Washington Times says American president guaranteed Netanyahu he'd uphold four-decade-old secret understanding, won't demand Israel sign NPT
Yitzhak Benhorin
YNET News
WASHINGTON – US President Barack Obama has decided not to press Israel to give international monitors access to its nuclear weapons, the Washington Times reported Saturday. Three officials told the Washington Times that during their meting in May Obama gave Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu guarantees that he will keep a four-decade-old secret understanding between the US and Israel over its nuclear program and won't pressure the Jewish state to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Israeli expert Avner Cohen told the American newspaper that under the agreement the US passively accepts Israel's nuclear weapons status as long as Israel does not unveil publicly its capability or test a weapon.
According to foreign publications, Israel's nuclear arsenal consists of hundreds of bombs.
Israel feared that Obama, who has made nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament one of his key initiatives, would not uphold the agreement, which was reached in 1969 between then-US President Richard Nixon and former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir.
The Washington Times report said Netanyahu asked Obama to reaffirm the agreement due to fears that during its negotiations with the six world powers over its uranium enrichment program Iran may demand the exposure of Israel's nuclear arsenal.
It is not clear whether Iran had in fact made such a demand during Thursday's talks between its chief nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili and US Under Secretary of State William Burns in Geneva.
Saturday, October 03, 2009
Obama Administration and Arab-Israeli Peace Process: Grinding to a Total and Humiliating Halt
RubinReports
Barry Rubin
The newly elected Fatah Central Committee—the one that was supposedly made up of young, reform-minded moderates but actually isn’t—has told Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas that he should absolutely not negotiate with Israel unless all building of apartments anywhere on the West Bank or in east Jerusalem comes to a complete halt. That’s not going to happen.
This means there won’t be direct negotiations, totally contradicting President Barack Obama’s absolutely clear and “firm” statement at the UN that talks much, should, and will begin immediately.
It should be remembered that this whole construction on settlements freeze idea was started by Obama himself, thus giving the Palestinians an excuse not to talk. Israel refused (Pie in Face #1). Later he backed down a bit, saying that Israel should get something in exchange for the settlement freeze, but then Arab states refused (Pie in Face #2). So he backed down again, while pretending that somebody had offered to do something.
But while Israel is eager to negotiate (not because it expects anything will be achieved), the Palestinians flatly refuse (Pie in Face #3) and keep escalating their refusal.
Israel offers a compromise in which it makes real material concessions; Palestinians remain completely intransigent but merely complain that Israel hasn't given even more. Is there a pattern here?
Obama tried to solve the problem by working out some partial freeze with Israel, an idea to which the Israeli government has responded positively. But the Palestinians simply reject such a compromise. They don’t want a medium-sized unilateral Israeli concession but will only accept a very large unilateral Israeli concession, and then only as a basis for demanding more unilateral Israeli concessions.
So what are Obama’s options at this point?
Option 1: Go back to having a confrontation with Israel demanding it freeze construction and get nothing in return. That’s not going to happen.
Option 2: Criticize the Palestinian stand and pressure it (after all, the United States is providing all of its money or helping to raise it among allied countries) to go to talks. That’s not going to happen.
Option 3: Pretend everything is going well, have officials run around as if something is getting done, develop some new photo opportunities, and hope no one notices. Yep, that’s the one.
Here's how Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat put it: "There will not be Palestinian-Israeli negotiations in Washington. There will be parallel American-Israeli negotiations and Palestinian-American negotiations." That sort of sets things back to the way they were around 1990.
After nine months in office and after having declared it would hit the ground running on Israel-Palestinian issues and get peace very fast, the Obama Administration has achieved nothing. In fact, it has set back the process and is getting less done than the supposedly criminally passive Bush Administration.
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan)
Barry Rubin
The newly elected Fatah Central Committee—the one that was supposedly made up of young, reform-minded moderates but actually isn’t—has told Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas that he should absolutely not negotiate with Israel unless all building of apartments anywhere on the West Bank or in east Jerusalem comes to a complete halt. That’s not going to happen.
This means there won’t be direct negotiations, totally contradicting President Barack Obama’s absolutely clear and “firm” statement at the UN that talks much, should, and will begin immediately.
It should be remembered that this whole construction on settlements freeze idea was started by Obama himself, thus giving the Palestinians an excuse not to talk. Israel refused (Pie in Face #1). Later he backed down a bit, saying that Israel should get something in exchange for the settlement freeze, but then Arab states refused (Pie in Face #2). So he backed down again, while pretending that somebody had offered to do something.
But while Israel is eager to negotiate (not because it expects anything will be achieved), the Palestinians flatly refuse (Pie in Face #3) and keep escalating their refusal.
Israel offers a compromise in which it makes real material concessions; Palestinians remain completely intransigent but merely complain that Israel hasn't given even more. Is there a pattern here?
Obama tried to solve the problem by working out some partial freeze with Israel, an idea to which the Israeli government has responded positively. But the Palestinians simply reject such a compromise. They don’t want a medium-sized unilateral Israeli concession but will only accept a very large unilateral Israeli concession, and then only as a basis for demanding more unilateral Israeli concessions.
So what are Obama’s options at this point?
Option 1: Go back to having a confrontation with Israel demanding it freeze construction and get nothing in return. That’s not going to happen.
Option 2: Criticize the Palestinian stand and pressure it (after all, the United States is providing all of its money or helping to raise it among allied countries) to go to talks. That’s not going to happen.
Option 3: Pretend everything is going well, have officials run around as if something is getting done, develop some new photo opportunities, and hope no one notices. Yep, that’s the one.
Here's how Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat put it: "There will not be Palestinian-Israeli negotiations in Washington. There will be parallel American-Israeli negotiations and Palestinian-American negotiations." That sort of sets things back to the way they were around 1990.
After nine months in office and after having declared it would hit the ground running on Israel-Palestinian issues and get peace very fast, the Obama Administration has achieved nothing. In fact, it has set back the process and is getting less done than the supposedly criminally passive Bush Administration.
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan)
Friday, October 02, 2009
Tel Aviv’s centennial is Zionism’s triumph
Adi Schwartz
“There are prettier ones”, wrote once the Israeli poet Nathan Alterman about the city of Tel Aviv, “but none share its beauty”. Just like a child that is loved and cherished by his parents simply because he is their own creation, even if another boy might be taller or somewhat faster, so was Tel Aviv held dear by the poet who emigrated from Poland in 1925, simply because it was his own city, where he was neither a stranger nor a second rate citizen. As its citizens now celebrate the 100th birthday, Tel Aviv still fulfils this same purpose of allowing the Jews a place of their own, a city where they can once and for all govern themselves and in which they can take pride. Indeed, Tel Aviv’s leafy boulevards and trendy bars are a reminder of how successful the Zionist movement is, and how well it achieved its main goal, which is a descent and honourable life for the Jews.
Consider this: after 2,000 years that Jews have not built a city, 66 families assembled on bare dunes just north of the mostly Arab port city of Jaffa. That was 1909, just 100 years ago, and the wandering Jew decided to build upon the wandering sands a permanent dwelling. By 1920 Tel Aviv had 2,000 inhabitants, by 1924 almost 20,000, and by 1925 - 40,000. Nowadays it’s a bustling hub with a population of more than a million in its metropolitan area.
As an act of defiance to 2,000 years of tradition, Tel Aviv’s founding fathers placed at the heart of their new community a secular educational institution instead of a synagogue. At the Herzliya Gymnasium, named after Theodor Herzl, students would learn for the first time in Hebrew, not in Yiddish or in any other European language.
This Promethean deed was only the first in a series that would position Tel Aviv at the heart of the modern and secular Zionist revolution. “The first Hebrew city”, as it is called, came to symbolize Zionism’s break with the past, and its rejection of any kind of ghetto-like circumscription. Indeed it was a choice - a choice to break with the Eastern European shtetl in favour of liberal and modern ideas.
Jerusalem is of course Israel’s capital. It is also the historic, religious and emotional centre of the Jewish world. But had it not been for Tel Aviv, Israel wouldn’t have been such a modern, liberal and western country. If Jerusalem stands for the past, with its solid rocks and tense emotions, Tel Aviv stands for the future, with its Mediterranean climate and optimistic easygoingness. Sir Patrick Geddes, the Scottish urban planner responsible for Tel Aviv’s master plan, said back in the 1920’s that it is a Jewish city that really lives, free of inhibitions felt so often in Jerusalem.
It is in Tel Aviv that finance and commerce take place. It is Tel Aviv that artists, musicians and actors flock to. It is in Tel Aviv where the four largest newspapers are located, and two of the largest universities, not to mention innumerous schools, galleries and art venues - all of which operate in Hebrew.
