Who will blink first - Netanyahu or German Foreign Minister?
Prime Minister Netanyahu is scheduled to meet today with German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel. Last night, Netanyahu issued an ultimatum saying he would cancel the meeting if Gabriel did not cancel meetings he has scheduled with European-financed anti-Israel NGO's. At first, it was reported that Netanyahu was referring to 'Peace Now,' but it now appears that it's even worse: Gabriel proposes to meet with B'Tselem and 'Breaking the Silence,' both of which are guilty of libeling Israel on the international stage.
“It’s time to make clear to Germany that we too have red lines,” the official told Arutz Sheva.
“If it was a low-level meeting, it might have looked different. But
when the Foreign Minister comes here and goes to meet with organizations
that are working against the government's policy and against the Prime
Minister's policy, this is unacceptable."
“The Prime Minister would never come to a country like Britain or
Germany, where there are organizations that are working against the
government's policy, and meet with the heads of those organizations. How
would that country react if he did? There is significance to such a
meeting held by a foreign minister,” the source continued.
Gabriel apparently plans to go ahead with his meetings with the anti-Israel organizations.
German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel responded
to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's ultimatum on Tuesday,
saying that it would be "regrettable" if the latter decides to cancel
their meeting because the Gabriel's meeting with representatives of
left-wing Israeli organizations.
Speaking to German TV
network ZDF, Gabriel defined his planned meetings with representatives
of B'Tselem and Breaking the Silence and "totally normal."
Gabriel said that he
had only learned of Netanyahu's threat from the media and noted it
would be "inconceivable" for the German minister to cancel a meeting
with the Israeli leader if the latter met with figures critical of the
German government. He nevertheless said that "it wouldn't be a
catastrophe" if their meeting is cancelled, and that it wouldn't change
his ties with Israel.
"You never get the full picture of any state in the world if you just meet with figures in government ministries," he said.
Netanyahu’s ultimatum to Gabriel was backed on Monday by Deputy
Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely (Likud), who said she "backs the Prime
Minister's decision to set a red line regarding anti-Israel
organizations such as B'Tselem and Breaking the Silence. This is an
important struggle against those who defame Israel in the world."
MK Yoav Kisch (Likud), who heads the Knesset House Committee,
expressed support for Netanyahu’s move as well, saying, "The German
Foreign Minister and any other leader who wants to meet those who spread
poison against Israel must understand: Legitimizing hatred of Israel is
out of the question."
But of course the opposition thinks Netanyahu should meet with Gabriel anyway.
In my not so humble opinion, Gabriel ought to be declared persona non grata if he goes ahead with the meetings with Breaking the Silence and B'Tselem. The European - and particularly German (read I Sleep in Hitler's Room) - obsession with finishing the job that Hitler started (God Forbid) needs to be met head on. Especially on the day after Holocaust Remembrance Day.
State Department spox John Kirby reaches bottom, keeps digging
State Department spokesman John Kirby almost makes you long for the days of ditzy Marie Harf. Yesterday, he reached bottom and kept digging.
At a daily press briefing on Wednesday, U.S.
State Department spokesman John Kirby said Israel, which has set up
roadblocks in Palestinian neighborhoods of Israeli-occupied East
Jerusalem to try to stem attacks, has a right and responsibility to
protect its citizens.
He added:
"Now, we have seen some – I wouldn’t call the checkpoints this - but
we’ve certainly seen some reports of what many would consider excessive
use of force.
"Obviously, we don’t
like to see that, and we want to see restrictions that are elevated in
this time of violence to be as temporary as possible if they have to be
enacted," Kirby said, without citing specific incidents.
Asked on Army Radio
about the remarks, Yaalon said: "Are we exercising excessive force? If
someone wields a knife and they kill him, is that excessive force? What
are we talking about?"
...
Kirby's comments touched a nerve in Israel,
especially after allegations by Abbas, in a televised speech in Arabic
on Wednesday, that Israeli forces were "executing our sons in cold
blood, as they did with this child, Ahmed Manasra, and other children in
Jerusalem and other places in Palestine".
Many Palestinians
were incensed by amateur video that had shown Manasra, 13, lying on the
street in Pisgat Zeev, a Jewish settlement on the northern edge of
Jerusalem, with blood coming from his head. Israeli police said that he
and a cousin stabbed two Israelis there on Monday.
The
15-year-old cousin was shot dead, and Israel said that day that Manasra
was alive and taken to hospital after being hit by a car during the
attack. On Thursday, after Abbas's address, Israel's Government Press
Office released a video, without sound, showing a youth it identified as
Manasra being spoon-fed in a bed in Jerusalem's Hadassah hospital. A
doctor said he could be discharged soon.
I'll have that video for you in the next post, so make sure to check back. And the Prime Minister has called a press conference for this evening at which he will be flanked by Dore Gold (Director General of the Foreign Ministry these days) and Tzipi Hotovely (Deputy Foreign Minister) at which the video will undoubtedly be shown.
