With all the talk about #FakeNews recently, there's one piece of #FakeNews that's been accepted as truth for the last 24 years, because the Israeli government was foolish enough to accept it. I saw this on Facebook:
Judith Bergman on "fake news"...
"In all the talk about 'fake news'
Israel is missing an opportunity by not calling out the fakest of the
fake news, namely the professed existence of a Palestinian Arab people.
Palestinian Arab officials themselves have admitted that the professed
Palestinian identity is fake, an invention for the political and
tactical purpose of defeating Israel.
In a 1977 interview with Dutch newspaper Trouw, PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein said:
“The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian
state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of
Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference
between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for
political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a
Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit
the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people’ to oppose Zionism".
Hamas Minister of the Interior and of National Security Fathi Hammad
made it clear that nothing has changed since 1977. This is what Hammad
said when he was interviewed on Al-Hekma TV in March 2012: “Brothers,
half of the Palestinians are Egyptians and the other half are Saudis.
Who are the Palestinians? ... We are Egyptians…”
Why is the world -
and parts of the Israeli establishment - obsessed with establishing a
Palestinian Arab state, funnelling billions of taxpayer dollars into
that enterprise, if the Palestinian Arabs themselves readily admit that
their professed identity is fake? To begin with, the 'Palestine
industry' has become a flourishing business that would put many people
out of business if peace were to actually break out."
The reason the Israeli establishment accepted the existence of a 'Palestinian people' is that in 1993, Israel's Left saw the Messiah of 'Peace' and his name was 'Palestinian.' I've been railing about this stuff for years.
But most of the Israeli establishment - including our Prime Minister - won't admit this. If they admitted it, they'd also have to admit that there's no 'two state solution' and admitting that would be admitting that everything they've done for the past 24 years has been misguided and wrong. So the #FakeNews continues to be treated as real.
How Donald Trump is bringing hope to the 'peace process'
After eight years in which most Israelis felt that they weren't getting a fair hearing at the White House, and in which Israel's Prime Minister looked more uncomfortable with each trip to the United States, times have changed. In a White House meeting earlier this week, President Trump allowed Netanyahu to say what nearly all Israelis believe and what former President Hussein Obama would never allow to be heard.
Despite his international protestations, Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority (like Yasir Arafat before him), has consistently denied
that the Jews have a historic connection to the Temple Mount. Far more
than arcane arguments over historical minutiae, the Arafat-Abbas
tradition of denying a longstanding Jewish link to Jerusalem is the
Palestinian’s inimitable way of saying that the Jews are simply the latest wave of Crusaders,
that Israel is nothing but a colonialist presence in the Middle East.
Just as the crusaders and colonialists of the past ultimately departed,
the argument goes, so too will the Jews.
The
belief that President Abbas sees the two-state solution as a
steppingstone to a one – Arab – state solution leaves many Israelis
cynical about the peace process and tiring of the rhetoric about two
states. Mr. Trump may have shifted that momentum.
President Trump afforded Prime Minister Netanyahu an opportunity to assert – despite American denials – that Palestinian schools’ textbooks teach Palestinian children to hate Jews. Israelis wholeheartedly believe that accusation to be true. They know of the Fatah Party’s incendiary boast on Facebook that it had killed 11,000 Israelis and that the Palestinian Authority recently named its fourth
school for Salah Khalaf, mastermind of the 1972 Munich Olympic massacre
of Israeli athletes. While President Barack Obama obliquely acknowledged
in his eulogy for Shimon Peres, the former Israeli president and prime
minister, that “Arab youth are taught to hate Israel from an early age,”
Mr. Trump gave Mr. Netanyahu a stage from which to make the accusation
explicit.
Obama's eulogy for Shimon Peres - perhaps his first acknowledgment of mainstream 'Palestinian' hate for Israelis and Jews - came on September 30, 2016, nearly at the end of Obama's term, and at a point where it was likely designed to help Hillary Clinton's election prospects and not a sincere empathy with Israel's plight.
Daniel Gordis believes that Trump's openness to hear the Israeli point of view can only help the 'peace process.'
Outward
appearances of confidence notwithstanding, Palestinian leaders
undoubtedly understand that the jig is up – gone (for now) are the days
in which they can tell the world one story and their people another.
That actually gives Israelis hope that – if the Palestinians want
political sovereignty – the Palestinian Authority will have to lay the
groundwork by forging an entirely different narrative about Israel and
Jews.
There
is still no reason to assume that President Trump and Prime Minister
Netanyahu can forge a deal. Mr. Trump’s White House is in disarray, Mr.
Netanyahu is under investigation for corruption and politically
weakened, Mr. Kushner has not a day of diplomatic experience, the other
Arab countries that Mr. Trump and Mr. Netanyahu hope will be part of an
agreement may or may not cooperate and Palestinian hatred of Jews may be
too deeply entrenched.
Yet
there is at least cause for a glimmer of hope. On Wednesday, whatever
ambivalences about Mr. Trump many Israelis have, they heard from a
United States president sympathetic to their story, sensitive to their
fears of Iran and committed to their safety. That may matter a great
deal. For Israelis who feel safe and protected are infinitely more
likely to make accommodations for peace.
Gordis is right that it's highly unlikely (to say the least) that Trump and Netanyahu can forge a deal. Not now and not in the next eight years. But that has nothing to do with investigations, disarray or weak political positions. Rather, it's because the 'Palestinians' have yet to give any indication that they are ready to accept a Jewish state of any size, shape or form, and that creating a 'Palestinian' state (God Forbid) will not be the end of the conflict, but rather moving on to a new stage against a much weakened Israel.