Not that it’s always an easy city. Patience, for example, is a commodity on demand: a shrewd observer once suggested defining the shortest unit of time as the splits of seconds it takes a driver in Tel Aviv to blow his horn when a red traffic light turns to green. And everyone has something to say - that’s why the main square of Tel Aviv turned quickly into a debating platform, where week after week rightists, leftists, pacifists, atheists and you name it, come to demonstrate, voice their opinions and share their aspirations.
It is by far the most plural and open city in Israel, not to mention the whole Middle East. In the late 19th century, when author Elhanan Levinsky wrote in his utopian novel that in the first Hebrew city “no one will ask you who you are, what your business is, and from where and to where you are going”, he couldn’t have envisaged that one day gay and lesbian Palestinians will find refuge in Tel Aviv. But they do, because they feel safer there than in their traditional and repressive environment.
Drive in its streets at 2am in the morning on a given Thursday night, and you’ll find yourself in traffic jams more often seen in London or New York during rush hours. You’ll see old people and young, dark-skinned and blonde, elegantly dressed and trashy.
Just a few days ago, while walking a Tel Aviv street at night-time, I have seen a typical view of this mixed and vibrant city: young people crowded the pavements, drinking cava. Above their heads were suspended posters of American President Barack Obama. Large garbage cans were leaning against the display window of a “Caucasian Coffeehouse” (whatever that means).
This chaos reverberates the words of the first city engineer, Yehuda Megidovitz, who used to say: “First you build, then you do the measurements”. But it is exactly this pandemonium that gives Tel Aviv its irresistible charm - the feeling that whoever you are, you’ll find your place there.
The whole point of the Zionist movement was to find a place for the Jewish people and to bring it back to life through a concrete geographical space. No other place does this better than the city of Tel Aviv, which might be called the capital of Zionism. Its 100th birthday should be seen as the clearest proof for Zionism’s triumph
http://www.adi-schwartz.com/tel-avivs-centnnial/
Adi Schwartz - Journalist, Author & Editor
“There are prettier ones”, wrote once the Israeli poet Nathan Alterman about the city of Tel Aviv, “but none share its beauty”. Just like a child that is loved and cherished by his parents simply because he is their own creation, even if another boy might be taller or somewhat faster, so was Tel Aviv held dear by the poet who emigrated from Poland in 1925, simply because it was his own city, where he was neither a stranger nor a second rate citizen. As its citizens now celebrate the 100th birthday, Tel Aviv still fulfils this same purpose of allowing the Jews a place of their own, a city where they can once and for all govern themselves and in which they can take pride. Indeed, Tel Aviv’s leafy boulevards and trendy bars are a reminder of how successful the Zionist movement is, and how well it achieved its main goal, which is a descent and honourable life for the Jews.
Consider this: after 2,000 years that Jews have not built a city, 66 families assembled on bare dunes just north of the mostly Arab port city of Jaffa. That was 1909, just 100 years ago, and the wandering Jew decided to build upon the wandering sands a permanent dwelling. By 1920 Tel Aviv had 2,000 inhabitants, by 1924 almost 20,000, and by 1925 - 40,000. Nowadays it’s a bustling hub with a population of more than a million in its metropolitan area.
As an act of defiance to 2,000 years of tradition, Tel Aviv’s founding fathers placed at the heart of their new community a secular educational institution instead of a synagogue. At the Herzliya Gymnasium, named after Theodor Herzl, students would learn for the first time in Hebrew, not in Yiddish or in any other European language.
This Promethean deed was only the first in a series that would position Tel Aviv at the heart of the modern and secular Zionist revolution. “The first Hebrew city”, as it is called, came to symbolize Zionism’s break with the past, and its rejection of any kind of ghetto-like circumscription. Indeed it was a choice - a choice to break with the Eastern European shtetl in favour of liberal and modern ideas.
Jerusalem is of course Israel’s capital. It is also the historic, religious and emotional centre of the Jewish world. But had it not been for Tel Aviv, Israel wouldn’t have been such a modern, liberal and western country. If Jerusalem stands for the past, with its solid rocks and tense emotions, Tel Aviv stands for the future, with its Mediterranean climate and optimistic easygoingness. Sir Patrick Geddes, the Scottish urban planner responsible for Tel Aviv’s master plan, said back in the 1920’s that it is a Jewish city that really lives, free of inhibitions felt so often in Jerusalem.
It is in Tel Aviv that finance and commerce take place. It is Tel Aviv that artists, musicians and actors flock to. It is in Tel Aviv where the four largest newspapers are located, and two of the largest universities, not to mention innumerous schools, galleries and art venues - all of which operate in Hebrew.
Not that it’s always an easy city. Patience, for example, is a commodity on demand: a shrewd observer once suggested defining the shortest unit of time as the splits of seconds it takes a driver in Tel Aviv to blow his horn when a red traffic light turns to green. And everyone has something to say - that’s why the main square of Tel Aviv turned quickly into a debating platform, where week after week rightists, leftists, pacifists, atheists and you name it, come to demonstrate, voice their opinions and share their aspirations.
It is by far the most plural and open city in Israel, not to mention the whole Middle East. In the late 19th century, when author Elhanan Levinsky wrote in his utopian novel that in the first Hebrew city “no one will ask you who you are, what your business is, and from where and to where you are going”, he couldn’t have envisaged that one day gay and lesbian Palestinians will find refuge in Tel Aviv. But they do, because they feel safer there than in their traditional and repressive environment.
Drive in its streets at 2am in the morning on a given Thursday night, and you’ll find yourself in traffic jams more often seen in London or New York during rush hours. You’ll see old people and young, dark-skinned and blonde, elegantly dressed and trashy.
Just a few days ago, while walking a Tel Aviv street at night-time, I have seen a typical view of this mixed and vibrant city: young people crowded the pavements, drinking cava. Above their heads were suspended posters of American President Barack Obama. Large garbage cans were leaning against the display window of a “Caucasian Coffeehouse” (whatever that means).
This chaos reverberates the words of the first city engineer, Yehuda Megidovitz, who used to say: “First you build, then you do the measurements”. But it is exactly this pandemonium that gives Tel Aviv its irresistible charm - the feeling that whoever you are, you’ll find your place there.
The whole point of the Zionist movement was to find a place for the Jewish people and to bring it back to life through a concrete geographical space. No other place does this better than the city of Tel Aviv, which might be called the capital of Zionism. Its 100th birthday should be seen as the clearest proof for Zionism’s triumph
http://www.adi-schwartz.com/tel-avivs-centnnial/
Adi Schwartz - Journalist, Author & Editor
Thursday, October 01, 2009
"Season of Our Joy"
Arlene Kushner
This (z'man simchatenu) is what Sukkot is called. It begins tomorrow night. A blessing to be here: all over, sukkahs are being erected and decorated. We are commanded to live in them for the week -- eating and, properly, sleeping in them. Even restaurants put up sukkahs, mostly on the sidewalk out front, so religious people can patronize them for the Sukkot week.
As I have indicated, it is unlikely that I will be posting during this coming week. Priorities: eating and sleeping in the sukkah with my children and grandchildren, and doing tiyulim (in this instance, day trips so very popular during hol hamoed, the intermediary days of the holiday.).
The world is a heavy place. Often a cruel and awful place. It is our job to actively defeat the evil and the cruelty. But there must also be a time for celebration, and for gratitude to the Almighty for His protection and for the blessings that are bestowed upon us. To all I wish a meaningful and joyful Sukkot.
~~~~~~~~~~
Let me return to the subject of the Goldstone Report. I speak, above, of defeating cruelty and evil. Here is an opportunity to be of real service to Israel at a time when we are beleaguered.
I have been advised that it is important to contact members of Congress to combat advancement of this report. Please, go back to what I wrote yesterday, regarding the outrageous bias of this report, and advice on what to say in communication with officials. (Or see my posting at http://www.arlenefromisrael.info/ -- it will be second on the home page, after this posting goes up.)
Additionally, here, I offer this, which was put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs:
"When Colonel Richard Kemp, Commander of British forces in Afghanistan was asked about Israel's conduct in Gaza, he replied: 'I don't think there has ever been a time in the history of warfare when any army has made more efforts to reduce civilian casualties and deaths of innocent people than the IDF in Gaza.'"
As you contemplate this -- the fact that Israel is not just innocent of the obscene charges being made against her, but has been extraordinary, absolutely exemplary, in her conduct with regard to innocents -- let it fire your determination to act against this extreme and willful travesty of justice.
~~~~~~~~~~
To locate your Congresspersons:
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml
To locate your Senators:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
~~~~~~~~~~
The more publicity there is on this subject, the more Obama is likely to feel he must block the resolution. So, please! make noise. Call in to talk shows, write letters to the editor, submit op-eds to your local papers. (Letters and op-eds must be concise, unemotional and factual.) Let the truth ring out loudly.
