, including generators, blankets and first aid kits.
~~~~~~~~~~
I have on occasion commented that our leaders who take such actions are crazy. But I've been cautioned by some readers to avoid saying that, because truly crazy people are absolved of responsibility for their actions -- and the comment is on the mark.
What I will say, instead, is that this is very sick, but that Barak remains fully responsible for his decisions.
~~~~~~~~~~
You may be wondering what the PA will be offering in all of this. After all, Fayyad and Barak met together to put forward suggests to improve the situation.
Well, it was agreed that the Palestinian security forces must assume "greater responsibility."
I did not note a precise delineation of responsibility for what.
They also agreed to step up efforts to "prevent terror."
Again, that vagueness. Nothing that could be quantified or measured -- the way Barak's promises on taking down 50 roadblocks or allowing 5,000 laborers into Israel can be measured.
I heard tonight, by the way, from a very reliable source that Rice said today that the US would be watching Israel closely to see that these commitments were honored.
But the Palestinians? Hey, they can say they made an effort to prevent terror, they gave it their best.
~~~~~~~~~~
And Fayyad? This particular son of a bitch refused to make a public statement with Olmert and Rice. Take all that's offered, but not be seen to be too close to Israeli leader, who is an enemy of Palestine, after all. The photo op would not have served him in the street, which admires Hamas.
~~~~~~~~~~
And as if this is not bad enough, Barak and Olmert are making gestures to Syria regarding resuming peace negotiations.
From a military perspective this is a disaster. I heard Maj. Gen (res) Yaakov Amidror -- former Commander of the IDF's National Defense College and currently with the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs -- speak on a panel sponsored by Likud Anglo tonight. As Syria's demand for peace is return of the Golan Heights, his assessment was that negotiating peace with Syria might mean we would ultimately find ourselves fighting Iranians in the Galil.
Another panel member, Dan Diker -- Director of the Institute for Contemporary Affairs and a Senior Foreign Policy Analyst at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs -- made this incisive observation: Timing is everything. We have just seen that heads of major Arab countries are snubbing Syria by not participating in the conference in Damascus. And now? Now is the time we pick to undercut that message and confer legitimacy on Syria by reaching out to Assad?
A theme of this panel was the recognition that concessions don't work. Israel, in 1993, had the notion that the more we gave the more the world would respect us. But the reverse has happened, as the world has lost respect for us and has stopped understanding that we have legitimate rights in this land. As we fail to stand up for ourselves, it is the Palestinian narrative that is being internalized internationally.
~~~~~~~~~~
One last comment before closing: I heard it tonight from an American with major contacts (as I've hard it before from an international lawyer here with Washington DC connections): Rice is running the show, and she's doing the work of Saudi Arabia. But Bush's attitude towards Israel is not the same as Rice's. He is being seriously misled: By Rice, whom he trusts, and by the PA leaders, whose lovely words of peace he trusts, and by the Israeli leaders, who tell him how much we're willing to give up.
It may be futile. But it must be attempted at every juncture, calling on every possible political contact, sending every possible message: Bush needs to be provided with the realities.
~~~~~~~~~~
Posting: March 29, 2008
Motzei Shabbat (after Shabbat)
"Regarding Abbas"
An Arab summit is being held in Damascus this weekend, but is being boycotted by several Arab nations: Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon. The refusal to come was meant clearly to send a message of displeasure to Syria for its association with Iran, and its support of Hamas and Hezbollah.
According to an AP report that ran in the Post:
"'There are now two axes - Iran, Syria, Hamas and Hezbollah are on one side and the rest are on the other,' said Wahid Abdel-Meguid of the Cairo-based Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies.
"Arab summits are all about protocol and symbolism, and in that language, the show of disdain from top US-allies Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan could not be more clear.
"In an unprecedented move, they are sending minor officials rather than their heads of state - or even their prime ministers or foreign ministers.
"Even Yemen's President Ali Abdullah Saleh decided Friday not to come, sending his vice president in his place... 'Syria is losing friends, one after the other,' said Mansour Hayal, a Yemeni political analyst."
~~~~~~~~~~
Uh huh... But guess who didn't shun the conference? Our "moderate peace partner," Mahmoud Abbas. Tells us a great deal about which side he's on.
And let me share with you what he said at the conference:
"The coming couple of months are decisive. If we don't reach a solution by the end of this year, it means the whole region will be on the verge of a new era of tension and loss of confidence in peace.