But at least Kirby was forced to walk back one outrageous comment.
Clarification from today's briefing: I did not intend to suggest that status quo at Temple Mount/Haram Al-Sharif has been broken.
Your tax Francs at work: Foreign Ministry calls on Swiss government, city of Zurich to withdraw support from Breaking the Silence exhibition
Israel's Foreign Ministry is urging the government of Switzerland and the City of Zurich to withdraw support from an exhibition being put on by Breaking the Silence, a European-funded Israeli NGO that has made falseaccusations against the IDF in the past. The withdrawal of support would apparently lead to the exhibition not taking place. This is from the first link.
A senior official in the Foreign
Ministry in Jerusalem said Israel's ambassador to Switzerland, Yigal
Caspi, called the head of the Middle East and North Africa Division in
Switzerland's Department of Foreign Affairs on Tuesday to issue a formal
complaint, and request his government quit funding the NGO's
exhibition.
The Israeli
official, who asked to remain anonymous due to the sensitivity of the
matter, noted that Caspi "vigorously protested" Swiss support for the
exhibition, which, he emphasized in his conversation with the Swiss
official," serves to slander Israel." As such, he said, the Israeli
government is concerned by the fact that Switzerland is financing it.
The exhibition, which is due to open in June in
Zurich, would include photos and testimonies of Israel Defense Forces
soldiers alleging human rights violations in the West Bank.
Two weeks ago, the Israeli news website NRG reported
that Switzerland's Foreign Ministry contributed 15,000 Swiss francs
($16,100) to support the exhibition, and that the Zurich municipality
contributed an additional 10,000 Swiss francs ($10,700).
If the formal complaint doesn't work (and it probably won't), maybe Hotovely should instruct the ambassador to show up at the exhibition. That's worked pretty well in the past.
The beginning of the end of Leftist domination of Israel's Foreign Ministry?
In the past week, there have been two significant appointments to Israel's foreign ministry that have the potential to change the foreign ministry's longtime Leftist slant. Keep in mind as you read this that Prime Minister Netanyahu did not appoint a foreign minister and that it was previously thought that he was holding the position open in the hope that Avigdor Lieberman or Dore Gold would eventually join the government.
First,
she’s a novice who has never held any executive branch position before,
yet will now exercise de facto control over one of the cabinet’s most
important ministries. Technically, she serves under Netanyahu, who
retained the foreign affairs portfolio for himself. But since Netanyahu
already has a full-time job as prime minister, she will largely run the
ministry.
Second, she’s one of the most hawkish members of Netanyahu’s coalition and an outspoken opponent of Palestinian statehood. As The Jerusalem Post’s diplomatic correspondent, Herb Keinon, put it, “Hotovely represents the opposite of everything much of the world...wants to see in Israel.”
Third,
in contrast to appointees like Miri Regev or Haim Katz, whose power
bases within Likud were simply too strong for Netanyahu to ignore,
Hotovely’s support inside the party is tenuous; in the last primary, she
barely scraped into the 20th slot. Nor is she known as one of the
premier’s own loyalists. Thus he was under no political compulsion to
reward her with such a lofty post.
Finally,
there were plenty of other candidates who would seemingly have been
more suitable, including the one many American Jews undoubtedly hoped to
see there: former ambassador to Washington and current Kulanu MK
Michael Oren.
Indeed, Hotovely’s main qualification for the post – aside from being pretty, personable and reportedly speaking excellent English
– would seem to be that she constitutes no threat to Netanyahu, who
notoriously squelches anyone he does consider a potential political
threat.
That’s why so many ambitious Likudniks eventually quit the party
to run their own parties (see Moshe Kahlon, Naftali Bennett and Avigdor
Liberman).
Gordon goes on to make a case for Hotovely being the one to shift the Foreign Ministry's focus away from the West and toward Africa and Latin America. And while I agree with Gordon that there's little hope of Europe ever taking our side again in the diplomatic courts of the world for the foreseeable future, I believe that there's a lot more that Hotovely can accomplish than just keeping countries like Rwanda and Nigeria on our side.
Sunday was perhaps the first indication that Netanyahu intends to have Hotovely remake the foreign ministry and the diplomatic corps: Netanyahu summarily fired the Director General and appointed his longtime confidante Dore Gold to be Director General of the Ministry and to work directly under Hotovely.
Gold, a former ambassador to the United Nations and currently head of
the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, will be working under Deputy
Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely, who was told about the appointment
just prior to it being made public. He replaces Nissim Ben-Sheetrit, a
veteran ministry employee who started out in its administrative track
and then moved to the diplomatic side.
...
[Former Foreign Minister Avigdor] Liberman commented on the appointment, saying that while it was
Netanyahu’s prerogative to appoint his own man to this post,
appointments at the ministry are not ways to give out favors or settle
scores. He also said that “it needs to be clear that new appointments
or changes are not a replacement for clear policy.”
In that
regard, one government source said, Gold was the perfect candidate
because he had a direct line to Netanyahu, and his interlocutors would
know that when he speaks, he is speaking for Netanyahu and with
authority.