Finally, please share this with everyone you can -- both so that others can take these actions, and simply so that people can know the truth. If you are in Israel, send this to all your friends and relatives in the States. Put this up on blogs and lists.
The Western nations represent a minority in the Human Rights Council. In spite of Netanyahu's efforts in meeting with ambassadors from nations in the Asia/Pacific region, this report is expected to not only be accepted, but to be sent on to the UN. That is where it must be blocked.
~~~~~~~~~~
Let me share here a column by Daniel Pipes, Director of the Middle East Forum, "Netanyahu's quiet success."
It echoes a theme I have been writing about:
"Almost unnoticed, Binyamin Netanyahu won a major victory last week when Barack Obama backed down on a signature policy initiative. This about-face suggests that US-Israel relations are no longer headed for the disaster I have been fearing...
"...On June 4, Obama weighed in: 'The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.... It is time for these settlements to stop.' A day later, he reiterated that 'settlements are an impediment to peace.' On June 17, Clinton repeated: 'We want to see a stop to the settlements.
"And so on, in a relentless beat.
"Focusing on settlements had the inadvertent but predictable effect of instantly impeding diplomatic progress...
"...The geniuses of the Obama administration eventually discerned that this double hardening of positions [by Israel and the PA] was dooming their naïve, hubristic plan to settle the Arab-Israeli conflict within two years.
"Obama's reconciliation with reality became public on Sept. 22, at a 'summit' he sponsored with Abbas and Netanyahu...
"Obama threw in the towel there, boasting that 'we have made progress' toward settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and offering as one indication that Israelis 'have discussed important steps to restrain settlement activity.' Those eight words of muted praise for Netanyahu's minimal concessions have major implications:
# Settlements no longer dominate US-Israel relations but have reverted back to their usual irritating but secondary role.
# Abbas, who keeps insisting on a settlement freeze as though nothing has happened, suddenly finds himself the odd man out in the triangle.
# The center-left faction of the Obama administration (which argues for working with Jerusalem)...has defeated the far-left faction (which wants to squeeze the Jewish state).
"...Hats off to Bibi - may he have further successes in nudging US policy to the right track."
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1254163544506&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
~~~~~~~~~~
I have vast respect for Daniel Pipes, and concur with him that Netanyahu has conducted himself in a manner that has enhanced Israel's position diplomatically, while taking Obama down a peg and making a fool of Abbas.
But I am not sanguine about the situation that faces us with regard to working with the Obama administration. Netanyahu has achieved his diplomatic gains by walking the slippery slope of offering some cooperation, while holding the line on several major issues. Diligence must be the watchword now: Netanyahu must not feel reassured that Obama has mellowed, so that he believes he can now let down his guard. He must not offer more than it is in Israel's best interest to offer. And he must stand strong not only for Israeli security, but for Israeli rights.
It occurs to me that working with the "center-left" faction of the US administration that promotes working with Jerusalem may be more dangerous than working with the "far left" faction that does not.
When working with those who are adamant in their hostility to Israel, it is clear what our positions must be. But when working with those who are predisposed to us in a "lukewarm" manner, ambivalence starts to creep in with regard to correct positions. Do we want to cross or embarrass those who promote working with us or do we want to motivate them to even further cooperation? Do we want to risk giving the upper hand once more to those hostile to us? These are dangerous -- inadvertently, I would suggest, almost subversive -- questions that may lead to an entrapment.
For it must be remembered that even those in the Obama administration prepared to "work with" us have in their sites goals for a Palestinian state that are not consistent with our rights and our needs.
Indeed, diligence, on the part of all of us, from the prime minister and members of his coalition, to the average Israeli citizen. The right flank of Netanyahu's coalition, and very much including his own party, will hopefully play a watchdog role here.
~~~~~~~~~~
I must mention Iran here. As Iran's nuclear capability comes closer to reality and the time for acting draws to a close, the media is filled with commentary on what is happening,
"Dialogue" with Iran is now beginning and the US, incredibly, is taking it seriously. "Towards the end of the year, we'll be able to calculate how much progress" has been made in talks, intoned a State Department spokesman.
But, in truth, these talks can be seen only as a farce. Ahmaninejad, who is supposed to agree to IAEA inspections, is bragging that he'll buy enriched uranium elsewhere.
And so there is serious consideration being given (with China and Russia still intransigent) to stiffer sanctions when talks fails. The sanctions that will be put in place are likely to be of a financial nature, strangling Iran's capacity to function, rather than involving a blockage of imports such as refined petroleum. Insurance companies and banks would be high level goals. According to the Washington Post, the "Obama administration is laying plans to cut Iran's economic links to the rest of the world."
Playing into what is happening right now is the public announcement of Iran's second, clandestine uranium enrichment plant. (Note: Western Intelligence knew about this for some time.) It makes more clear to certain governments (who were slow to see what was staring them in the face) what the duplicitous intentions of Iran really are, and has stiffened many backs with regard to those sanctions.
One of the questions being raised is whether, with the prospect of more serious sanctions, Israel will hit Iran militarily. That hit would have to come within six months, I believe.
~~~~~~~~~~
"Good News Corner"
I began with a sense of joy and will end with a happy feeling, sharing news of innovative medical advances in Israel and other good things:
[] It is well known that antioxidants protect and work against cancers. An Israeli doctor, relying upon an ancient herbal remedy text written in Arabic, has discovered (or rediscovered) a plant that may turn out to be a powerful weapon against cancer.
Dr. Fuad Fares -- working in the Carmel Medical Center in Haifa -- has developed an antioxidant drawn from a non-edible plant that grows in Israel. In early lab tests -- on mice and in vitro cancer cells -- this compound is showing enormous promise ("a dramatic effect"). Ultimately, following more tests, it is hoped that the anti-oxidant can be purified into a new compound that would be ingested much as a vitamin pill is.
At this point the doctor will not reveal the identity of the plant. Nor is he saying if the Arabic text he is referring to is a text by Maimonides, the great 12th century Jewish scholar and philosopher, who was a physician and wrote in Arabic.
_____
[] Neurim Pharmaceuticals has developed an answer to insomnia that is far superior to standard sleeping pills, which have side effects. The product, Circadin -- developed by Neurim's founder, Professor Nava Zisapel of Tel Aviv University -- works with the body's natural processes.
Melatonin, which is released in the body at the onset of darkness, prepares the body for sleep by lowering blood pressure and body temperature. But factors such as artificial lighting, anxiety and aging can interfere with this process.
Explains Zisapel, "Circadin produces melatonin in the same way as the pineal gland: It starts slowly at around 10:00 PM, gets to a peak at around 2:00 AM, and gradually stops by the morning. It releases melatonin in a gradual manner."
Circadin is being distributed now in Israel and some European countries, and is awaiting US FDA approval. It is expected to be most helpful to people over 55.
_____
A native American tribe, the Coushatta of Louisiana, has reached out to establish a relationship with Israel.
"It is natural that we feel a connection to you and your people," says Kevin Sickey, a chairman of the Coushatta Tribal Council. "You stand for the same fundamental principles and values upon which the sovereign nation of Coushatta was [founded]: freedom and opportunity, justice and deep respect for your history and culture."
Additionally, tribe members felt that they and Israelis both have ancient languages, spoken by a minority; both struggled for sovereignty against suppressive forces; and both have a deep respect for their ancestors.
Some months ago, in a colorful ceremony highlighted by a traditional “stomp” dance, the tribe signed an unprecedented “affirmation of friendship” (an unofficial document) with the State of Israel. Asher Yarden, Israel’s Consul General in Houston and members of his staff were present.
This (z'man simchatenu) is what Sukkot is called. It begins tomorrow night. A blessing to be here: all over, sukkahs are being erected and decorated. We are commanded to live in them for the week -- eating and, properly, sleeping in them. Even restaurants put up sukkahs, mostly on the sidewalk out front, so religious people can patronize them for the Sukkot week.
As I have indicated, it is unlikely that I will be posting during this coming week. Priorities: eating and sleeping in the sukkah with my children and grandchildren, and doing tiyulim (in this instance, day trips so very popular during hol hamoed, the intermediary days of the holiday.).
The world is a heavy place. Often a cruel and awful place. It is our job to actively defeat the evil and the cruelty. But there must also be a time for celebration, and for gratitude to the Almighty for His protection and for the blessings that are bestowed upon us. To all I wish a meaningful and joyful Sukkot.
~~~~~~~~~~
Let me return to the subject of the Goldstone Report. I speak, above, of defeating cruelty and evil. Here is an opportunity to be of real service to Israel at a time when we are beleaguered.
I have been advised that it is important to contact members of Congress to combat advancement of this report. Please, go back to what I wrote yesterday, regarding the outrageous bias of this report, and advice on what to say in communication with officials. (Or see my posting at http://www.arlenefromisrael.info/ -- it will be second on the home page, after this posting goes up.)