"The last few months have witnessed unprecedented Israeli escalation in settlement expansion in Jerusalem and the West Bank. It has become clear that the Israeli government is imposing on the ground the political solution that it wants.
"Negotiations cannot continue under the Israeli bulldozers swallowing our land and building settlements and under the daily Israeli military operations."
He spoke of Israel "brutally" killing innocent Palestinians in Gaza, and he asked those present to "think seriously of Arab... protection for our people," by which he meant troops.
~~~~~~~~~~
You'll forgive my absolutely undiplomatic and impolitic response. This son of a bitch lies through his teeth. "Unprecedented Israeli escalation in settlement expansion"?
Olmert had -- most regrettably --caved completely and put a freeze on any building in eastern Jerusalem or Judea and Samaria. That freeze was lifted minimally, and only in line with what had been approved well prior to Annapolis, because of Olmert's fear of losing his coalition. I do not believe for a second that Abbas doesn't know this. He is inciting.
~~~~~~~~~~
But this charge allows me to return briefly here to the issue of settlements and why they do not constitute a stumbling block to peace.
First, it must be noted that the underlying assumption here -- which is outrageous -- is that everything outside the Green Line "belongs" to the PA, and is thus area upon which we have no right to build. That I've recently exposed as fallacious in terms of history and international law. Israel's final borders have yet to be negotiated.
What I want to advance here are a few other perspectives, which the world would do well to consider.
-- When Sharon decided to withdraw from Gaza in 2005, he pulled out all of the settlements of Gush Katif. I am not applauding this; I, in fact, deplore what happened. But it did happen, and it provides evidence for the fact that if there is Israeli intent withdrawals are possible.
My own position most strongly is that there should be no withdrawals and we should stand on our rights to the land. But the international community should begin to realize that stopping all construction is not necessary for peace negotiations to continue. Instead of making the "settlements" the whipping boy, let there first be a total elimination of terrorism, and let there be sincere negotiations with genuine desire on the other side for a two-state solution. Then let Israel and her genuine peace partner work out what should be relinquished by Israel and what not. Before that day comes (and we're talking more than a generation from now at a minimum), to demand of Israel that there be no building to accommodate natural growth in existing communities is nonsense. And natural growth in existing communities is all that has been sanctioned.
Then too, there is this thought: Why is it assumed by the international community that the PA has a right to a territory that is Judenrein? They charge us with apartheid, but this demand, which truly reflects apartheid thinking, elicits no reproach. It is a given: They want the land, and so Jews can't live there. Why is it that there would be hell to pay if we tried to move out all Arabs living in Israel, but that the same standard doesn't apply to the PA? Why cannot it be said that those Jews who remain in areas that would be going to the PA would be offered the option of remaining?
I feel driven to clarify again that I am not advocating any of this. I am merely pointing out the double standard that is at work and the unreasonable approach that is being taken with regard to this matter.
-- I will add here that while there is screaming about our building in eastern Jerusalem, Arabs are doing a huge amount of illegal building to which scant attention is paid. Double standard indeed!
~~~~~~~~~~
Let's return to Abbas for just a moment. With everything else, according to Khaled Abu Toameh, reporting in yesterday's Post, Abbas's Fatah is contending with an unprecedented rash of scandals that further weakens it.
"Remarked [a] Fatah representative: 'Fatah has lost much of what's left of its credibility. If we hold a free election in the West Bank tomorrow, it's almost certain that Hamas will win.'"
The scandals include accusations that Ahmed Qurei, who heads the PA negotiating team, deposited $3 million of PLO money in his accounts. Additionally, large shipments of expired medicine that had been illegally smuggled into the West Bank have been confiscated, with "dozens of physicians, pharmacists and officials from the PA's Ministry of Health are currently being interrogated for their alleged role in the medicine scandal, which is believed to have resulted in the death of many patients."
For details on these scandals and others see:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1206632349492&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
~~~~~~~~~~
Posting: March 28, 2008
"Dangerous Stupidity"
The stupidity alluded to here pertains both to US and Israeli policy. And it is with regard to the practice of continuing to arm and train Fatah forces in Judea and Samaria.
There is some very irrational notion that it is necessary to "strengthen" Fatah so it can prevent a Hamas takeover. However, the evidence from the recent past provides absolutely no reason to believe that giving Fatah more weapons and more training is going to turn them into a fighting machine that will keep Hamas at bay and that will help to keep Israel safe from terrorists. In fact, the opposite is glaringly obvious to anyone who wishes to pay attention.