“This will give him power and make him relevant,” the official said, noting that Ben-Sheetrit never enjoyed that status.
The
American-born Gold is considered one of Netanyahu’s top foreign policy
advisers. He served as one of his foreign policy advisers starting in
1996, during the prime minister’s first term in office, being appointed
the following year as ambassador to the UN, where he served until
1999. In 2014, he became an “outside” consultant in the Prime
Minister’s Office.
In recent years, Gold has accompanied
Netanyahu on many of his trips to Washington and the UN, and over the
years has been one of Israel’s foremost unofficial spokesmen, speaking
in the media and at conferences around the world on Israeli policy. He
is often sought out by journalists and diplomats because of his
knowledge of the issues, and because he is considered to be close to
Netanyahu, thus reflecting his thinking.
He has also been very active in lobbying policy-makers on behalf of “defensible borders” for Israel.
Hotovely
spoke with Gold after the appointment and issued a statement, saying
that with his rich experience in the international arena, the former UN
ambassador could contribute to furthering Israel’s position in the
world.
For those of you who have forgotten, 'defensible borders' mean that any 'Palestinian state' would be severely truncated.
Dore Gold has done the State of Israel a great service by forcing us to
focus on concrete things that we want out of the 'peace process.' Dore
is fond of pointing out that when you ask a 'Palestinian' what he wants
from the 'peace process,' he will tell you that he wants a 'Palestinian
state' in the areas that are outside Israel's '1967 borders' (for now),
whose capital is Jerusalem. If you ask an Israeli Jew what he wants from
the 'peace process,' he will tell you 'peace.'
Dore is changing
that paradigm. One of the things he believes that Israeli Jews can and
should be demanding from the 'peace process' is defensible borders. His
organization, the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, has put together a
collection of essays that sets out in concrete terms what defensible
borders mean. The collection is called Israel's Critical Security Needs for a Viable Peace. It's reviewed by Lee Smith in Tablet Magazine.
The book Israel’s Critical Security Needs for a Viable Peace
is a collection published this year under the auspices of the JCPA with
essays about security and diplomacy by leading figures in Israel’s
security establishment, like Maj.-Gen. Aharon Ze’evi Farkash, former
head of IDF intelligence, and Maj.-Gen. Uzi Dayan, former IDF deputy
chief of staff and a former national security adviser to Prime Ministers
Ehud Barak and Ariel Sharon. The volume’s findings represent a broad
consensus across the Israeli political spectrum, and the fact that
Lt.-Gen. Moshe Yaalon—former IDF chief of staff and currently the vice
prime minister—wrote the introduction is evidence that the ideas have
won approval at the highest political levels.
The book pushes
three common ideas, some likely to add to the friction between
Washington and Jerusalem: First, Israel, must not withdraw to the 1949
armistice lines; second, Israel needs defensible borders; third, Israel
must rely on itself to defend itself and not on foreign forces as
proposed by U.S. national security adviser Gen. James Jones, who has talked openly about replacing the IDF with international forces in the West Bank.
The
insistence that Israel must retain the ability to defend its own
borders—a basic attribute of national sovereignty—is the least
controversial element of Gold’s blueprint. The issue is not merely the
inglorious record of U.N. peacekeeping forces—from Sinai to Bosnia and
Lebanon—but also the fact that the international community rarely sends
its blue helmets into the middle of a real shooting war, which is what
the West Bank would become if an IDF withdrawal left Hamas and Fatah at
each other’s throats and eager to gain credit for launching terror
attacks on Israel.
The concept of defensible borders is closely
tied to the drawing of 1949 armistice lines, commonly and incorrectly
known as the 1967 borders. As Gold explains in his contribution to the
volume, successive U.S. administrations since Lyndon Johnson’s have all
recognized the danger in Israel withdrawing to those borders. George
Shultz, one of President Ronald Reagan’s secretaries of State, explained
that “Israel will never negotiate from or return to the 1967 borders,”
and the Clinton Administration reaffirmed the Reagan White House’s
concept of defensible borders. However, it was during Clinton’s Camp
David negotiations that then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak abandoned
the idea of defensible borders in the hope of a radical breakthrough
with Yasser Arafat. With the outbreak of the Second Intifada and peace
nowhere in the offing, the George W. Bush Administration pledged not to
hold the Israelis to the Clinton parameters and returned to the
traditional U.S. position. “It is unrealistic to expect that the outcome
of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the
armistice lines of 1949,” reads an April 14, 2004 letter from Bush to then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.
How will this play out in the field? One indication might be this link I received in an email this morning from JCC Watch's Richard Allen.
The UJA-Federation’s top brass have been twisting the arms of
Israel’s diplomatic corps to provide cover for supporting the New Israel
Fund marching in the Israel Day Parade, according to emails obtained by
JCCWatch.