Additionally, here, I offer this, which was put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs:
"When Colonel Richard Kemp, Commander of British forces in Afghanistan was asked about Israel's conduct in Gaza, he replied: 'I don't think there has ever been a time in the history of warfare when any army has made more efforts to reduce civilian casualties and deaths of innocent people than the IDF in Gaza.'"
As you contemplate this -- the fact that Israel is not just innocent of the obscene charges being made against her, but has been extraordinary, absolutely exemplary, in her conduct with regard to innocents -- let it fire your determination to act against this extreme and willful travesty of justice.
~~~~~~~~~~
To locate your Congresspersons:
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml
To locate your Senators:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
~~~~~~~~~~
The more publicity there is on this subject, the more Obama is likely to feel he must block the resolution. So, please! make noise. Call in to talk shows, write letters to the editor, submit op-eds to your local papers. (Letters and op-eds must be concise, unemotional and factual.) Let the truth ring out loudly.
Finally, please share this with everyone you can -- both so that others can take these actions, and simply so that people can know the truth. If you are in Israel, send this to all your friends and relatives in the States. Put this up on blogs and lists.
The Western nations represent a minority in the Human Rights Council. In spite of Netanyahu's efforts in meeting with ambassadors from nations in the Asia/Pacific region, this report is expected to not only be accepted, but to be sent on to the UN. That is where it must be blocked.
~~~~~~~~~~
Let me share here a column by Daniel Pipes, Director of the Middle East Forum, "Netanyahu's quiet success."
It echoes a theme I have been writing about:
"Almost unnoticed, Binyamin Netanyahu won a major victory last week when Barack Obama backed down on a signature policy initiative. This about-face suggests that US-Israel relations are no longer headed for the disaster I have been fearing...
"...On June 4, Obama weighed in: 'The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.... It is time for these settlements to stop.' A day later, he reiterated that 'settlements are an impediment to peace.' On June 17, Clinton repeated: 'We want to see a stop to the settlements.
"And so on, in a relentless beat.
"Focusing on settlements had the inadvertent but predictable effect of instantly impeding diplomatic progress...
"...The geniuses of the Obama administration eventually discerned that this double hardening of positions [by Israel and the PA] was dooming their naïve, hubristic plan to settle the Arab-Israeli conflict within two years.
"Obama's reconciliation with reality became public on Sept. 22, at a 'summit' he sponsored with Abbas and Netanyahu...
"Obama threw in the towel there, boasting that 'we have made progress' toward settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and offering as one indication that Israelis 'have discussed important steps to restrain settlement activity.' Those eight words of muted praise for Netanyahu's minimal concessions have major implications:
# Settlements no longer dominate US-Israel relations but have reverted back to their usual irritating but secondary role.
# Abbas, who keeps insisting on a settlement freeze as though nothing has happened, suddenly finds himself the odd man out in the triangle.
# The center-left faction of the Obama administration (which argues for working with Jerusalem)...has defeated the far-left faction (which wants to squeeze the Jewish state).
"...Hats off to Bibi - may he have further successes in nudging US policy to the right track."
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1254163544506&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
~~~~~~~~~~
I have vast respect for Daniel Pipes, and concur with him that Netanyahu has conducted himself in a manner that has enhanced Israel's position diplomatically, while taking Obama down a peg and making a fool of Abbas.
But I am not sanguine about the situation that faces us with regard to working with the Obama administration. Netanyahu has achieved his diplomatic gains by walking the slippery slope of offering some cooperation, while holding the line on several major issues. Diligence must be the watchword now: Netanyahu must not feel reassured that Obama has mellowed, so that he believes he can now let down his guard. He must not offer more than it is in Israel's best interest to offer. And he must stand strong not only for Israeli security, but for Israeli rights.
It occurs to me that working with the "center-left" faction of the US administration that promotes working with Jerusalem may be more dangerous than working with the "far left" faction that does not.
When working with those who are adamant in their hostility to Israel, it is clear what our positions must be. But when working with those who are predisposed to us in a "lukewarm" manner, ambivalence starts to creep in with regard to correct positions. Do we want to cross or embarrass those who promote working with us or do we want to motivate them to even further cooperation? Do we want to risk giving the upper hand once more to those hostile to us? These are dangerous -- inadvertently, I would suggest, almost subversive -- questions that may lead to an entrapment.
For it must be remembered that even those in the Obama administration prepared to "work with" us have in their sites goals for a Palestinian state that are not consistent with our rights and our needs.
Indeed, diligence, on the part of all of us, from the prime minister and members of his coalition, to the average Israeli citizen. The right flank of Netanyahu's coalition, and very much including his own party, will hopefully play a watchdog role here.
~~~~~~~~~~
I must mention Iran here. As Iran's nuclear capability comes closer to reality and the time for acting draws to a close, the media is filled with commentary on what is happening,
"Dialogue" with Iran is now beginning and the US, incredibly, is taking it seriously. "Towards the end of the year, we'll be able to calculate how much progress" has been made in talks, intoned a State Department spokesman.
But, in truth, these talks can be seen only as a farce. Ahmaninejad, who is supposed to agree to IAEA inspections, is bragging that he'll buy enriched uranium elsewhere.
And so there is serious consideration being given (with China and Russia still intransigent) to stiffer sanctions when talks fails. The sanctions that will be put in place are likely to be of a financial nature, strangling Iran's capacity to function, rather than involving a blockage of imports such as refined petroleum. Insurance companies and banks would be high level goals. According to the Washington Post, the "Obama administration is laying plans to cut Iran's economic links to the rest of the world."
Playing into what is happening right now is the public announcement of Iran's second, clandestine uranium enrichment plant. (Note: Western Intelligence knew about this for some time.) It makes more clear to certain governments (who were slow to see what was staring them in the face) what the duplicitous intentions of Iran really are, and has stiffened many backs with regard to those sanctions.
One of the questions being raised is whether, with the prospect of more serious sanctions, Israel will hit Iran militarily. That hit would have to come within six months, I believe.
~~~~~~~~~~
"Good News Corner"
I began with a sense of joy and will end with a happy feeling, sharing news of innovative medical advances in Israel and other good things:
[] It is well known that antioxidants protect and work against cancers. An Israeli doctor, relying upon an ancient herbal remedy text written in Arabic, has discovered (or rediscovered) a plant that may turn out to be a powerful weapon against cancer.
Dr. Fuad Fares -- working in the Carmel Medical Center in Haifa -- has developed an antioxidant drawn from a non-edible plant that grows in Israel. In early lab tests -- on mice and in vitro cancer cells -- this compound is showing enormous promise ("a dramatic effect"). Ultimately, following more tests, it is hoped that the anti-oxidant can be purified into a new compound that would be ingested much as a vitamin pill is.
At this point the doctor will not reveal the identity of the plant. Nor is he saying if the Arabic text he is referring to is a text by Maimonides, the great 12th century Jewish scholar and philosopher, who was a physician and wrote in Arabic.
_____
[] Neurim Pharmaceuticals has developed an answer to insomnia that is far superior to standard sleeping pills, which have side effects. The product, Circadin -- developed by Neurim's founder, Professor Nava Zisapel of Tel Aviv University -- works with the body's natural processes.
Melatonin, which is released in the body at the onset of darkness, prepares the body for sleep by lowering blood pressure and body temperature. But factors such as artificial lighting, anxiety and aging can interfere with this process.
Explains Zisapel, "Circadin produces melatonin in the same way as the pineal gland: It starts slowly at around 10:00 PM, gets to a peak at around 2:00 AM, and gradually stops by the morning. It releases melatonin in a gradual manner."
Circadin is being distributed now in Israel and some European countries, and is awaiting US FDA approval. It is expected to be most helpful to people over 55.
_____
A native American tribe, the Coushatta of Louisiana, has reached out to establish a relationship with Israel.
"It is natural that we feel a connection to you and your people," says Kevin Sickey, a chairman of the Coushatta Tribal Council. "You stand for the same fundamental principles and values upon which the sovereign nation of Coushatta was [founded]: freedom and opportunity, justice and deep respect for your history and culture."
Additionally, tribe members felt that they and Israelis both have ancient languages, spoken by a minority; both struggled for sovereignty against suppressive forces; and both have a deep respect for their ancestors.
Some months ago, in a colorful ceremony highlighted by a traditional “stomp” dance, the tribe signed an unprecedented “affirmation of friendship” (an unofficial document) with the State of Israel. Asher Yarden, Israel’s Consul General in Houston and members of his staff were present.
2009 Annual Survey of American Jewish Opinion
Ted Belman
The data reported here are from the 2009 Annual Survey of American Jewish Opinion, sponsored by the American Jewish Committee. Among the topics covered in the present survey are U.S.-Israel relations, the Arab-Israel conflict, and the Iran nuclear threat. Many of the questions appearing in the survey are new; others are drawn from previous American Jewish Committee surveys, including various Annual Surveys of American Jewish Opinion carried out between 1979 and 2008.