Don't expect it to happen in your lifetime or mine.
Horror in London: Trump actually intends to move US embassy to Jerusalem
Greetings from Boston where I celebrated the end of the Clinton dynasty last night by staying up way too long.
Al-Guardian is quoting Donald Trump adviser David Friedman (pictured, left) as saying that President Trump really does intend to move the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.
Israeli government ministers and political figures are pushing the US
president-elect, Donald Trump, to quickly fulfill his campaign promise
to overturn decades of US foreign policy and recognise Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv.
‘It was a campaign promise and there is every intention to keep it,”
Friedman said. ‘We are going to see a very different relationship
between America and Israel in a positive way.”
Trump has also promised to 'tear up' the nuclear deal with Iran (which I cannot quite see him doing, although I do see him reimposing sanctions if there continues to be evidence that Iran is developing ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons), and has invited Prime Minister Netanyahu to the White House, calling Israel a close friend.
Netanyahu has reciprocated.
Trump’s election was quickly welcomed by Netanyahu who,
but the Israeli president steered clear of controversial issues, only
congratulating Trump and calling him a “true friend” of Israel while
pledging to work with him on security and peace in the region.
Netanyahu
later released a video on YouTube welcoming Trump’s appointment.
“President-elect Trump is a true friend of the state of Israel,” said
Netanyahu in a statement. “We will work together to advance the
security, stability and peace in our region. The strong connection
between the United States and Israel is based on shared values, shared
interests and a shared destiny.
“I’m certain that President-elect Trump and I will continue to
strengthen the unique alliance between Israel and the United States, and
bring it to new heights,” he added.
Indeed, there are many reasons for Israelis to be pleased by Trump's election.
A Trump administration will be far more favourable to the Jewish
state, another of the president-elect’s advisers on Israel has said.
Shmuel Rosner, a senior fellow at the Jewish People Policy Institute,
said a Trump administration is likely to be “much more understanding if
Israel has to use force in order to tamp down Palestinian violence”.
He also said he felt the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would be “much
less of a priority, and when it’s not a priority, this means that Israel
in some ways gets off the hook”.
Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas congratulated Trump and said he
hoped peace could be achieved during his term based on the two-state
solution.
“We are ready to deal with the elected president on the basis of a
two-state solution and to establish a Palestinian state on the 1967
borders,” spokesman Nabil Abu Rudeina told AFP, referring to the year
when Israel seized the West Bank.
I didn't know that Rosner was advising Trump. That's interesting in itself.
In any event, given how little the Arab world cares for the 'Palestinians,' their position definitely does not improve by Trump's election.
Dahlan wants 'Palestinians' in Arab countries to be granted citizenship?
In an interview with the 'Palestinian' publication Maan, Fatah's former Gaza strongman Mohammed Dahlan hints that 'Palestinians' in Arab countries should receive citizenship in the countries in which they reside.
Dahlan also criticized the PA and Fatah in particular for neglecting
Palestinian refugee camps in the Middle East, especially in Syria and
Lebanon.
"Why are we treating our people in those refugee
camps just as neglectfully as we treat our people in Jerusalem and the
Gaza Strip?" he asked."The PA spends only 0.003 percent of
its budget on the Palestinian refugees in Syria and Lebanon, and we are
talking about 600,000 Palestinian refugees living dire conditions and
deprived of the right to work, movement, education and medical
treatment, not to mention what Palestinian refugees in Syria have been
suffering as a result of the war," Dahlan alleged.
“I challenge whomever
to prove the opposite.”
Of course, the reason why 'Palestinians' are deprived of the right to work, movement, education and medical treatment is because they are not citizens of the countries in which they have lived for nearly 70 years. Here's one example:
Lebanon
Around half of the 400,000 refugees live in camps, deprived of many
rights. Refugees don't have any property rights, no access to the
Lebanese healthcare system and there are certain restrictions on jobs we
are allowed to do. We are issued handwritten [travel documents](www.passport-collector.com/2011/08/10/lebanon-refugee-passport-for-palestine/)
of appalling quality (large size, cheap paper). The travel documents
don't even have a full date of birth, just the birth year. You probably
know about the Sabra and Chatila massacre (from the movie Waltz with
Bashir, perhaps my favorite animated movie) were 3000 Palestinian
civilians were killed in cold blood. These are at the top of my head,
I'm sure there's more. This is what a British MP Gerald Kaufman said in
2011 when he visited the camps:
When I went to Gaza in 2010 I thought I had seen the worst that could
be seen of the appalling predicament of Palestinians living in
conditions which no human being should be expected to endure. But what I
saw in the camps in Lebanon is far worse and far more hopeless. The
conditions are unspeakable, but for over 400,000 of our fellow human
beings this is their life: today, tomorrow and for a future that cannot
even be foreseen. At least in Gaza, frightful though the situation is,
the people are free within the confines of their blockaded prison. In
the camps of Lebanon they are not free.
UPDATE1: Since many here are blaming the PLO and its
involvement in the civil war. That's definitely true to a large extent,
however you're missing a few points. Most Palestinians refugees were
placed in camps in south Lebanon when they arrived. These camps were
gradually militarized and became the grounds for operations against
Israel and because the PLO had so much power back then, they started
making trouble and trying to control part of the country. So had the
Lebanon absorbed it's Palestinian population properly, this wouldn't
have happened.
But the reason that the Arab countries never absorbed their 'Palestinians' and made them citizens (except in Jordan - the article goes on to describe Syria, but they're not citizens there either) is because doing so would have meant giving up on holding them hostage to the Arab dream of destroying Israel - a dream that most of the Arab countries have themselves given up at this point, and that would no longer exist but for the Oslo Accords.