The strategy to use the Foreign Ministry as their beard came to an
uncomfortable public end last week, when the Spokesman for the Israeli
Consulate in New York had to make a statement to deny what UJA-Federation
CEO Eric Goldstein had told Talkline Communications radio host Zev
Brenner on March 30. In an appearance on the show, Goldstein said, twice
actually, that “the government of Israel, the Consul General’s office,
very much, emphatically, want us to allow these groups to continue to march.”
The consulate spokesman told Arutz Sheva last week
that at “no point did any of the parade’s organizers consult with the
Consulate or with someone acting on its behalf regarding the New Israel
Fund’s participation.” The newspaper quoted the spokesman directly as
saying, “never, ever, did the Consul-General, or someone on his behalf,
or any of the Consulate’s employees, say anything favoring the NIF’s
participation, either explicitly or implicitly, in a hinted manner or in
public, in secret or openly.”
The oddly worded distancing of the Consul-General’s office from the
UJA-Federation comes as emails obtained by JCCWatch show Goldstein and
former UJA-Federation president Jerry Levin, indeed, reaching out to
Israeli ambassadors for exactly that kind of cover.
The email trail leading up to Goldstein’s foot-in-mouth routine,
and reproduced below, casts a dark shadow on UJA-Federation leadership
who were able to co-opt important Israel diplomats to publicly boost
their cause of defending the New Israel Fund.
The exposure of Federation efforts to force parade organizers to accept the New Israel Fund, and the disavowal of interference on behalf of the NIF's behalf by the Consulate may have come on a direct order from Hotovely. And if it did, it's long overdue. In the past, I doubt that the Consulate would have issued such a clarification.
Here's hoping that Hotovely and Gold will bring about an end to the Leftist domination of the Foreign Ministry, which goes back to the days of Shimon Peres, Tzipi Livni and others. That would be a welcome change.
“America harmed its allies in Israel, Egypt, and the Palestinian Authority by ignoring their demands and coming to the table with a plan that was not approved or even semi-approved by any of them," said Agriculture Minister Yair Shamir (Yisrael Beytenu). "Maybe it’s because they have a problem with the regime in Egypt and they thought that by going through Turkey and Qatar, they’d be seen as an honest broker. But instead, they lost the allies that they had and didn’t get any new ones. Kerry lost credibility in the eyes of everyone, and the president ended up undermining him.”
Likud MK Tzipi Hotovely said Israel must reject Obama’s cease-fire proposal, which she said only serves the interests of Hamas. She said the government of Israel must change the rules of the game in the Gaza Strip and defeat Hamas.
Her Likud colleague Danny Danon called upon Obama and his government to "cease firing at Israel."
"We need to withstand the exorbitant pressure that is put on us and deal with the interests of Israel," he said. "Would America cease fire on al-Qaida when it is being attacked? John Kerry is disconnected from reality and ignores the security concerns of Israel.”
MK Eli Yishai (Shas) said “The security of the citizens of Israel must come before our relations with the United States." He said that although Israel owed much to America, "that obligation cannot come at the expense of Israel’s future.”
The criticism of America's handling of the cease-fire proposal also came from the Left side of the political map.
“America has displayed a shameful lack of elementary understanding of how the Middle East works," said Hatnua faction chairman Meir Sheetrit, who ran for president last month. "No matter what America says, it is forbidden to end the war as long as there is a threat of tunnels and rockets. I hope our friends in the US and Europe won’t get in the way by insisting on an immediate ceasefire. The free world must support Israel, not weaken it, and I hope our friends in the US give us their backing.”
MK Nachman Shai (Labor) said Obama’s demand to stop the fighting prevents Israel from maximizing its military and public diplomacy achievements. He said he doubted America's ability to demilitarize Gaza and prevent future war there.
But there were also voices on the Left praising the US and attacking Netanyahu and his government.
Wow. I cannot remember the United States coming under attack by an ally like this. And I cannot remember the United States attacking an ally like this either. The attacks on Kerry are well-deserved.
Economics Minister Naftali Bennett (Jewish Home) quickly shot down the idea in a Facebook post.
“The idea that Jewish communities will live under Palestinian
sovereignty, as expressed by the Prime Minister's Office, is a very
grave matter, and it reflects a panicked loss of values,” said Bennett.
"2,000 years of longing for the Land of Israel did not transpire so that
we could live under Abu Mazen's rule”
The idea “pulls the ground out from beneath our settlement of Tel Aviv” as well, he stated.
Bennett called on Netanyahu to immediately deny that the idea reflects his policy.
He wants Netanyahu to deny the truth? Maybe Bennett needs to wake up to reality. Saying that he's going to leave the revenants behind in a 'Palestinian state' has two huge advantages for Netanyahu and for his Leftist allies (like Yair Lapid whom Bennett helped bring into the government). First, he avoids the heart-rending scenes of the IDF forcibly expelling Jews from their homes. And second, he avoids having to pay 'compensation' when the revenants flee for their lives into a rump state of Israel.
