Obama's legacy: Criminalizing Israeli citizenship?
I've already written a couple of times about the fears here in Israel of what President Hussein Obama might try to do to us in his final days in his office. Here's a really disturbing Wall Street Journal piece from Jonathan Schanzer about
some of the possibilities.
The Middle East has few
bright spots these days, but one is the budding rapprochement between
Israel and its Sunni Arab neighbors, including Saudi Arabia and the
United Arab Emirates, thanks to shared threats from Iran and Islamic
State. Now the Obama Administration may have plans to wreck even that.
Israeli diplomats gird for the possibility
that President Obama may try to force a diplomatic resolution for Israel
and the Palestinians at the United Nations. The White House has been
unusually tight-lipped about what, if anything,
it might have in mind. But our sources say the White House has asked
the State Department to develop an options menu for the President’s
final weeks.
One possibility would be to sponsor, or at
least allow, a U.N. Security Council resolution condemning Israeli
settlement construction, perhaps alongside new IRS regulations revoking
the tax-exempt status of people or entities involved
in settlement building. The Administration vetoed such a resolution in
2011 on grounds that it “risks hardening the position of both sides,”
which remains true.
But condemning the settlements has always been
a popular way of scoring points against the Jewish state, not least at
the State Department, and an antisettlement resolution might burnish Mr.
Obama’s progressive brand for his postpresidency.
Mr. Obama may also seek formal recognition of a
Palestinian state at the Security Council. This would run afoul of
Congress’s longstanding view that “Palestine” does not have the
internationally recognized attributes of statehood,
including a defined territory and effective government, though Mr.
Obama could overcome the objection through his usual expedient of an
executive action, thereby daring the next President to reverse him.
Both actions would be a boon to the bullies in
the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, while also subjecting
Israeli citizens and supporters abroad to new and more aggressive forms
of legal harassment. It could even criminalize
the Israeli army—and every reservist who serves in it—on the theory
that it is illegally occupying a foreign state. Does Mr. Obama want to
be remembered as the President who criminalized Israeli citizenship?
The worst option would be an effort to
introduce a resolution at the U.N. Security Council setting “parameters”
for a final settlement between Israel and the Palestinians.
The French
have been eager to do this for some time, and one
option for the Administration would be to let the resolution pass
simply by refusing to veto it. Or the U.S. could introduce the
resolution itself, all the better to take credit for it.
As the old line has it, this would be worse
than a crime—it would be a blunder. U.S. policy has long and wisely been
that only Israelis and Palestinians can work out a peace agreement
between themselves, and that efforts to impose
one would be counterproductive. Whatever parameters the U.N.
established would be unacceptable to any Israeli government, left or
right, thereby destroying whatever is left of a peace camp in Israel.
The Palestinians would seize on those
parameters as their birthright, making it impossible for any future
Palestinian leader to bargain part of them away in a serious
negotiation. Arab states would find their diplomatic hands tied,
making it impossible to serve as useful intermediaries between
Jerusalem and Ramallah. It could refreeze relations with Israel even as
they finally seem to have thawed.
President Obama may be the last man on earth
to get the memo, but after decades of fruitless efforts to end the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict it might be wiser for the U.S. to step back
until the Palestinians recognize that peace cannot
be imposed from the outside.
If Mr. Obama is still seeking a Middle
East legacy at this late stage in his presidency, his best move is do
nothing to make it worse.
A few comments. First, it is longstanding US policy that peace between Israel and the 'Palestinians' can only come through direct negotiations between the parties. Obama has done much to undermine that policy through his insistence on
international peace conferences and
other ways of allowing the 'Palestinians' to
avoid direct negotiations, including his support for
preconditions to negotiations. Perhaps that's why Obama has zero influence in Israel, where the government once again spat in his face on Monday, announcing that it would
build 98 new homes in Shilo, which is well outside the 'settlement blocs.'
On Monday the state informed the High Court of Justice it awaited
final bureaucratic approval to develop the site within six months as a
relocation option for the 40 families from the Amona outpost.
It, therefore, asked the HCJ to delay by seven months the mandated December 25 demolition of the outpost.
Alternatively,
the state said, it was also pursuing the option of using the abandoned
property law, so that it could relocate the outpost to land adjacent to
the community’s current location.