Even Dahlan himself admits that were it not for the 'Palestinian street,' the 'Palestinians' could live in peace in Israel.
The failures of PA leadership, in addition to repressive Israeli
policies in the occupied Palestinian territory, could have dire
consequences, Dahlan said.
"If this situation continues, we
will either yield to the occupation's conditions and rules -- which is
impossible at the popular level -- or have a popular uprising, which
will be very dangerous," he said, adding that the status quo could no
longer be sustained.
Because after seventy years of living the lie that they would one day return to their 'homes' in 'Palestine,' you can't quite tell these people in one day that the lie was a dream that's not going to come true. Of course, if you never start, you'll never be able to tell them either....
Dahlan strikes me as much more of a realist (although he is also a brutal murderer with the blood of Israelis and Americans on his hands) than most of the 'Palestinian leadership.' But he still has a long way to go, and he's not very popular anyway, having been disgraced by Hamas when they took over Gaza.
When the 'peace process' and a 'Palestinian state' are your religion
Greetings once again from Boston, where the local time is 5:09 pm as I start this post.
I learned in a yeshiva that shall remain nameless in 1979-80 (okay, some of my readers know which one it was, but please don't mention it in comments or I'll delete them). The yeshiva was unusually open in terms of the viewpoints that were tolerated by the Roshei Yeshiva (heads of the yeshiva). An apocryphal store from the year before I arrived would perhaps be the best illustration.
The year before I arrived, one of the Roshei Yeshiva stood up and spoke out in favor of the then pending Camp David accords with Egypt, pursuant to which Israel was going to return every last inch of Sinai to the Egyptian aggressors from which it had captured Sinai 11-12 years earlier. There was an argument about what the Rosh Yeshiva was saying, and one of the other rabbis stood up and started screaming at him in the Beit Midrash (study hall). That Rosh Yeshiva passed away a bit more than a year ago. His eldest son is today one of the Roshei Yeshiva. The rabbi who stood up and screamed at him is also one of the Roshei Yeshiva today.
Perhaps that will explain to some of you how it could be that Rabbi Donniel Hartman (then known as Danny) and I both studied in the same yeshiva at the same time. I did not know him well, but even then I had heard of the Sholom Hartman Institute founded by his father. I wonder which of us got the yeshiva's openness correctly. This statement seems like an overstep to the yeshiva's philosophy in my book, for reasons I will explain below.
Donniel Hartman, president of the Shalom Hartman Institute in
Jerusalem and an Orthodox rabbi, focused his part on the Israeli side of
the conflict.
Hartman said he dreams of a time where he can live side-by-side with the Palestinian state in peace and security.
Change must be made, he said, as fear of the unknown can begin to define and warp an individual’s existence.
“We also have to unequivocally stop acting in such a way that
undermines each other’s hopes,” he said. “If the deepest hopes of the
Palestinians and my hope for them is to be a free people living as
sovereign in sovereign state, side-by-side with Israel, any action which
undermines the fulfillment or the completion of that dream has to cease
to be.
“It is not simply enough for me to declare my commitment
to a Palestinian state, anything I do that undermines that possibility
has to become forbidden either as a political position, let alone as a
political platform or political action.”
The emphasis is mine.
Really? If defending Jews anywhere means no 'Palestinian state,' that means no defending Jews anywhere? Not in my Talmud and not in my Rambam (for starters).
While the yeshiva in which we studied was quite open, it was still well within Torah boundaries. I find it hard to believe that the Roshei Yeshiva - today or in my times - would have placed the value of a 'Palestinian state' on a pedestal above the Torah. In fact, I'm sure they would not.
NY Times worries Israel will make peace with Saudi Arabia and leave the 'Palestinians' in the cold
In an editorial in Sunday's editions, the New York Times worries that Israel will make peace with Saudi Arabia (and Egypt, with which we made peace nearly 40 years ago) and leave the 'Palestinians' out in the cold.
The Israelis and the Saudis
have reasons to work together. They share antipathy toward Iran, the leading
Shiite-majority country. Both are worried about regional instability. Both are
upset with the United States over the Iranian nuclear deal and other policies,
including those dealing with Syria. For some time, Israeli and Saudi officials
have been cooperating covertly on security and intelligence matters.
...
It’s hard to tell sometimes
whether and through whom the Saudi royal family is speaking, and some analysts
do not view General Eshki as a serious interlocutor. But his visit to Jerusalem, which included a meeting with members of Parliament,
suggested a new Saudi openness to testing how the public in both countries would
react to overt contacts.
Significantly, Saudi Arabia has also begun a media
campaign in the kingdom, apparently to prepare its citizens for better relations
with Israel.
In recent years, Israelis
and Saudis have encountered each other often at academic and policy forums. In
addition, Israel has established separate official channels of communication
with Saudi Arabia, as well as with the United Arab Emirates, and these channels
are considered “real and significant,” according to Daniel Levy, president of
the U.S./Middle East Project.
Egypt
has also been pursuing warmer ties with Israel. A week before the Saudi
delegation arrived, Sameh Shoukry became the first foreign minister of Egypt
to visit Israelin nine years. Although the two countries signed a peace treaty in 1979, the
relationship never fulfilled its promise. However, ties have improved since
Abdel Fattah el-Sisi became Egypt’s president in 2014, enabling greater security
cooperation against Hamas in Gaza and the militants battling Egyptian troops in
the Sinai.