It is Netanyahu - and not Bennett - who has learned the lessons of the Gaza expulsion. And in fact, Ehud Olmert would have done the same thing in 2006 had the Second Lebanon War not quashed his plans. It's a brilliant strategy. Despicably evil, but brilliant.
Others knew better than Bennett how to respond to Netanyahu.
Two hawkish Likud MKs also warned against Netanyahu's idea. Deputy
Minister of Transportation, MK Tzipi Hotovely, said that “a diplomatic
plan that relegates the Jewish settlement enterprise to Palestinian
sovereignty will not receive political backing in Likud. The commitment
not to uproot settlements is not enough. It is important that Israeli
sovereignty be maintained.”
Deputy Defense Minister MK Danny Danon rejected the plan and said:
“Whoever thinks that Jews will live under Palestinian control in Judea
and Samaria is invited to try and visit Gaza today and understand the
meaning of 'tolerance' in the Middle East.”
Danon added: “In areas where the military will not be present and
bear responsibility – no Jew will enjoy security. We will not abandon
the settlers behind enemy lines.”
The Legal Forum for the Land of Israel warned against implementing the idea and said that it will lead to a bloodbath.
“One of the basic civil rights is the right to life,” stated Forum
Director Nahi Eyal. “No one has a moral and legal right to hand over
responsibility for the security of Israel's citizens to Palestinian
policemen and murderers whom the government released from jail in recent
months.”
Well, yes. But you'd have to go back to the Shamir government (1990-92) to find the last government in this country in which moral and legal values were predominant.
Oh my: Which Likud MK says Netanyahu betrayed the public's trust?
A Likud MK is accusing Prime Minister Netanyahu of betraying the public's trust. Would you believe... Tzipi Hotovely?
In a Knesset Channel interview, MK Hotovely noted that some
Likud ministers, like Gilad Erdan and Yisrael Katz, have expressed their
opposition to the release of the prisoners, who are in fact "'heavy'
terrorists and murderers who received punishment on the basis of a
judicial process. This is an expression of disrespect for Israel's
judicial system and for its system of deterrence," she said.
In words that were clearly deliberately chosen, Hotovely said that
the person responsible for the release was Netanyahu. "I am not ashamed
to say that Netanyahu, as prime minister, is the one who bears
responsibility, and I want to say more than this: as a prime minister
who built an entire public career on combating terror, there is a
betrayal of the most basic trust on this issue."
The release of terrorists is "the opposite of a peace process," she
said. Saying that the terrorists are being released as part of an
attempt to restart the peace process is "an oxymoron," she added.
So is Bibi going to complete his morphing into Ariel (the Vegetable) Sharon and fire Hotovely? When are the rest of the Likud's ministers and MK's going to speak out against this absurd 'peace process'?
MK's from the Likud Beytenu and Bayit Yehudi parties - the two 'right wing' parties in the Prime Minister's coalition - are stepping up the pressure on Prime Minister Netanyahu not to make more concessions to the 'Palestinians.'
MKs on the Right said they were concerned that US Secretary of State
John Kerry would pressure Netanyahu to make more concessions, so they
felt it necessary to counter-act Kerry's demands to Netanyahu with
pressure of their own. To that end, 16 MKs in the coalition wrote the
prime minister as he was meeting with Kerry.
"Tell the secretary of state that Israel has no intention of
returning to the parameters of the Oslo Accords or relinquishing any
more of Israel's homeland to the Palestinian Authority," the MKs wrote
in the letter.
Among the 16 MKs were legislators from Likud
Beytenu and Bayit Yehudi, including deputy ministers Ze'ev Elkin
(Foreign Ministry), Tzipi Hotovely (Transportation), Eli Ben Dahan
(Religious Services), Avraham Wortzman (Education), and Ophir Akunis
(Knesset Liason).
Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon complained
that the Palestinians had upped their demands in the negotiations by
asking for the concessions made by former prime minister Ehud Olmert. In
September 2008 when he was prime minister, Olmert offered the
Palestinians 100 percent of the West Bank with land swaps, the return of
thousands of Palestinians to Israel's final borders, a Palestinian
state with its capital in eastern Jerusalem and the internationalization
of the Holy Basin of Jerusalem's Old City.
That's 16 out of 68 MK's or one shy of a quarter of the coalition. And you will note that the list doesn't include any ministers - only deputy ministers. That's because the ministers probably all fear Sharon treatment (Sharon fired all the ministers who voted against expelling Jews from Gaza in 2005).
But here's one Right wing minister who did not sign on.
Netanyahu receive unexpected defense from the most right-wing
minister in the cabinet, Construction and Housing Minister Uri Ariel.
"I
am strengthening the prime minister to withstand all the pressure he is
under the best way he can and maintain Israel's clear interests," Ariel
said. "I am sure that 20 years after the Oslo agreement was signed, he
learned the historic lesson to not accept false promises at the expense
of Israel's security."
I wonder what makes Ariel so sure. I'm not so sure.
The Knesset Committee of the Interior will hold a hearing on Monday
regarding preparations for Jewish visitation to the Temple Mount over
the upcoming Succot holiday.