How does one reconcile these two responses.How does one reconcile these two responses.
Do you approve or disapprove of the Obama Administration’s handling of US-Israel relations?,
54% approved
32 disapproving.
Do you agree or disagree with the Obama Administration’s call for a stop to all new Israeli settlement construction?
51% disapprove to
41% approved
In fact there are many responses which make you wonder how Obama can still have a 54% approval rating. Mind you, 78% voted for him.
6. In the current situation, do you favor or oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state?
Favor 49
Oppose 41
7. In the framework of a permanent peace with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to compromise on the status of Jerusalem as a united city under Israeli jurisdiction?
Yes 37
No 58
8. As part of a permanent settlement with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to dismantle all, some, or none of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank?
all 8
some 52
none 37
9. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? “The goal of the Arabs is not the return of occupied territories but rather the destruction of Israel.”
Agree 75
Disagree 19
10. Do you think there will or will not come a time when Israel and its Arab neighbors will be able to settle their differences and live in peace?
Will 43
Will not 51
11. Do you think that Israel can or cannot achieve peace with a Hamas-led Palestinian government?
Can 17
Cannot 79
12. Should the Palestinians be required or not be required to recognize Israel as a Jewish state in a final peace agreement?
Required 94
How does one reconcile these two responses.
Do you approve or disapprove of the Obama Administration’s handling of US-Israel relations?,
54% approved
32 disapproving.
Do you agree or disagree with the Obama Administration’s call for a stop to all new Israeli settlement construction?
51% disapprove to
41% approved
In fact there are many responses which make you wonder how Obama can still have a 54% approval rating. Mind you, 78% voted for him.
6. In the current situation, do you favor or oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state?
Favor 49
Oppose 41
7. In the framework of a permanent peace with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to compromise on the status of Jerusalem as a united city under Israeli jurisdiction?
Yes 37
No 58
8. As part of a permanent settlement with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to dismantle all, some, or none of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank?
all 8
some 52
none 37
9. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? “The goal of the Arabs is not the return of occupied territories but rather the destruction of Israel.”
Agree 75
Disagree 19
10. Do you think there will or will not come a time when Israel and its Arab neighbors will be able to settle their differences and live in peace?
Will 43
Will not 51
11. Do you think that Israel can or cannot achieve peace with a Hamas-led Palestinian government?
Can 17
Cannot 79
12. Should the Palestinians be required or not be required to recognize Israel as a Jewish state in a final peace agreement?
Required 94
How does one reconcile these two responses.
Do you approve or disapprove of the Obama Administration’s handling of US-Israel relations?,
54% approved
32 disapproving.
Do you agree or disagree with the Obama Administration’s call for a stop to all new Israeli settlement construction?
51% disapprove to
41% approved
In fact there are many responses which make you wonder how Obama can still have a 54% approval rating. Mind you, 78% voted for him.
6. In the current situation, do you favor or oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state?
Favor 49
Oppose 41
7. In the framework of a permanent peace with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to compromise on the status of Jerusalem as a united city under Israeli jurisdiction?
Yes 37
No 58
8. As part of a permanent settlement with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to dismantle all, some, or none of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank?
all 8
some 52
none 37
9. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? “The goal of the Arabs is not the return of occupied territories but rather the destruction of Israel.”
Agree 75
Disagree 19
10. Do you think there will or will not come a time when Israel and its Arab neighbors will be able to settle their differences and live in peace?
Will 43
Will not 51
11. Do you think that Israel can or cannot achieve peace with a Hamas-led Palestinian government?
Can 17
Cannot 79
12. Should the Palestinians be required or not be required to recognize Israel as a Jewish state in a final peace agreement?
Required 94 How does one reconcile these two responses.
Do you approve or disapprove of the Obama Administration’s handling of US-Israel relations?,
54% approved
32 disapproving.
Do you agree or disagree with the Obama Administration’s call for a stop to all new Israeli settlement construction?
51% disapprove to
41% approved
In fact there are many responses which make you wonder how Obama can still have a 54% approval rating. Mind you, 78% voted for him.
6. In the current situation, do you favor or oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state?
Favor 49
Oppose 41
7. In the framework of a permanent peace with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to compromise on the status of Jerusalem as a united city under Israeli jurisdiction?
Yes 37
No 58
8. As part of a permanent settlement with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to dismantle all, some, or none of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank?
all 8
some 52
none 37
9. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? “The goal of the Arabs is not the return of occupied territories but rather the destruction of Israel.”
Agree 75
Disagree 19
10. Do you think there will or will not come a time when Israel and its Arab neighbors will be able to settle their differences and live in peace?
Will 43
Will not 51
11. Do you think that Israel can or cannot achieve peace with a Hamas-led Palestinian government?
Can 17
Cannot 79
12. Should the Palestinians be required or not be required to recognize Israel as a Jewish state in a final peace agreement?
Required 94
How does one reconcile these two responses.
Do you approve or disapprove of the Obama Administration’s handling of US-Israel relations?,
54% approved
32 disapproving.
Do you agree or disagree with the Obama Administration’s call for a stop to all new Israeli settlement construction?
51% disapprove to
41% approved
In fact there are many responses which make you wonder how Obama can still have a 54% approval rating. Mind you, 78% voted for him.
6. In the current situation, do you favor or oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state?
Favor 49
Oppose 41
7. In the framework of a permanent peace with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to compromise on the status of Jerusalem as a united city under Israeli jurisdiction?
Yes 37
No 58
8. As part of a permanent settlement with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to dismantle all, some, or none of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank?
all 8
some 52
none 37
9. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? “The goal of the Arabs is not the return of occupied territories but rather the destruction of Israel.”
Agree 75
Disagree 19
10. Do you think there will or will not come a time when Israel and its Arab neighbors will be able to settle their differences and live in peace?
Will 43
Will not 51
11. Do you think that Israel can or cannot achieve peace with a Hamas-led Palestinian government?
Can 17
Cannot 79
12. Should the Palestinians be required or not be required to recognize Israel as a Jewish state in a final peace agreement?
Required 94 Not required 5
The data reported here are from the 2009 Annual Survey of American Jewish Opinion, sponsored by the American Jewish Committee. Among the topics covered in the present survey are U.S.-Israel relations, the Arab-Israel conflict, and the Iran nuclear threat. Many of the questions appearing in the survey are new; others are drawn from previous American Jewish Committee surveys, including various Annual Surveys of American Jewish Opinion carried out between 1979 and 2008.
How does one reconcile these two responses.How does one reconcile these two responses.
Do you approve or disapprove of the Obama Administration’s handling of US-Israel relations?,
54% approved
32 disapproving.
Do you agree or disagree with the Obama Administration’s call for a stop to all new Israeli settlement construction?
51% disapprove to
41% approved
In fact there are many responses which make you wonder how Obama can still have a 54% approval rating. Mind you, 78% voted for him.
6. In the current situation, do you favor or oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state?
Favor 49
Oppose 41
7. In the framework of a permanent peace with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to compromise on the status of Jerusalem as a united city under Israeli jurisdiction?
Yes 37
No 58
8. As part of a permanent settlement with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to dismantle all, some, or none of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank?
all 8
some 52
none 37
9. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? “The goal of the Arabs is not the return of occupied territories but rather the destruction of Israel.”
Agree 75
Disagree 19
10. Do you think there will or will not come a time when Israel and its Arab neighbors will be able to settle their differences and live in peace?
Will 43
Will not 51
11. Do you think that Israel can or cannot achieve peace with a Hamas-led Palestinian government?
Can 17
Cannot 79
12. Should the Palestinians be required or not be required to recognize Israel as a Jewish state in a final peace agreement?
Required 94
How does one reconcile these two responses.
Do you approve or disapprove of the Obama Administration’s handling of US-Israel relations?,
54% approved
32 disapproving.
Do you agree or disagree with the Obama Administration’s call for a stop to all new Israeli settlement construction?
51% disapprove to
41% approved
In fact there are many responses which make you wonder how Obama can still have a 54% approval rating. Mind you, 78% voted for him.
6. In the current situation, do you favor or oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state?
Favor 49
Oppose 41
7. In the framework of a permanent peace with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to compromise on the status of Jerusalem as a united city under Israeli jurisdiction?
Yes 37
No 58
8. As part of a permanent settlement with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to dismantle all, some, or none of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank?
all 8
some 52
none 37
9. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? “The goal of the Arabs is not the return of occupied territories but rather the destruction of Israel.”
Agree 75
Disagree 19
10. Do you think there will or will not come a time when Israel and its Arab neighbors will be able to settle their differences and live in peace?