Where does this leave the
Palestinians? Both the Saudi and Egyptian visits were ostensibly aimed at
promoting peace between Israel and the Palestinians, who have relied on the
Sunni Arab states to advance their interests. General Eshki, for instance,
talked of reviving the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative, which promised Israel
normalized relations with the Arab League countries as part of a deal to end the
Palestinian conflict.
Unfortunately, neither the
Israelis nor the Palestinians show interest in serious peace talks. And there
are reasons to doubt that the Palestinians are the Arab countries’ real focus.
Mr. Netanyahu, in fact, has made clear his preference for improving relations
with the Arab states first, saying Israel would then be in a stronger position
to make peace with the Palestinians later on.
Of course, improved
relations between Israel and its Arab neighbors do not preclude a Palestinian
peace deal. The danger is that these countries will find more value in mending
ties with each other and stop there, thus allowing Palestinian grievances, a
source of regional tension for decades, to continue to fester.
In an interview given by Zuhair Mohsen to the Dutch newspaper Trouw in March 1977, Mr. Mohsen explains the origin of the 'Palestinians':
The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab
unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians,
Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical
reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people,
since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a
distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.
For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan.
It's long past time to acknowledge reality: There aren't going to be two states - a Jewish state of Israel and an Arab state of 'Palestine' living side-by-side in peace - unless the Arab state is the one known today as Jordan. The 'Palestinian grievances' can never be satisfied, and even the Arab states recognize today that they have more important things to do with Israel than try to dismember it by creating a 'right of return' for 'Palestinian refugees' who are non-citizens in weaker Arab countries like Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. There will be no 'right of return.'
The 'Palestinians' who live within Israel (including Judea and Samaria) will either learn to accept reality and economic and political conditions in the State of Israel that are far better than those anywhere in the Arab world outside of the royal families of the Gulf, or they will leave for Western countries that are willing to have them (Frau Merkel?). And Israel will eventually have relations with Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, and maybe even Qatar (which today is Hamas' biggest supporter) because economic realities dictate that those relationships will happen.
And the New York Times will go off crying into the sunset. Speedily and in our times.
Yes, it's a travel day again. Greetings from the airline lounge at Paris-Charles DeGaulle.
I've discussed the concept of a Darwin Award many times. A Darwin Award is given to someone who improves the human race by removing himself from the gene pool.
The Palestinian terrorist group Hamas announced that one of its
operatives was electrocuted to death while working on a tunnel in the
Gaza Strip on Saturday, Israel Army Radio reported. The news comes as residents of Gaza who seek to rebuild their homes face difficulty in securing the necessary electricity and other resources, which are routinely appropriated by Hamas.
Israel was forced to increase
the amount of electricity it sends to Gaza in June after repeated
shutdowns at Gaza’s only power plant due to a payment dispute between
Hamas and Fatah. Because of this infighting, Gaza residents usually only
have six to eight
hours of electricity per day. The lack of power has also caused
failures at Gaza’s new $100 million sewage treatment facility, which was
built with financing from the World Bank.
It's nice to be able to laugh at Hamas once in a while, but really this is not such a joke.
Brig. Gen. (res.) Yossi Kuperwasser, formerly the head of the
research division of Israeli military intelligence and later
the director general of the Ministry of Strategic Affairs, told reporters in
May that the discovery of the tunnels was a sign that Hamas was
preparing for another war against Israel. He added that the tunnel
digging means that “they definitely invest a lot in making the necessary
preparations so that in the next round, when they decide to start it,
they will be able to inflict the heaviest damage on Israel, including
through those tunnels.”
Commenting on the efforts Hamas was putting into its terror tunnels
at the expense of Gazans, long time Palestinian affairs correspondent
Khaled Abu Toameh observed, “the last thing Hamas cares about is the welfare of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip,”
Haaretz’s defense correspondent Amos Harel wrote
in January that “Hamas is investing great efforts and huge sums in the
tunnel project. It is reasonable to assume that the number of tunnels
crossing under the border is close to that on the eve of Protective
Edge,” or the 2014 Gaza war.
But give them a 'state' and the 'Palestinians' will know exactly what to do. The Euroweenies will help them. Oh... wait... Hamas HAS a state in Gaza, and this is what they are doing with it.
'I killed myself to give the 'Palestinians' a state'
For once I agree with Bill Clinton. Yes, he really did nearly kill himself to give the 'Palestinians' a state. And yes, he's telling the truth about the 'Palestinians.'
Let's go to the videotape.
Since I know you can't make out what the spectator is saying, there's a full transcript here.
But here's the problem. I don't like Bill Clinton, but I have serious doubts he would ever purposely destroy Israel. I don't have those doubts about Hillary. Here's why. Hillary has a long history of being anti-Israel.
It seems that in the Obama White House, the boss may not be the biggest
Israel hater. That title may well belong to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (Hat Tip: Shy Guy).
In his book American Evita, Christopher Anderson writes.
At
a time when elements of the American Left embraced the Palestinian
cause and condemned Israel, Hillary was telling friends that she was
"sympathetic" to the terrorist organization and admired its flamboyant
leader, Yasser Arafat. When Arafat made his famous appearance before the
UN General Assembly in November 1974 wearing his revolutionary uniform
and his holster on his hip, Bill "was outraged like everybody else,"
said a Yale Law School classmate. But not Hillary, who tried to convince
Bill that Arafat was a "freedom fighter" trying to free his people from
their Israeli "oppressors." (1)
Of course Hillary's
feelings about the PLO and Israel are only one aspect of her character,
often a person's true nature is more closely revealed in a more intimate
setting. In an early showcase of Hillary's diplomatic skills
Christopher Anderson relates an experience that she and her future
husband had during a trip to Arkansas in 1973.