Groups lobbying for Jewish prayer
rights at the site criticized the lack of access afforded to them over
the recent Rosh Hashana festival and are demanding that Jewish visits
over Succot be enabled by the police.
Access was restricted on the first day of Rosh Hashana and the site was
closed on the second day to Jewish and other non-Muslim visitors when
non-Muslims are generally not given access.
The second day of Rosh HaShana was a Friday....
Feiglin also intends to publicly question the legality of the Waqf and its authority to administer the Temple Mount.
He
recently sent a letter to the Israel Police asking for clarifications
regarding the legal authority of the body, and subsequently challenged
the reply that a government decision taken after the Six-Day War of 1967
authorized the Waqf to continue running the site.
“To the best of
my knowledge there is no such decision, and from a reading of the words
of the ministerial committee in 1968 it is clear that they thought
there was no such agreement,” Feiglin wrote to Israel Police Insp.-Gen.
Yohanan Danino.
He then quoted the comments of then Justice
Minister Yaakov Shimshon Shapira from a committee meeting in June 1968
as saying "We never announced that the entirety of the Temple Mount
belongs to the Arabs. We never announced that it is forbidden for Jews
to pray there, we never announced that it is forbidden for Jews to
establish a synagogue there.”
Feiglin wrote that in the absence of
such a decision, “all directives which discriminate between Muslims and
non-Muslims regarding entrance to the [Temple] Mount should be
immediately rescinded, and free entrance from all gates to the Mount be
enabled, in accordance with the law.”
The MK also demanded that
all Waqf stewards be removed from the site and raised questions about
the institutes legal status, questions that he will raise in Monday’s
committee hearing.
In particular, Feiglin claims that the Waqf is
not a registered institute in any state framework, and therefore does
not pay the appropriate taxes and national insurance contributions as
required by law.”
“It seems to me that this a badge of shame for
the Israel Police to cooperate with this criminal organization and for
its police officers to respond to the whims of its officials,” wrote
Feiglin.
It's a pity that it's taken 45 years for anyone to raise this. And that sizzling sound you just heard was MosheDayan rolling over.
Knesset members on the Right called the 11 million shekel event a waste
of money, even though it was funded by contributions and not taxpayers.
"The event that we saw yesterday was pompous, wasteful, and
pretentious," said MK Moshe Feiglin (Likud). "Woe to the country that
cuts child welfare payments in the Knesset at the same time that its
president holds a birthday celebration that costs millions. If it was
funded by donations, Peres should have solicit contributions for the
kids instead."
Feiglin, who led demonstrations against Peres
during the Oslo diplomatic process in the 1990s, said the party was the
last event he would go to. He said he and thousands of other Israelis
could never forgive Peres for the diplomatic concessions that resulted
in hundreds of deaths.
"There is no man who harmed the country
more than Shimon Peres," Feiglin said. "The existence of the country in
its land is being questioned in the West because of the Oslo process
Peres symbolizes. Negotiations begin with an incorrect assumption that
there is a Palestinian people with a right to a state, while the
Palestinians deny our right to a Jewish state, and the world takes their
side."
But MK's didn't just criticize the event itself.
MK Tzipi Hotovely (Likud) lashed out at Peres for putting a map of
Israel in pre-67 borders on the tickets of the event. [Jewish Home MK Orit] Struck noted the
irony of Barbara Streisand singing a traditional song about God having
mercy on our children with that map in the background.
On the way to the conference this morning, my taxi driver told me that it was reported in the Hebrew papers on Wednesday that Bill Clinton donated the entire $500,000 that hehis foundation received from the Jewish National Fund for coming here to fund scholarships for Israeli students to attend university. That's very nice, but why is the JNF paying $500,000 for university scholarships when their mission is supposed to be land reclamation. Better they should use that money to free up scarce land in the country's center to create affordable housing for young couples who have no place to live.
In an interview with the JPost before the new cabinet ministers were announced, Likud MK Tzipi Hotovely tries hard to avoid giving the impression that Prime Minister Netanyahu is a control freak.
“The prime minister wants to respect veterans in the party and
feels he can’t tell a minister that now he’ll be a regular MK. It’s a twisted
method that could turn into a dictatorship,” Hotovely explained, following
indications that Netanyahu will not appoint any new ministers.
Hotovely
unseated outgoing Culture and Sport Minister Limor Livnat as the “first lady of
the Likud” in the party’s November primary, reaching the 10th spot in the Likud
and the 15th in the combined Likud Beytenu list.
“There was a primary,
and part of the idea of a primary is to show who Likud voters want to see in the
next government,” she said. “There was a clear choice to change generations and
refresh our ranks.”
Though she called former Likud MKs like Bennie Begin
and Dan Meridor “wonderful people,” Hotovely said it is a natural process for
party veterans to be voted out over time.
“The prime minister has to
allow for political renewal.
There is nothing more democratic than
respecting the results of the primary,” she added. “At the moment, with the
number of seats in the Knesset we have [31], there is not much room for
maneuvering, but the choice to go to old politics hurts the Likud’s public
image.”