Washington has rebuked Israel
for both plans, but the State Department issued a particularly sharp
statement in which it said the Shiloh project was tantamount to the
creation of a new settlement, something Israel had promised the US it
would not do.
“This settlement's location deep in the West Bank…
would link a string of outposts that effectively divide the West Bank
and make the possibility of a viable Palestinian state more remote,” the
State Department had said.
Second, as much as I will never vote for Hillary Clinton (#NeverHillary), it is clear to me that this sort of scorched earth strategy from the Obama administration is far more likely if Donald Trump wins next week's election than if Clinton wins it. After all, it was Netanyahu who set up Clinton's illegal private server, and it was he that caused it to be used for government business (/sarc). Obama would have far more interest in trying to tie Trump's hands than in trying to tie Clinton's.
All in all, the outlook is bleak with the 'most pro-Israel administration evah' set to extract revenge from an Israeli government that has not been willing to surrender to Obama's wishes over the past eight years.
Labels: Abu Mazen, Amona, Barack Hussein Obama, Binyamin Netanyahu, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Middle East peace process, Obama's legacy, Shilo, United Nations Security Council, US presidential campaign 2016
Obama's nasty November surprise... for Israel
Former European Parliament MP Fiamma Nirenstein believes that President Obama is planning a
nasty November surprise (or maybe not such a surprise) for Israel.
But like Ariadne’s thread, a number of clues lead us to believe that,
after the November 8thvote and before the inauguration on January 20th,
Obama is planning a very strong move against Israel during a period in
which he can no longer influence the presidential election’s outcome or
damage Hillary.
In other words, facing a U.N. Security Council
resolution during the “lame duck” period, he’ll ignore the need for
negotiations between the two parties, impose borders, as well as set up
the parameters for the birth of a Palestinian State, reneging the
long-standing American veto. He would allow the resolution supported by
the French initiative for a peace conference to win.In practice, the
consequences would only be those of disrepute and, possibly, of
sanctions against Israel. In times of BDS, this discrediting,this
backing into a corner seems to drive more or less consciously America’s
policy toward Israel.
Astonishingly, the White House erased a
reference to the fact that at Peres’ funeral Obama had spoken in
“Jerusalem, in Israel” from a previously released statement on the
President’s speech. That is to say, the revered Peres would no longer be
buried in Israel, but rather, in some no man’s land. Later, using the
funeral as a bludgeon, while the world burns, the U.S. State Department
issued a violently worded statement regarding the construction of some
apartment units in Shiloh, in the West Bank (to relocate the displaced
settlers from Amona, a dismantled illegal settlement). The statement
basically says that the memory of the deceased leader had been betrayed
thus “cementing a one-state reality of perpetual occupation that is
fundamentally inconsistent with Israel’s future as a Jewish and
democratic state." Oh, really! The housing units, repeated the
government, will be built in an old settlement for refugees of another
destroyed settlement, without bringing one man more. Therefore, this
disproportionate criticism leads us to think two things: the first is
that they are creating an atmosphere for a political attack and
secondly, that Obama wants to leave his mark on the Middle East with
what he considers a boost to the peace process. But it is difficult to
think that he’s right: the real contribution that he could have given is
that of devising a new plan of territorial distribution (his
predecessors all did the same thing); to finally push the parties toward
talks; to ask Abu Mazen to renounce his support for terrorism; and to
favor Israel’s integration within the Middle East. However, he didn’t do
it.
Obama - if he insists - will be remembered as the president
whose pacifism(as has already happened in the past) has fueled conflict
throughout the Middle East and beyond. He will be perceived as the
anti-proliferation president who let the pact with Russia fall to
pieces, as the point of reference for Islamic moderation that favored
Iran and Hezbollah’s Shiite extremism, and who failed to stop Sunni
extremism while upsetting his more moderate allies. This legacy of
failures will only be worsened by sanctions upon the only pro-American
democracy in the Middle East.
I doubt anyone here would be surprised by this kind of nastiness from the self-proclaimed 'most pro-Israel administration evah.'
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, feckless French, Judea and Samaria construction, Obama's obsession with Israel, Obama's obsession with Palestinians, Shilo, United Nations Security Council
Do we intend to 'keep' Jerusalem?