It was
during this trip to his home state that Bill took Hillary to meet a
politically well connected friend. When they drove up to the house, Bill
and Hillary noticed that a menorah-the seven branched Hebrew
candelabrum (not to be confused with the more common and subtler
mezuzah)-has been affixed to the front door.
"My daddy was
half Jewish," explained Bill's friend. "One day when he came to visit ,
my daddy placed the menorah on my door because he wanted me to be proud
that we were part Jewish. And I wasn't about to say no to my daddy."
To his astonishment, as soon as Hillary saw the menorah, she refused
to get out of the car. "Bill walked up to me and said that she was hot
and tired, but later he explained the real reason." According to the
friend and another eyewitness, Bill said, "I'm sorry, but Hillary's
really tight with the people in the PLO in New York. They're friends of
hers, and she just doesn't feel right about the menorah." (2)
Read the whole thing. After that second story, anyone want to try to convince me that she 'only' hates Israel and not Jews?
The only time in her adult life that Hillary Clinton was pro-Israel was
when it was necessary to be elected as US Senator from the heavily
Jewish state of New York. I don't believe that Hillary Clinton is worthy
of Jewish support at all, but if American Jews are going to donate to
her campaign they should at least condition their support on a clear and
irreparable break with President Hussein Obama's policies on both the
Iranian nuclear file and the so-called 'peace process.'
Rather than promoting stability, greater access to advanced missiles,
artillery, and combat vehicles could empower a range of Iranian proxy
forces, partners and terrorist groups – from Lebanese Hezbollah to the
Syrian National Defense Forces (a sectarian paramilitary organization
tantamount to Iran’s Basij) to Palestinian Hamas— which remain a threat
to U.S. interests and to our regional allies, most notably Israel. These
forces could endanger U.S. personnel at regional diplomatic and
military facilities and make it more difficult for Washington to secure a
political solution in Syria and Iraq, let alone between Israel and the
Palestine Liberation Organization.
...
Increased arms flowing into Hezbollah’s hands and like-minded groups in
the Palestinian territories endanger the security of Israel.” Further
equipping and training of Yemen's Houthis could position this group to
threaten global trade through the Suez Canal if they are able to both
establish a naval presence from the Red Sea port of Hodeida and further
south at the Mandeb Strait. Increased IRGC armed shipments to the
Houthis could lead to more stand-offs in the Gulf of Aden with the U.S.
Navy.
Lifting the arms embargo on Iran could spell the end of the Israeli Left's dream of a 'Palestinian state' threatening Israel and could result in an arms windfall to Hamas and Hezbullah that would leave us on full-time war alert. Even Israel's Left gets that.
President Hussein Obama finally has a diplomatic achievement to which he can point. But it's not the one he was hoping for. The picture at the top is a photo of a handshake between incoming Director General of Israel's Foreign Ministry, Dore Gold (who has a kipa on his head and is at left) and Anwar Majed Eshki, a retired Saudi general and ex-adviser to Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the former Saudi ambassador to the U.S. And there's much more to it than a handshake, and it's been going on for a year and a half.Eli Lake reports.
Since the beginning of 2014, representatives from Israel and Saudi
Arabia have had five secret meetings to discuss a common foe, Iran. On
Thursday, the two countries came out of the closet by revealing this
covert diplomacy at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington.
...
It was not a typical Washington think-tank event. No questions were
taken from the audience. After an introduction, there was a speech in
Arabic from Anwar Majed Eshki, a retired Saudi general and ex-adviser to
Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the former Saudi ambassador to the U.S. Then
Dore Gold, a former Israeli ambassador to the United Nations who is
slotted to be the next director general of Israel's foreign ministry,
gave a speech in English.
While these men represent countries that have been historic enemies,
their message was identical: Iran is trying to take over the Middle East
and it must be stopped.
Eshki was particularly alarming. He laid out a brief history of Iran
since the 1979 revolution, highlighting the regime's acts of terrorism,
hostage-taking and aggression. He ended his remarks with a seven-point
plan for the Middle East. Atop the list was achieving peace between
Israel and the Arabs. Second came regime-change in Iran. Also on the
list were greater Arab unity, the establishment of an Arab regional
military force, and a call for an independent Kurdistan to be made up of
territory now belonging to Iraq, Turkey and Iran.
We only have five of the seven points here, but notice what's missing: 'Peace between Israel the Arabs' is not the same as 'Palestinian state.' Well, maybe not.
Eshki told me that no real cooperation would be possible until Israel's
prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, accepted what's known as the Arab
Peace Initiative to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The plan was
first shared with New York Times columnist Tom Friedman in 2002 by Saudi
Arabia's late King Abdullah, then the kingdom's crown prince.
In any event, these ties go back a long time - all the way to the beginning of the Obama administration.
These ties became more focused on Iran over the last decade, as shown by
documents released by WikiLeaks in 2010. A March 19, 2009, cable
quoted Israel's then-deputy director general of the foreign minister,
Yacov Hadas, saying one reason for the warming of relations was that
the Arabs felt Israel could advance their interests vis-a-vis Iran in
Washington. "Gulf Arabs believe in Israel's role because of their
perception of Israel's close relationship with the U.S. but also due to
their sense that they can count on Israel against Iran," the cable
said.
Note - that was two months after Obama was inaugurated, and Netanyahu had already been elected by then and was forming a government (he was sworn in on March 31, 2009).
Obama finally has a diplomatic achievement: A burgeoning reconciliation between Israel and Saudi Arabia.