Repeatedly over the years since the PA was established, there have been incidents in which weapons and training provided by the US with Israeli sanction were turned against Israel. The very first time this happened was in 1996 and the severity of such situations increased with the second intifada starting in 2000.
~~~~~~~~~~
But that's just one factor of concern. The other is the vast likelihood that these weapons will end up in Hamas hands. That's precisely what happened in Gaza. Fatah was heavily armed by the US so that it might stand against Hamas. When Hamas routed Fatah, they acquired these weapons, which are now being utilized against Israel, and which will make that eventual major operation in Gaza more difficult than it otherwise would have been. Hamas is now in possession of such Fatah equipment as machine guns, thousands of assault rifles, personnel carriers and night vision goggles.
~~~~~~~~~~
What must be understood here -- what is of MAJOR concern -- is the fact that Fatah was not defeated in Gaza because of Hamas superiority. Fatah had better training, better equipment, and a larger number of troops in the field. What they lacked was the will to fight Hamas.
Consider this information from my report on Fatah from in January:
After the rout, The Observer interviewed Abu Obieda, head of the military wing of Hamas, who said, "I expected it to take one month. That is what we planned for and trained for. But then at the beginning all of the Fatah commanders escaped their compounds in ambulances and left for Egypt. They left their men to die. Who could do that?"
Amir Tahiri, reporting in the NY Post, confirmed this, saying that even the four chief bases, claimed to be impregnable, fell within hours as the defenders fled, leaving their equipment behind.
While according to the Economist, Abbas did not declare a state of emergency until his own Gaza house (very large and elaborate, it should be noted) was being ransacked. Middle level officers complained about a lack of leadership: "We had no orders to fight except in self defense."
~~~~~~~~~~
That was in Gaza. Now in Judea and Samaria, even US generals have begun to complain about the lack of effort on the part of the PA to take on terrorism. This is something I've been writing about for months: the reports that security officers say they aren't given orders to shoot at terrorists, etc.
This pattern persists because Fatah (the PA) has no stomach for this fight. As they see it, Hamas and Fatah are all part of the Palestinian people, and there is at heart no disapproval of Hamas terrorism within the ranks of Fatah. The goals are the same, it is only the methods that vary, like a "good cop, bad cop" routine.
Months ago, the assessment of Israeli intelligence was that Hamas was as strong as Fatah in Judea and Samaria. Since then, Hamas has strengthened further and it is clearly understood that only the IDF stands between the PA and a Hamas takeover.
~~~~~~~~~~
Yet, in spite of this, the US, which saw its policy fail so badly in Gaza, and which is in possession of information regarding Hamas strength in Judea and Samaria, and PA failure to fight terrorism... the US decides to adopt precisely the same policy that backfired in Gaza and to back the same losers all over again. The US is funding weapon supplies and training for the PA.
Where are the brains of Rice and company? Where is Bush in all of this? They are setting themselves up for a situation that is doomed to fail. They are making it possible for Hamas to secure better weapons than they would otherwise have had, and ultimately they -- US officials! -- are going to be responsible for Israeli deaths.
And those who head the Israeli government? They behave like US lackeys, instead of officials of a sovereign state. They give statements about how Israeli security must be their first concern, but they don't act in accord with these statements.
~~~~~~~~~~
Now it is in the news that Defense Minister Barak has expressed to the US concern that Hamas may take over Judea and Samaria, and that Israeli gestures to the US may backfire.
Well, good morning! But why didn't he register this concern BEFORE making the gestures. Why didn't he flatly refuse to make the gestures (which are blatantly said to be gestures to the US) because his first responsibility is to protect Israel?
Yet Israel has signed on to allowing the PA to have armored personnel carriers, night vision goggles and a whole lot more.
All in the interests of peace, you understand.
~~~~~~~~~~
Rice is due here tomorrow night. She is coming to push that moribund "peace process." And we must ask, here too, why she thinks Fatah is a viable peace partner for Israel, given the parameters outlined above.
What is particularly infuriating is that she is being "even handed," criticizing both Israel and the PA for "failures" to live up to their commitments. But what she criticizes Israel for are such things as not taking down "illegal outposts," while with the PA the criticism is not fighting terrorism.
These are not parallel issues. The bottom line is that without an elimination of terrorist infrastructure there will be no peace here. Everything else must be on hold until that is accomplished.
As to the issues of communities established beyond the Green Line being an "obstacle to peace," I will discuss this further in the next posting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