Will 43
Will not 51
11. Do you think that Israel can or cannot achieve peace with a Hamas-led Palestinian government?
Can 17
Cannot 79
12. Should the Palestinians be required or not be required to recognize Israel as a Jewish state in a final peace agreement?
Required 94
How does one reconcile these two responses.
Do you approve or disapprove of the Obama Administration’s handling of US-Israel relations?,
54% approved
32 disapproving.
Do you agree or disagree with the Obama Administration’s call for a stop to all new Israeli settlement construction?
51% disapprove to
41% approved
In fact there are many responses which make you wonder how Obama can still have a 54% approval rating. Mind you, 78% voted for him.
6. In the current situation, do you favor or oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state?
Favor 49
Oppose 41
7. In the framework of a permanent peace with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to compromise on the status of Jerusalem as a united city under Israeli jurisdiction?
Yes 37
No 58
8. As part of a permanent settlement with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to dismantle all, some, or none of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank?
all 8
some 52
none 37
9. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? “The goal of the Arabs is not the return of occupied territories but rather the destruction of Israel.”
Agree 75
Disagree 19
10. Do you think there will or will not come a time when Israel and its Arab neighbors will be able to settle their differences and live in peace?
Will 43
Will not 51
11. Do you think that Israel can or cannot achieve peace with a Hamas-led Palestinian government?
Can 17
Cannot 79
12. Should the Palestinians be required or not be required to recognize Israel as a Jewish state in a final peace agreement?
Required 94 How does one reconcile these two responses.
Do you approve or disapprove of the Obama Administration’s handling of US-Israel relations?,
54% approved
32 disapproving.
Do you agree or disagree with the Obama Administration’s call for a stop to all new Israeli settlement construction?
51% disapprove to
41% approved
In fact there are many responses which make you wonder how Obama can still have a 54% approval rating. Mind you, 78% voted for him.
6. In the current situation, do you favor or oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state?
Favor 49
Oppose 41
7. In the framework of a permanent peace with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to compromise on the status of Jerusalem as a united city under Israeli jurisdiction?
Yes 37
No 58
8. As part of a permanent settlement with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to dismantle all, some, or none of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank?
all 8
some 52
none 37
9. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? “The goal of the Arabs is not the return of occupied territories but rather the destruction of Israel.”
Agree 75
Disagree 19
10. Do you think there will or will not come a time when Israel and its Arab neighbors will be able to settle their differences and live in peace?
Will 43
Will not 51
11. Do you think that Israel can or cannot achieve peace with a Hamas-led Palestinian government?
Can 17
Cannot 79
12. Should the Palestinians be required or not be required to recognize Israel as a Jewish state in a final peace agreement?
Required 94
How does one reconcile these two responses.
Do you approve or disapprove of the Obama Administration’s handling of US-Israel relations?,
54% approved
32 disapproving.
Do you agree or disagree with the Obama Administration’s call for a stop to all new Israeli settlement construction?
51% disapprove to
41% approved
In fact there are many responses which make you wonder how Obama can still have a 54% approval rating. Mind you, 78% voted for him.
6. In the current situation, do you favor or oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state?
Favor 49
Oppose 41
7. In the framework of a permanent peace with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to compromise on the status of Jerusalem as a united city under Israeli jurisdiction?
Yes 37
No 58
8. As part of a permanent settlement with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to dismantle all, some, or none of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank?
all 8
some 52
none 37
9. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? “The goal of the Arabs is not the return of occupied territories but rather the destruction of Israel.”
Agree 75
Disagree 19
10. Do you think there will or will not come a time when Israel and its Arab neighbors will be able to settle their differences and live in peace?
Will 43
Will not 51
11. Do you think that Israel can or cannot achieve peace with a Hamas-led Palestinian government?
Can 17
Cannot 79
12. Should the Palestinians be required or not be required to recognize Israel as a Jewish state in a final peace agreement?
Required 94 Not required 5
A Video for a Video, a Soldier for a Prisoner'
Hillel Fendel '
A7 News
Criticism of the decision to exchange 20 female terrorists – most of whom tried to murder – for a videotape of Gilad Shalit has been widely heard. The 20 will be released from prison on Friday, in accordance with a decision of the Political-Security Cabinet of the Government of Israel today (Wednesday). Israel’s negotiating team on behalf of kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit reached an agreement to this effect with the Government of Egypt and with the Hamas terror organization.
In exchange, Israel is to receive a “sign of life” from Shalit, in the form of a video taped in recent weeks.The video is one minute long, and Gilad is seen speaking about himself, according to a Gaza terrorist spokesman. The spokesman did not explain how the date of the video would be verified.
The Legal Forum for the Land of Israel responded negatively to the news of the intended release of terrorists: “Exchanging 20 terrorists for a videotape shows a government with no strategic vision. The 20 potential murderesses will celebrate this weekend, and thus encourage further murders and kidnappings.”
The government announced that the list of prisoners to be freed has been examined by legal authorities and by the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency), which have found them “suitable for release in terms of their danger to the public and the charges against them.”
Of the 20, 16 were sentenced to prison terms of various lengths, while four were only in “detainee” status – including two charged with “attempting to cause death.”
Of the 16 sentenced terrorists, four were to be released by the end of 2009 in any event. Nine, however, were to be released in the year 2010 – including seven who were convicted of “attempting to cause death.”
The three remaining sentenced terrorists are being released about 18 months early; all of them were convicted of “attempting to cause death.” A Hamas spokesman in Gaza said the 20 belong to all the various terrorist organizations: four are of Hamas, five are from Fatah, three from Islamic Jihad, and the remainder are independent or of other groups. Eight are from Shechem (Nablus), four are from Ramallah, three each are from Hevron and Bethlehem, and one is from Gaza.
A Tape for a Tape, A Soldier for a Prisoner
Forum Director Nachi Eyal said, “A normal country would exchange a tape for a tape, a prisoner for a soldier. A true government of leadership must look past the eyes of the Shalit family and see the eyes of the families of the next kidnap victims, which this exchange will, unfortunately, encourage.”
MK Michael Ben-Ari (National Union) said, “Exchanging terrorists for a videotape is just another deterioration in the government’s series of errors throughout the Shalit case. We have become the suckers of the Middle East.”
The Forum of Bereaved Parents in the Almagor Terror Victims Association says it is happy that a sign of life will be heard from Gilad Shalit, but says, “We view with great gravity the trend implicit in this decision, when the Government of Israel is prepared to pay with terrorists in exchange for a mere sign of life – a simple humanitarian gesture that is required by every international charter to be carried out without getting anything in return.”
“This mini-deal shows that the Netanyahu government can be easily pressured and made to cave in to the terrorist gangs from Gaza. The government should not give in to terrorists, and certainly not at the beginning of the negotiations, and must demand to receive a sign of life without giving anything in return."
Time for a new departure
YITZHAK KLEIN , THE JERUSALEM POST
Far from advancing his policy regarding the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, President Obama's hastily cobbled-together summit in New York last week simply exposed that policy's weakness. Obama expressed impatience with "talking about talks," but that's exactly what Israelis and Palestinians will start doing this week. In his address to the UN General Assembly, Obama reiterated his view that Israel and the Palestinians should wrap up their century-old conflict in the next two years, but his words merely served to underscore the increasingly evident gap between Obama's rhetoric and reality.
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu can be justly proud of his management of Israeli-American relations since he entered office six months ago. At that time, Obama tried to position himself as, at best, equidistant between Israel and the Arab world. Since then Netanyahu has demonstrated that the Jewish democracy is far and away America's closest ally in the region, the most attuned to the values shaping American policy and the most willing to accommodate that policy within the constraints of Israel's own interests.
Nevertheless the time has come to put more distance between Israel's policy and an administration policy that clearly isn't working.
OBAMA'S SUMMIT will likely lead to endless talks, but not to genuine negotiations. The two sides are simply too far apart, starting with the fact that Israel recognizes the Palestinians' right to govern themselves but the Palestinians aren't prepared to concede an equal right to the Jewish people. Obama almost certainly cannot spare the time and political resources needed to initiate meaningful negotiations and nurse them along.
Given the slim prospects of the president's policy working, the most likely scenario is that the administration will quietly let Israeli-Palestinian relations slip into stalemate. The Palestinians will continue to avoid the necessary hard choices. George Mitchell will continue to discuss a settlement freeze, content that the freeze continues as long as discussions continue. This may serve Obama's and Mahmoud Abbas' short-term interests but it doesn't serve Israel's interests.
Israel has rights and interests in Judea and Samaria. The Oslo process, which began 16 years ago, was predicated on bracketing those rights and not insisting on them, in hopes that this would facilitate peace. This turned out to be a strategic mistake, as most compromises of principle are. It encouraged the Palestinians to believe they could get by without acknowledging Israel's rights, and could try to convince the world that Israel has no legitimate rights.