From January 2009 to the present, the conflict between Israel and the
United States has never been connected to any real chance of peace or
ending the conflict in a manner that is consistent with American pledges
about ensuring the Jewish state’s security. At this point, it is time
for even those that have rationalized and apologized for Obama’s
penchant for attacking Israel to face up to the fact that his behavior
requires a better explanation than an alleged desire to save it from
itself. Nor is the argument about Iran enough to justify what we are
witnessing. Nothing about the current argument can be traced to U.S.
security needs. Rather, its motive seems more about personal anger and
vague ideological assumptions about Israel and the Palestinians that
have no connection to reality.
That is a sobering thought that should motivate even those Democrats
who are no fans of Netanyahu to begin speaking up against an
administration policy that seems rooted in spite, not strategy.
Where does Israel fit into this? It seems that Victor Davis Hanson got it partly right when he wrote:
Does
Team Obama really believe that a murderous autocratic cabal like Hamas
is merely different from a democratic constitutional republic like
Israel? At best we have naiveté at the helm (Obama thinks he can
mesmerize misunderstood killers), at
worst, a genuine feeling that Israel is an aggressive, Western
imperialist power exploiting indigenous people of color who simply wish
to be free--in other words, the Rev. Wright-Bill Ayers-Rashid Khalidi
view of the Middle East.
If D'Souza is correct (and
what he writes is certainly plausible), it should be clear that Obama
views Israel - like the United States - as a post-colonial country that
is "an aggressive, Western imperialist power exploiting indigenous people of color who simply wish to be free."
But Hanson got one detail wrong. Obama doesn't look at us that way
because of Wright, Ayers and Khalidi. They just reinforced the view of
Israel that Obama already had in his blood from his Kenyan father.
I've been telling you all for eight years that the company a politician keeps matters. We could all have figured this out eight years ago (I did). What could go wrong?
Israeli official: 'No Palestinian state in our generation'
Confirming reports that the Obama administration had been part of a concerted effort to oust Prime Minister Netanyahu, a 'senior Jerusalem official' has told the Times of Israel that there will be 'no Palestinian state in our generation,' and that everyone knows it.
The Jerusalem official took Netanyahu’s
disavowal of Palestinian statehood further, claiming that a two
state-solution would be out of reach “in our generation,” due to
Palestinian rejections of Israeli proposals and US-led agreements.
“[Obama] continuously warns of a deteriorating
state of chaos in the [Palestinian] territories, when he knows that the
only place that truly manages to maintain stability in the Middle East
right now is [Israel],” the official said. “Netanyahu said there will no
agreement [with the Palestinians] during his term in office.”
A Palestinian state “won’t even happen in our generation,” the official added.” Everyone knows it.”
“They come and accuse us of torpedoing
negotiations even though they know that Palestinian Authority President
Mahmoud Abbas himself said no [to a deal], twice — once to
then-secretary of state Hillary Clinton in 2011, and once to Secretary
of State John Kerry last year.”
The official went on to refer to two
“framework documents, designed to jump-start the process” that were
accepted by Israel and rejected by the Palestinians, and accused the
administration of devoting too much energy to the Palestinian issue, to
the detriment of other, more pertinent regional challenges.
“Look at what we did about settlement
construction. We took upon ourselves all the restrictions laid forth
during the Sharon-Bush era, which allowed for building to accommodate
natural population growth, but not for building new settlements,” the
official continued, referring to an arrangement in the last decade
between then-prime minister Ariel Sharon and president George Bush. “But
the [current] administration does not recognize the Sharon-Bush
understandings. They’re working according to a ‘no-brick’ policy and it
doesn’t make any sense.”
Obama rejected the Bush letter in June of 2009. It was about a week before Netanyahu's Bar Ilan speech. Netanyahu's second government (the first of the Obama administration) was formed on March 31, 2009. Anyone not think Obama had it in for Israel from Day One.
Sickening: Israel's 'charitable' Left taking election loss out on poor
Reeling from its election loss last week, Israel's 'charitable' Left has identified the enemy: Israel's poor. The Left has decided that since the poor vote for the Likud anyway, the Left will no longer donate to charity.
The latest trend among leftists who were shocked by their defeat at
the polls Tuesday is an apparently spontaneous campaign called “Don't
Give,” which calls on people to stop donating to the poorer Israelis and
the socio-economically weaker regions known as “the periphery,” because
these Israelis insist on voting for Likud, in election after election.
The campaign's name in Hebrew, Lo Latet, is a reference to Latet (“To
Give”), a major charity group that collects donations for the needy.
The campaign started as a Facebook trend, which gathered steam after
it was reported about in the news, and has turned into a Facebook page
with over 3,000 likes.
"As the holiday of Pesach approaches, I would like to remind you that
there are hundreds of people who have no way of celebrating,” wrote one
Lo Latet poster. “It's important that you do not give them a single
shekel.”
He added sarcastically: “After all, elected a government that will
change their situation, so why interfere and ruin things? Happy
holiday!”
"From now on, I want peace of mind,” wrote another poster. “From now
on, it's every one for himself. Don't tell me about minimum wages and
people whose salary doesn't carry them through the month. I don't want
to hear about hungry children or single mothers in distress, about
distressed contract workers, or eroded pensions. Don't preach to me
about 'the people's choice and majority rule', I understand what
democracy is, but from now on, let every person take care of himself.”
Maybe the poor figured out that raising the minimum wage (which was part of Labor's platform) would put more of them out of work. Maybe they figured out that a nuclear Iran and a rocket-laden 'Palestinian state' within firing range of the center of the country would kill all our investments. And maybe - definitely - the Left has shown its true colors as the 'beautiful people' (yefei ha'nefesh in Hebrew) who couldn't care less about anyone but themselves.