I doubt that any of you will be too surprised at this, but US Secretary of State John FN Kerry's 'framework agreement' includes an Israeli '
settlement freeze.' But what's puzzling about this report is what it says about Jerusalem.
Officials in Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's office have yet to
officially respond to the request, Army Radio reported. While there has
been no official response from Jerusalem, government officials have
resigned themselves to the fact that Israeli gestures are necessary in
order to entice Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas back to
the negotiating table.
According to Army Radio, Israel would declare an "unofficial" freeze to
all construction in the isolated Jewish settlements that lie outside of
the major population centers under Israeli control in the West Bank.
While an official freeze on construction requires a government edict, an
unofficial freeze could be implemented by placing bureaucratic
obstacles and red tape on building plans or having the defense minister
order the Civil Administration, which is charged with approving
construction plans in the territories, to cease deliberating on such
plans. In addition, the interior minister could instruct the Jerusalem
Building and Planning Council to halt all plans in sensitive areas of
the city, and the prime minister could order the housing minister to
cease publishing tenders.
An unofficial freeze would enable government officials to deny its
existence while in practice halting all construction, according to Army
Radio.
Emphasis added is mine. Two questions here: First, there are 'Jewish settlements' that are not isolated but that lie outside of the major population centers under Israeli control in the 'West Bank.' For example, anything in the Jordan Valley. Or the Beit El - Shilo - Ofra area (which was not originally considered a 'major settlement bloc' but Netanyahu has hinted that it might be considered one). Or the Hebron area.
Second, if the only place in which we are being asked to freeze 'settlement construction' is in 'Jewish settlements' that lie outside of the major population centers under Israeli control in the 'West Bank,' why would we have to halt construction anywhere in Jerusalem? Is it not under our control? Is Jerusalem not an area that Israel intends to keep (another criterion given earlier in the same article)?
Hmmm.
Labels: Beit El, East Jerusalem, Hebron, John Kerry, Jordan Valley, Judea and Samaria, settlement blocs, settlement freeze, Shilo
Occupied land found?
The sign pictured above was found in Shilo, a Jewish village in Samaria on Tuesday.
More
here.
Labels: Judea and Samaria, occupation, Shilo
'Peace Now' helping to legalize construction in Judea and Samaria
A series of petitions filed by 'Peace Now' in a bid to force the government to evict revenants from homes built on state-owned land in Judea and Samaria is having precisely the opposite effect. Forced to choose between destroying the homes and legalizing them,
the government is choosing legalization. This is from a lengthy JPost piece about Shilo, which is in Samaria.
According to [State's Attorney] Sylvetsky, the state’s move to legalize housing construction in Shiloh is part of a trend that has developed over the past yearand- a-half in reaction to petitions like this one, filed against building on state (public) lands in the West Bank.
The petitions have given the state the impetus to legalize settlement construction on state lands, which lacks the necessary permits.
The land is considered public and there are no Palestinian private land claims against it, Sylvetsky says, because the High Court has forced the state to give an answer about the land.
“Peace Now’s petitions have been having the opposite affect to that intended,” he added. “In several places, the state has legalized construction because of petitions, whereas if the settlers themselves had asked for legalization it would never have happened.”
Sylvetsky pointed to legalizations that have taken place in the Eli settlement and the Shevut Rachel outpost, where he says petitions were filed against construction carried out without the necessary building permits.
In some cases, such as in Shevut Rachel, the state itself authorized the construction and sale of houses.
“The state was forced to either correct its mistakes by legalizing construction, or destroy the houses,” Sylvetsky said.
The state can legalize the houses because they are built not on private Palestinian land but on so-called “state lands,” land considered public property under Ottoman law.
According to that law, which was in force when Israel took the area from Jordan in 1967, land in the West Bank is considered state land unless an individual has occupied, cultivated and paid taxes on it for at least 10 years.
Heh.