Still, Hotovely denied that Netanyahu may feel threatened by
younger, more rightwing MKs in the party, pointing out that he personally
recruited her into the Likud in 2009.
I don't think he feels threatened by the MK's. I think he feels threatened by their ideology, which is far more consistent than his.
The Likud's MK's are sharpening their knives for the Prime Minister, because he has decided to leave the current Likud ministers in place even though many young MK's ranked far higher in the party's primary.
Meanwhile, the younger generation of Likud MKs, who ranked high in
the party primary - Ze'ev Elkin, Danny Danon, Tzipi Hotovely, Yariv
Levin and others - began to express frustration at reports that
Netanyahu does no plan to appoint any new ministers from within his
party.
Danon expressed careful optimism that he - ninth on the
party list - could get a ministry instead of MK Tzachi Hanegbi - 26th,
who Netanyahu promised a portfolio.
"I hope the prime minister
will consider the results of the primary," Danon said. "He needs to [go
by the party list], because the Likud is a democracy."
Danon also
called for Netanyahu to realize that there is a new generation of
lawmakers in the Likud, and that not all of the old guard should be left
in place.
"Netanyahu can't ignore what Likud voters want," Danon added.
MK
Tzipi Hotovely, the highest-ranking woman in the Likud, attacked
Netanyahu's intentions more directly, saying that he is making a
mistake.
"It's a mistake to go for old politics and recycling the
old list of ministers. At the end of the day, the public will look at
the Likud's list and say, if the government doesn't change, then why did
we vote in the primary? In a way, this shows lack of faith in the the
[primary] voting process," Hotovely told Galei Yisrael Radio.
Hotovely
specifically mentioned Culture and Sport Minister Limor Livnat, 27th
on the party's 31-seat list, as someone who should no longer be part of
the government.
"Thousands of votes separate me and Limor Livnat," Hotovely pointed out.
I suppose we should be thankful he's given up on keeping Ehud Barak as Defense Minister. But Danny's Danon's phrase that I highlighted above is so wrong it's pathetic. Netanyahu pushed Moshe Feiglin down to an unrealistic slot after the 2009 primaries, he prevented a new central committee from being elected for years, and he is now trying to return the Likud to a system where the Central Committee - rather than party members - selects and ranks the candidates for MK positions.
As someone who spent more than three hours voting in the primary, I'm angry but not surprised. .The Likud a democracy? It's about as democratic as Egypt.
The one (Jewish) state solution: An idea that can be discussed in public
There was a conference in Hebron last Thursday, attended by more than 500 people, at which the only viable long-term solution to the Middle East dispute was discussed: The one Jewish state solution.
It's an idea that until recently was not politically correct to discuss (and still isn't politically correct in some circles). But here in Israel, many people aren't just whispering it. They're saying it out loud. There’s nothing new about far-right groups holding events in which speakers fantasize about “Greater Israel.” But Thursday’s conference was different: It indicated that the idea of the one-state solution has become respectable within a larger segment of society, including the ranks of Israel’s ruling party.
[Likud MK Tzipi] Hotovely was right: For years, moderate right-wingers tiptoed around the question of what they envision for the future of the territories Israel captured in 1967. Only hardliners openly admitted what perhaps many others secretly desired, but knew to be politically too incorrect to openly demand.
...
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is on record saying that he does not want to rule over the Palestinians and is ready to accept a Palestinian state. But that no longer prevents some members of his party from openly demanding a one-state solution. MK Miri Regev, speaking on a recorded video clip, boasted that she recently founded the Knesset Lobby for the Application of Israeli Sovereignty over Judean and Samarian Communities. The Likud constitution requires the application of sovereignty over the settlements, she said.
“It’s time to change the discourse in the State of Israel about Judea and Samaria,” said MK Ze’ev Elkin, the chairman of the coalition, also in a prerecorded statement. “For 20 years, we talked about what to give and why. Now the time has come for an entirely different discourse. This is our land, and it’s our right to apply sovereignty over it. Regardless of the world’s opposition, it’s time to do in Judea and Samaria what we did in [East] Jerusalem and the Golan. It’s time to end this system in which the Palestinians take and take and we give and give.”
Most speakers focused on Israel’s right to The Land — all of it — and tried to reassure the audience that they need not fear the so-called demographic threat. Israel would not lose its Jewish majority if it annexed the West Bank and granted citizenship to the Arabs living there, nearly all the speakers promised.
...
Former Israeli ambassador Yoram Ettinger used his 15 minutes — the organizers strictly enforced every speaker’s time limit — for a slideshow in which he presented a lot of data ostensibly proving that there are a million fewer Palestinians in the West Bank than generally assumed. How come? Because the Palestinian officials dealing with statistics are either incompetent or lying, he said.