True colors: Sore loser Obama taking revenge against Israel
Barack Hussein Obama has gone ballistic against Israel, saying that he will use the United Nations (Hat Tip: Memeorandum) to pressure the Jewish state to self-destruct, and prompting Prime Minister Netanyahu to walk back comments (Hat Tip: Memeorandum) he made the day before the election about being opposed to a 'Palestinian state.' This is from the first link.
Angered by Netanyahu’s hard-line platform toward the Palestinians, top
Obama officials would not rule out the possibility of a change in
American posture at the United Nations, where the U.S. has historically
fended off resolutions hostile to Israel.
And despite signals from Israel suggesting that Netanyahu might walk
back his rejection, late in the campaign, of a Palestinian state under
his watch, Obama officials say they are taking him at his word.
“The positions taken by the prime minister in the last days
of the campaign have raised very significant substantive questions that
go far beyond just optics,” said a senior administration official,
adding that recent Israeli government actions were in keeping with
Netanyahu’s rhetoric.
While saying it was “premature” to discuss
Washington’s policy response, the official wouldn’t rule out a modified
American posture at the United Nations, where the U.S. has long fended
off resolutions criticizing Israeli settlement activity and demanding
its withdrawal from Palestinian territories.
“We are signaling
that if the Israeli government’s position is no longer to pursue a
Palestinian state, we’re going to have to broaden the spectrum of
options we pursue going forward,” the official said.
Mr. Netanyahu said in an interview on MSNBC
that he still wanted “a sustainable, peaceful two-state solution” to
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and that he had not intended to reverse
the position he took endorsing that in a 2009 speech at Bar-Ilan
University. But he said the Palestinian leadership’s refusal to
recognize Israel as a Jewish state, and its pact with the militant
Islamist Hamas movement, made that impossible right now.
“I haven’t changed my policy,” Mr. Netanyahu said in the interview, his first since his resounding victory on Tuesday, which handed him a fourth term. “What has changed is the reality.”
“I don’t want a one-state solution; I want a sustainable, peaceful
two-state solution, but for that, circumstances have to change,” he
added. “I was talking about what is achievable and what is not
achievable. To make it achievable, then you have to have real
negotiations with people who are committed to peace.”
His description of the reality is correct, but I think it's been that way all along. And whether or not Netanyahu intended to reverse the Bar Ilan speech remains to be seen. In the meantime, the Obama administration will seize Netanyahu's Tuesday comments as a way to do what Obama has wanted to do all along.
How the map would change if there were a 'Palestinian state' in Judea and Samaria
Unfortunately, I only have this in Hebrew.
On the right, is the missile alert map that was issued last summer in connection with Operation Protective Edge. The map shows how much time you would have to reach a shelter in the event that you are in a given area when a rocket is fired.
For the Hebrew impaired, the top time is 'immediate,' the next three times are 15, 30 and 45 seconds, and the last three times are a minute, a minute and a half and three minutes.
The map on the left is what our warning times would look like in the event that a 'Palestinian state' is established in Judea and Samaria. Notice how much of the country goes from a minute and a half to 45 seconds or less....
When we meet w/ Arab leaders they almost never mention Palestinian issue because they have other things that are more impt 2 them- Hoenlein
— Conf Of Presidents (@Conf_of_Pres) February 16, 2015
Yes, it's the Obama administration and the Europeans who are keeping alive the dream of a 'Palestinian state.' The Arabs couldn't care less anymore. They recognize that there are more important things in life.
Khaled Abu Toameh writes that 'moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud AbbasAbu Mazen is afraid to cut a peace deal with Israel.
[US Secretary of State John] Kerry failed to acknowledge that Palestinian Authority [PA] President
Mahmoud Abbas does not have a mandate from his people to negotiate, let
alone sign, any agreement with Israel. Abbas is now in the tenth year
of his four-year term in office.
Nor did Kerry listen to the advice of those who warned him and his
aides that Abbas would not be able to implement any agreement with
Israel on the ground. Abbas cannot even visit his private house in the
Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip, and he controls less than 40% of the West
Bank. Where exactly did Kerry expect Abbas to implement any agreement
with Israel? In the city-center of Ramallah or Nablus?
What Kerry and other Western leaders do not want to understand is that Abbas is not authorized to make any
concessions for peace with Israel, and has even repeatedly promised his
people that he would not make any concessions for the sake of peace
with Israel.
In a speech in Ramallah on November 11, marking the tenth anniversary of the death of his predecessor, Yasser Arafat, Abbas declared: "He who surrenders one grain of the soil of Palestine and Jerusalem is not one of us."
This statement alone should be enough for Kerry and Western leaders
to realize that it would be impossible to ask Abbas to make any
concessions. Like Arafat, Abbas has become hostage to his own rhetoric.
How can Abbas be expected to accept any deal that does not include 100%
of his demands -- in this instance, all territory captured by Israel in
1967?
Abbas himself knows that if he comes back with 97% or 98% of his
demands, his people will either spit in is face or kill him, after
accusing him of being a "defeatist" and "relinquishing Palestinian
rights."
This is precisely why Abbas chose to walk out of Kerry's nine-month
"peace process." Realizing that Israel was not going to offer him 100%
of his demands, Abbas preferred to abandon the peace talks last summer.
For Abbas, it is more convenient to be criticized by the U.S. and
Israel than to be denounced by his own people for achieving a bad deal
with Israel.