Labels: Judea and Samaria construction, Peace Now, Shilo
Sarah Leah Whitson's lies
'Human Rights Watch's Sarah Leah Whitson - she who once
raised money in Saudi Arabia for HRW by stressing how much HRW works against Israel - accuses Israel of 'apartheid.' Among other accusations, she came up with
this:
Israel justifies its policies on security grounds: it must protect the security of settlers. Israeli authorities indeed have an obligation to safeguard citizens -- all citizens, whatever their ethnicity or religion. But security concerns do not warrant treating every last Palestinian man, woman and child as a threat. And security concerns do not justify systematically separating Palestinians from Jews, with shanties and dirt roads provided for the one, and spacious villas with swimming pools and paved highways provided for the other.
What Whitson didn't tell you is that the spacious villas with swimming pools belong to the 'Palestinians.'
Mrs. Carl has a sister who lives in one of the Jewish towns in Samaria. Today, we reach the town via bypass roads and don't see many 'Palestinian villages.' But in the 1980's and 1990's, to travel to Mrs. Carl's sister, we had to pass through Ramallah and El Bireh, two sister cities just northeast of Jerusalem. As we would drive through them, we would pick out villas and decide which we would like to own. We would also marvel at the fact that the 'Palestinians' lived alongside the road, openly and proudly, while the Jews lived behind security fences and barbed wire.
One of the villas we admired is at the top of this post.
Shiloh Musings lives in a town that is not far from Mrs. Carl's sister. Four years ago, she did two posts (
here and
here) with pictures of 'Palestinian' mansions in the area. They are stunning. I urge you all to look at them and see what kind of 'shanties' Whitson has in mind.
Now here's a picture of a typical Jewish town in Judea and Samaria.
Note the fence and the simple Levittown-type look-alike homes. No mansions.
So what the heck is Whitson talking about? And what else has she lied about?
By the way, Elder of Ziyon has some more pictures of Arab mansions in Judea and Samaria
here.
Labels: Arab mansions, El Bireh, Judea and Samaria, Ramallah, Shilo
Video: What the 'settlers' do to olive trees
You've all heard about all the terrible things that the 'settlers' do to olive trees. Well, here they are in action. Yes, they're as terrible as they're made out to be.
Let's go to the videotape.
The background music is a popular Israeli song about striking roots in Israel through nature, trees and fruits of the land.
Labels: olive trees, revenants, Shilo
Painting the town red in Ariel
A group of graffiti artists from the New York City area is
here in Israel this week painting up a storm. They were here once before in November, and painted bomb shelters in Sderot and the like. This trip, they're spending a lot of time in Ariel, where they are trying to counteract the
artists' boycott of the new theater there.
An international group of graffiti artists are in Ariel to break what they call "an artistic siege" against the approximately 18,000 residents, in the midst of the national debate over Ariel's new cultural center. "Graffiti writers are used to making art where people tell them not to," says Craig Dershowitz, executive director of the New York group, Artists 4 Israel, which organized the trip.
The group is creating murals across the West Bank city and giving free painting lessons to school children. On the trip, the artists also painted in Sderot, decorated a community center in Jerusalem and did murals at Intel's corporate clubhouse. After an American Thanksgiving dinner hosted for them by Ariel residents, the group will also visit Beit El and Shilo.
Artists also attempted yesterday to document and paint over hate messages on both sides of the wall in the areas of Bethlehem, but while working on the Palestinian side they were approached by Palestinian men who asked them to leave, according to the group. "Graffiti artists are called 'writers," says Dershowitz. "What we hope to do by organizing trips where American, European, Israeli and Arab artists can meet each other is to write a new story. In graffiti, we will write a better future for the whole region."
One of the things this story doesn't mention is that the group found the time to have dinner cooked by Mrs. Carl and our two younger daughters in our home last week, and did graffiti of most of our children's and grandchildren's names while they were sitting at our dining room table! They're an amazing group. Some of them are Jewish, some of them are not. Most of them are from the New York City area and at least some of them got their start decorating New York City subway cars in the 1970's and 1980's.
The picture at the top is a bomb shelter from the first trip in April. I've seen pictures from the current trip, but they aren't up on the website yet. One of them said to me that the importance of what he was doing hit him when he realized the use of the thing they were decorating. Having those pictures to look at should make them less scary for small children.
Those of you who are able to do so should consider a contribution to Artists4Israel. There's more information on how to donate
here.
And yes, we're hoping our house will become a regular stopping point for them on their trips here.
Labels: Ariel, Artists4Israel, Beit El, Sderot, Shilo