Ettinger’s graphs made it easier for subsequent speakers to dismiss the demographic argument against a one-state solution as left-wing demagoguery. Gershon Mesika, the head of the Samaria Regional Council, for instance, called the demographic threat a “big bluff.” Even most Arabs don’t believe the idea of two states for two people would work, he added.
And so the evening went by, with speaker after speaker preaching to the choir, rarely challenging the audience with provocative questions about, for example, Palestinian national aspirations. “This is not Arab land. This is the holy land of God,” said Hebron Rabbi Uzi Sharbaf, adding that it was “absolutely forbidden” by Jewish law to retreat from any centimeter of the Promised Land.
My guess is that if we actually annexed Judea and Samaria, a lot of the 'Palestinians' would leave (and whine about being refugees and demand international assistance). In any event, the idea ought to be publicly discussed, and if enough conferences like this take place, it will be discussed more and more.
Some of you may be surprised to see me refer to the one Jewish state solution as the only viable long-term solution. Aside from the Jewish right to the entire land conveyed in the Bible, please allow me to explain why I believe that the one Jewish state solution is the only one that is viable in the long term.
1. The 'Palestinians' have proven that they will never make peace with a Jewish state.
2. The 'Palestinians' insist that a 'Palestinian state' be Judenrein.
3. Therefore, anything other than a one Jewish state solution will result, God forbid, in a mass slaughter of Jews.
4. On the other hand, Israel's Jews have proven for the last 64 years that they are willing and able to allow an Arab minority to coexist among us.
Simple enough? Anyone who wants to disagree is invited to challenge those four assertions, with proof. That, I believe, is an impossible task.
Bill aims to stop foreign governments from contributing to Israeli NGO's
MK's Tzipi Hotovely (Likud), Ofir Akunis (Likud) and Robert Ilatov (Yisrael Beiteinu) have introduced a bill in the Knesset that would prevent Israeli NGO's from accepting donations from foreign governments and from the UN.
“The absurd situation in which foreign governments, mostly Europeans, try to influence policy in the State of Israel by funding organizations that act against the IDF and the state must end,” Hotovely said, following a Channel 2 report that Netanyahu will back the legislation.
“It would be better if each country dealt with its own internal matters, and not try to meddle in our issues without understanding the damage they cause,” she added. “This bill could solve part of the problems with cash flow into the region.”
According to the bill’s text, its purpose is to stop foreign governments from influencing “the political discourse, character and policies of the State of Israel.”
“This bill is not meant to harm social organizations,” the bill reads. “It is meant to stop the involvement of foreign countries in Israeli politics through support for political NGOs.”
The circusKnesset opens in Jerusalem on Monday afternoon after its long summer vacation, and some outsiders have been invited. The Shalit family will be there, as will the poor little rich girl from Kfar Shmaryahu. But there won't be any terror victims or their families there, and that's got MK Tzipi Hotovely (Likud), whom one blogger calls Israel's Saracuda, quite upset.
MK Tzipi Hotovely (Likud) said on Sunday that, while she respects the Schalit family, Rivlin should have also invited "bereaved families, in which those who murdered their loved ones were released in the deal [to release Schalit]."
"The difficult side of the deal should be expressed, as well," she explained. "It was a complex moment, while many were happy that Schalit was released, it cannot be denied that many families were hurt because terrorists were set free."
Hotovely is right. The government of Israel should be ashamed of the way in which it has treated terror victims. This reminds me of Yitzchak Rabin's dismissing them in 1994-95 as 'sacrifices for peace.' I'd expect better from Binyamin Netanyahu, Ruby Rivlin (the Knesset speaker who controls invitations) and the Likud. It's disgraceful.
I've mentioned Liz Berney - who ran for Gary Ackerman's seat in Congress - several times on this blog, most recently here.
This is from the description of the video you're about to watch:
On January 10, 2011, at an event in Manhattan, Liz Berney expressed to MK Tzipi Hotovely that the 'Palestinian Authority' needs to be accountable for not complying with agreements to stop terrorism, incitement, and collecting illegal arms. Liz Berney also expressed in order for the Americans to really support Israel, that Israel has to take the most aggressive posture possible. This is yet another illustration of Liz Berney's excellent positions and leadership. Liz Berney, a Republican, ran against ultra leftist Gary Ackerman in the NY 5th Congressional District in 2008 and 2010. Ackerman is a strong supporter of the Obama agenda.
While MK Hotovely has some good positions on the issues, one thing she must overcome is her concern about the reaction of the International Community. This is something the vast majority of the 'leaders in Israel' worry about. It's foolish on their part. Leaders of other countries are going to criticize Israel regardless what it does. Hence, why not take a proactive aggressive approach! If Israel follows the blue print of the Creator of the Universe, everything will take care of itself.
At the beginning of the video, the person Liz Berney was referring to is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin 'Bibi' Netanyahu. Like 'Bibi', MK Tzipi Hotovely is a member of the Likud party.
Let's go to the videotape.
Liz - the first speaker - obviously gets it. Tzipi Hotovely, who responds to her, is one of our better MK's, and hopefully will get it real soon.
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