Abu Toameh seems to believe that there are circumstances under which Abu Mazen might agree to a deal with Israel if Israel were to give him 100% of what he demands. Sadly, even that is not true. And even if Israel were to agree to 100% of Abu Mazen's demands and Abu Mazen were to sign on the dotted line, there is virtually no chance that he would keep to his side of the bargain, and there is even less chance that whoever succeeds him would keep to Abu Mazen's side of the bargain (a precedent that has sadly been encouraged by the Obama administration's behavior). This is not about a return to the 1949 armistice lines. It's about Israel's continued existence as the Jewish homeland in the region.
That's the reality in the Middle East and most Israelis have come to realize that over the last 14 years. The only chance of it ever changing is if the 'Palestinians' were to some day wake up and realize that they will never have a 'state' unless they reach and keep to a deal. And that will never happen so long as the one consequence of not making a deal - losing out to on the ground reality - is consistently thwarted by the international community's obsession with Israeli 'settlement building.'
To cry: Last picture of three-month old terror victim at Kotel (Western Wall) shortly before she was murdered
Three-month old Chaya Zisel Braun HY"D (May God Avenge her blood) was on her way home from the Kotel (Western Wall) with her parents and grandparents on Wednesday night when a 'Palestinian' terrorist ran her over and murdered her. The picture above was taken at the Kotel shortly before she was murdered (Hat Tip: Kikar Shabbat).
Oh and by the way - she was a US citizen. But that apparently means little to the US State Department. 'Even-handed' as always.
Three-month-old Chaya Zissel Braun, the baby girl killed today in Jerusalem during a vehicular terrorist attack, was an American citizen, a US official confirmed to The Jerusalem Post on Wednesday night.
The girl was thrown from her stroller as a car swerved into the Ammunition Hill light rail station, injuring seven others.
State Department deputy spokeswoman Marie Harf has "urged restraint" and calm from both sides after the attack.
...
His grandaughter flew 10-20 meters in the air before landing headfirst on the pavement, Shimshon Halperin said Wednesday night.
Standing outside Hadassah University Medical Center on Jerusalem’s Mount Scopus, after Chaya had died of intracranial bleeding Halperin explained how the driver from Silwan rammed a row of pedestrians, hitting Chaya’s stroller and sending her flying.
I guess you'd have to work for the State Department to believe that the 'Palestinians' would stop behaving this way if only we would give them a 'state.'
Because there's no 'Palestinian state': 'Israeli Arab' doctor killed fighting for Islamic State terror group
Barzilay Hospital in Ashkelon has confirmed that Othman Abdal Kian, a Bedouin doctor who was killed while fighting for the Islamic State terror organization, did his residency at the hospital.
Arab media reported that a Beduin doctor from Israel had been killed while fighting with the terrorist group.
According
to the statement released by Barzilai, Othman Abdal-Kian finished his
medical degree in Jordan and began doing his residency at the hospital
in Ashkelon in February after passing tests qualifying him to
temporarily practice medicine in Israel.
He chose to do an elective month at Soroka Medical Center in Beersheba which he was supposed to have started in May.
Abdal-Kian failed to show up at the hospital on the prescribed date and all contact with him was lost.
Security
authorities questioned the hospital administration at Barzilai about
Abdal-Kian's tenure at the facility, informing them that he had foregone
his medical career to join Islamic State forces.
I'm sure that if there were a 'Palestinian state,' Abdal Kian would never have done something like that. Just ask John FN Kerry.
Abu Bluff and Egypt's foreign ministry both deny Sinai land offer
It took several hours, but both 'moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud AbbasAbu Mazen and Egypt's foreign ministry are denying a story I reported earlier today that has Egypt offering Abu Mazen 1,600 square kilometers of the Sinai for a 'Palestinian state' and Abu Mazen turning down that offer. This is from the next-to-law link.
Israeli statesmen responded favorably to reports of an Egyptian-led
proposal aimed at establishing a Palestinian state in the Sinai
Peninsula in order to resolve the issue of refugees.
Earlier in the day, Egypt's Foreign Ministry denied reports of the
initiative, which claimed President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi presented
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas with the proposal. The ministry
added that the proposal was actually made in the past by ousted
President Mohammed Morsi.
Al-Tayyib Abd Al-Rahim, Secretary-General of Abbas's office, told the Palestinian Arab Ma'an News Agency that the reports were "fabricated."
Al-Rahim added that Abbas would not accept any alternative to a
"Palestinian state" on the 1949 Armistice lines with eastern Jerusalem
as its capital.
"This news is completely false and the proposal is an old one
suggested by former head of the Israeli National Security Council Giora
Eiland, who suggested to establish a Palestinian state in Gaza and parts
of Sinai with autonomy in the West Bank," al-Rahim said.
Abbas's representative further claimed that Egypt shares the PA's
position calling for a "two state solution" based on the 1949 Armistice
lines.
My guess is that Sisi made the offer, Abu Bluff said no, and that the Egyptian foreign ministry is afraid that disclosing the fact that the offer was made will lead to rioting in the streets, and possibly to Egypt being expelled from the Arab League as happened after Camp David. Egypt is extremely anti-Semitic.
I am an Orthodox Jew - some would even call me 'ultra-Orthodox.' Born in Boston, I was a corporate and securities attorney in New York City for seven years before making aliya to Israel in 1991 (I don't look it but I really am that old :-). I have been happily married to the same woman for thirty-five years, and we have eight children (bli ayin hara) ranging in age from 13 to 33 years and nine grandchildren. Four of our children are married! Before I started blogging I was a heavy contributor on a number of email lists and ran an email list called the Matzav from 2000-2004. You can contact me at: IsraelMatzav at gmail dot com