Israelis have an interest in bringing their conflict with the Palestinians to an end, but this interest isn't served by allowing the Palestinians to pretend that Israeli rights don't exist. Israel should be working to realize its rights and interests on a day-to-day basis. Its policy should be directed to achieving a settlement that accomodates them, which means making the Palestinians acknowledge them.
The first step is to note that there is a world of difference between claiming one has security interests in Judea and Samaria and asserting that Israelis are there by right. A good summary of Israel's rights can be found in Supreme Court Judge Edmond Levy's dissent in Gaza Coast Regional Council vs. Knesset (2005). Judge Levy's opinion is a fundamental Zionist document.
SEVERAL ISRAELI cabinet ministers are going on a coast-to-coast hasbara tour of the United States this fall, and they should emphasize Israel's rights, and not just its security concerns. They should prepare American public opinion to accept that Israeli policies based purely on diplomatic expediency have proved disastrous, and that henceforth its policies will be focused on asserting its rights.
The second step is to make clear to the Palestinians that they are going to have to acknowledge the Jewish people's legitimate rights - starting with their right to a sovereign state in Eretz Yisrael. Continued Palestinian intransigence should cost them dear in terms of assets and interests. Israel should make clear that Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria exist by right, that they are not about to disappear, and that they will continue to expand, on vacant public land and on privately owned Jewish land, until a treaty demarcating Israeli and Palestinian rights in Judea and Samaria is negotiated and signed.
Israel has promised the United States a "temporary settlement freeze" as a means of kickstarting genuine negotiations, and it should not go back on its word. But neither should it allow endless negotiations to turn a "temporary" freeze into a permanent one, freezing any real prospect of a resolution of the conflict.
Prime Minister Netanyahu should immediately declare the start of a six-month "freeze," excepting essential public buildings, in the settlements. At the end of that time, if the Palestinians have yet to come around, Israel should adopt a policy that asserts its rights while penalizing the Palestinians for not acknowledging them.
The writer heads the Israel Policy Center, whose mission includes reinforcing Israel's character as a Jewish, democratic state.
This article can also be read at http://www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1254163544152&pagename=JPArticle%2FShowFull
Far from advancing his policy regarding the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, President Obama's hastily cobbled-together summit in New York last week simply exposed that policy's weakness. Obama expressed impatience with "talking about talks," but that's exactly what Israelis and Palestinians will start doing this week. In his address to the UN General Assembly, Obama reiterated his view that Israel and the Palestinians should wrap up their century-old conflict in the next two years, but his words merely served to underscore the increasingly evident gap between Obama's rhetoric and reality.
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu can be justly proud of his management of Israeli-American relations since he entered office six months ago. At that time, Obama tried to position himself as, at best, equidistant between Israel and the Arab world. Since then Netanyahu has demonstrated that the Jewish democracy is far and away America's closest ally in the region, the most attuned to the values shaping American policy and the most willing to accommodate that policy within the constraints of Israel's own interests.
Nevertheless the time has come to put more distance between Israel's policy and an administration policy that clearly isn't working.
OBAMA'S SUMMIT will likely lead to endless talks, but not to genuine negotiations. The two sides are simply too far apart, starting with the fact that Israel recognizes the Palestinians' right to govern themselves but the Palestinians aren't prepared to concede an equal right to the Jewish people. Obama almost certainly cannot spare the time and political resources needed to initiate meaningful negotiations and nurse them along.
Given the slim prospects of the president's policy working, the most likely scenario is that the administration will quietly let Israeli-Palestinian relations slip into stalemate. The Palestinians will continue to avoid the necessary hard choices. George Mitchell will continue to discuss a settlement freeze, content that the freeze continues as long as discussions continue. This may serve Obama's and Mahmoud Abbas' short-term interests but it doesn't serve Israel's interests.
Israel has rights and interests in Judea and Samaria. The Oslo process, which began 16 years ago, was predicated on bracketing those rights and not insisting on them, in hopes that this would facilitate peace. This turned out to be a strategic mistake, as most compromises of principle are. It encouraged the Palestinians to believe they could get by without acknowledging Israel's rights, and could try to convince the world that Israel has no legitimate rights.
Israelis have an interest in bringing their conflict with the Palestinians to an end, but this interest isn't served by allowing the Palestinians to pretend that Israeli rights don't exist. Israel should be working to realize its rights and interests on a day-to-day basis. Its policy should be directed to achieving a settlement that accomodates them, which means making the Palestinians acknowledge them.
The first step is to note that there is a world of difference between claiming one has security interests in Judea and Samaria and asserting that Israelis are there by right. A good summary of Israel's rights can be found in Supreme Court Judge Edmond Levy's dissent in Gaza Coast Regional Council vs. Knesset (2005). Judge Levy's opinion is a fundamental Zionist document.
SEVERAL ISRAELI cabinet ministers are going on a coast-to-coast hasbara tour of the United States this fall, and they should emphasize Israel's rights, and not just its security concerns. They should prepare American public opinion to accept that Israeli policies based purely on diplomatic expediency have proved disastrous, and that henceforth its policies will be focused on asserting its rights.
The second step is to make clear to the Palestinians that they are going to have to acknowledge the Jewish people's legitimate rights - starting with their right to a sovereign state in Eretz Yisrael. Continued Palestinian intransigence should cost them dear in terms of assets and interests. Israel should make clear that Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria exist by right, that they are not about to disappear, and that they will continue to expand, on vacant public land and on privately owned Jewish land, until a treaty demarcating Israeli and Palestinian rights in Judea and Samaria is negotiated and signed.
Israel has promised the United States a "temporary settlement freeze" as a means of kickstarting genuine negotiations, and it should not go back on its word. But neither should it allow endless negotiations to turn a "temporary" freeze into a permanent one, freezing any real prospect of a resolution of the conflict.
Prime Minister Netanyahu should immediately declare the start of a six-month "freeze," excepting essential public buildings, in the settlements. At the end of that time, if the Palestinians have yet to come around, Israel should adopt a policy that asserts its rights while penalizing the Palestinians for not acknowledging them.
The writer heads the Israel Policy Center, whose mission includes reinforcing Israel's character as a Jewish, democratic state.
This article can also be read at http://www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1254163544152&pagename=JPArticle%2FShowFull
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Unnoticed Anniversary: Rome Fell 1600 Years Ago; Greeks Beat Persians 2500 Years Ago, Lessons for the Present?
RubinReports
Barry Rubin
Next year marks important anniversaries of two of the most important events in Western history both of which, as far as I know, have been pretty much ignored.
Next September 21, it will be 2500 years ago exactly, on September 21, 491 BCE (BC to most of you), that the Greeks defeated the Persian invasion at Marathon. And next August 24, it will be 1600 years ago, on August 24, 410, that Rome fell to the Visigoths under Alaric. Historians mark this date as the end of the Roman Empire.
These two dates--whose anniversaries fall within a few days of each other--can be said to mark, respectively, the beginning of Western civilization's primacy and it's at least temporary end.
The victory for the Greek city-states marked the triumph of relative democracy and logic-based philosophy, among other things. It laid the basis for all that was to come.
The collapse of the Roman Empire brought to a close the Classical era of history and high civilization in general. While the truth is somewhat more complex, it can be said that it took humanity, certainly in the West, 1200 years to return to the intellectual and cultural level that had existed then.
While there has been a long and complex debate on why Rome and ancient civilization collapsed, clearly there were both internal and external reasons. Among the former can be counted: a loss of civic pride and patriotism, refusal of citizens to fight for their country, and decay of traditional values. The latter factors include the assault by other peoples with a strong religious and national sense of identity who were still willing and even eager to fight, and the flooding of the empire by immigrants who had a different world view and agenda aimed at taking it over.
People are free to draw conclusions regarding a comparison with contemporary conditions, but the subject should certainly be considered seriously. The study of Roman history has also undergone some change which seems to coincide with Political Correctness. The classical explanations for the Rome's decline and fall included moral corruption, the loss of identity, and letting the "wild warriers" of the Germanic tribes settling on its territory due to a labor shortage.
Many more recent writers speak of the Romans as not being nice enough to the Gothic immigrants, on whom they increasingly depended for their army.
On the other hand, we should never forget the great achievements. As Aelius Aristides summed them up in a 175 letter to Emeror Marcus Aurelius:
"Now the whole world keeps holiday and laying aside its ancient dress of steel [armor] has turned in freedom to adornment and all delights. The cities have abandoned their old uarrels, and are occupied by a single rivalry, each ambitious to be more pleasant and beautiful....Today Greek or foreigner may travel freely where he will...as though he was passing from homeland to homeland....To be safe it is enough to be Roman....You have...bridled rivers with many a bridge, cut mountains into carriage roads, filled the deserts with outposts, and civilized all things with settled discipline and life."
As one of the relatively few people who can claim direct descent from the Persian Empire’s beneficiaries (King Cyrus of Persia ended the Babylonian exile of the Jews and allowed the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem) and from the Roman Empire's victims (since it killed and exiled my ancestors after the capture of Jerusalem following the great revolt there) I can appreciate counter-arguments regarding Persia's tolerance and Rome being an aggressive and often repressive dictatorship, too.
But the broader, long-term points remain valid.
(Here one can insert some sarcastic and humorous remark about what the world would be like if Rome existed today. An emperor who apologized for all its past conquests or the representative of Caligula or Nero chairing the UN Human Rights Commission? I leave the choice of appropriate examples to readers.)
Still, if many experiences remind one of personal mortality, this is an event that should make us think about civilizational mortality, something we hopefully won’t be finding out about directly.
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan)..
Barry Rubin
Next year marks important anniversaries of two of the most important events in Western history both of which, as far as I know, have been pretty much ignored.
Next September 21, it will be 2500 years ago exactly, on September 21, 491 BCE (BC to most of you), that the Greeks defeated the Persian invasion at Marathon. And next August 24, it will be 1600 years ago, on August 24, 410, that Rome fell to the Visigoths under Alaric. Historians mark this date as the end of the Roman Empire.
These two dates--whose anniversaries fall within a few days of each other--can be said to mark, respectively, the beginning of Western civilization's primacy and it's at least temporary end.
The victory for the Greek city-states marked the triumph of relative democracy and logic-based philosophy, among other things. It laid the basis for all that was to come.
The collapse of the Roman Empire brought to a close the Classical era of history and high civilization in general. While the truth is somewhat more complex, it can be said that it took humanity, certainly in the West, 1200 years to return to the intellectual and cultural level that had existed then.
While there has been a long and complex debate on why Rome and ancient civilization collapsed, clearly there were both internal and external reasons. Among the former can be counted: a loss of civic pride and patriotism, refusal of citizens to fight for their country, and decay of traditional values. The latter factors include the assault by other peoples with a strong religious and national sense of identity who were still willing and even eager to fight, and the flooding of the empire by immigrants who had a different world view and agenda aimed at taking it over.
People are free to draw conclusions regarding a comparison with contemporary conditions, but the subject should certainly be considered seriously. The study of Roman history has also undergone some change which seems to coincide with Political Correctness. The classical explanations for the Rome's decline and fall included moral corruption, the loss of identity, and letting the "wild warriers" of the Germanic tribes settling on its territory due to a labor shortage.
Many more recent writers speak of the Romans as not being nice enough to the Gothic immigrants, on whom they increasingly depended for their army.
On the other hand, we should never forget the great achievements. As Aelius Aristides summed them up in a 175 letter to Emeror Marcus Aurelius:
"Now the whole world keeps holiday and laying aside its ancient dress of steel [armor] has turned in freedom to adornment and all delights. The cities have abandoned their old uarrels, and are occupied by a single rivalry, each ambitious to be more pleasant and beautiful....Today Greek or foreigner may travel freely where he will...as though he was passing from homeland to homeland....To be safe it is enough to be Roman....You have...bridled rivers with many a bridge, cut mountains into carriage roads, filled the deserts with outposts, and civilized all things with settled discipline and life."
As one of the relatively few people who can claim direct descent from the Persian Empire’s beneficiaries (King Cyrus of Persia ended the Babylonian exile of the Jews and allowed the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem) and from the Roman Empire's victims (since it killed and exiled my ancestors after the capture of Jerusalem following the great revolt there) I can appreciate counter-arguments regarding Persia's tolerance and Rome being an aggressive and often repressive dictatorship, too.
But the broader, long-term points remain valid.
(Here one can insert some sarcastic and humorous remark about what the world would be like if Rome existed today. An emperor who apologized for all its past conquests or the representative of Caligula or Nero chairing the UN Human Rights Commission? I leave the choice of appropriate examples to readers.)
Still, if many experiences remind one of personal mortality, this is an event that should make us think about civilizational mortality, something we hopefully won’t be finding out about directly.
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan)..
The Gaza Report is a Disaster for Human Rights and Peace
Barry Rubin*
September 24, 2009
http://www.gloria-center.org/Gloria/2009/09/human-rights.html
The United Nations-sponsored Goldstone report, created for the purpose of bashing Israel over the Gaza war with phony claims of “war crimes,” is possibly the most inaccurate document ever produced by that organization.
In fact, several commission members declared the defendant guilty before being selected; sections of the report echoed previous ones by groups known for their bias; virtually all the data included are unverified claims by politically committed Palestinians who view Israel as an enemy to be destroyed; and scores of specific items can be shown to be false. For example, the report accepts the claims of Palestinian groups regarding civilians killed despite the fact that detailed studies show many of those so listed were Hamas gunmen according to these groups' own publications. Similarly, the report claims attacks were not against military targets when Hamas has published obituaries of its soldiers killed in said targets.
The report also repeats claims that a mortar shelling near a school in Jabalya was aimed at the school, this despite a Globe and Mail correspondent's published findings that reports of shells landing inside the schoolyard were inaccurate, and the fact that Israeli spokespeople asserted that their forces had only returned fire from gunmen in the vicinity of the school. As in other cases, the blame belongs to Hamas, which used the school and civilians as human shields for its soldiers there.
Imagine a war in which one side (Hamas) openly declares it will wipe out the other (Israel). Imagine that this regime officially refers to its enemies (Jews) as sub-humans responsible for everything evil in history. Imagine this regime is effectively a dictatorship, punishing anyone who contradicts its positions.
Now, imagine an outside group combining the naive and sympathizers, which in effect says: Tell us how evil and terrible your enemy (i.e., would-be victim) is. We will write it all down and use it to isolate, demonize and punish them. What do you expect the result will be?
That is what has happened. Witnesses made propaganda against Israel; the UN collated, endorsed, and broadcast it.
Consider the testimony of the most moderate Palestinian witness, Dr. Iyyad El-Sarraj, a Gaza psychologist. He claimed that Israeli soldiers view Palestinians as demons, are never restrained and kill children or fathers in front of their children; that Israelis build statues to honour those who kill Palestinians; that a Jewish settlement mayor told him he wanted to make Palestinian workers there “put signs on their shoulders,” the equivalent of the yellow star Nazis made Jews wear; and that Israelis identify with Nazis.
Justice Richard Goldstone and the commission challenged none of this. In fact, the only grain of truth proves the opposite: When some settlers built a monument to a Jewish terrorist, the army tore it down.
Anyone who heard this testimony – and there was much worse – should conclude that such individuals are so intent on furthering their cause that they make up things and are unreliable witnesses. Instead, the commission based its findings on such information.
Aside from a campaign to put sanctions on Israel, what is the report's effect?
First, damage to the cause of peace.
* If Israelis are such monsters, why should Arabs or Palestinians make peace with them?
* If Israel is being portrayed as evil, why shouldn't the Palestinian side do nothing and wait for the world to force Israel to give up everything, even to help destroy it?
Second, it encourages repression, war and real war crimes.
* If Hamas's strategy of attacking Israel makes Israel hated and isolated, why not continue doing so?
* If Hamas can use civilians as human shields and hospitals, mosques and schools as fortresses, then gain political victory by having the enemy branded as a war criminal for attacking them, it will continue doing so and others will copy the practice.
* If Hamas can repress its people, teach anti-Semitism, and encourage terrorism daily while being granted victim status by the world, it will even intensify this behaviour.
This report is a disaster for human rights and peace.
*Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), with Walter Laqueur (Viking-Penguin); the paperback edition of The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan); A Chronological History of Terrorism, with Judy Colp Rubin, (Sharpe); and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley). To read and subscribe to MERIA, GLORIA articles, or to order books, go to http://www.gloria-center.org
September 24, 2009
http://www.gloria-center.org/Gloria/2009/09/human-rights.html
The United Nations-sponsored Goldstone report, created for the purpose of bashing Israel over the Gaza war with phony claims of “war crimes,” is possibly the most inaccurate document ever produced by that organization.
In fact, several commission members declared the defendant guilty before being selected; sections of the report echoed previous ones by groups known for their bias; virtually all the data included are unverified claims by politically committed Palestinians who view Israel as an enemy to be destroyed; and scores of specific items can be shown to be false. For example, the report accepts the claims of Palestinian groups regarding civilians killed despite the fact that detailed studies show many of those so listed were Hamas gunmen according to these groups' own publications. Similarly, the report claims attacks were not against military targets when Hamas has published obituaries of its soldiers killed in said targets.
The report also repeats claims that a mortar shelling near a school in Jabalya was aimed at the school, this despite a Globe and Mail correspondent's published findings that reports of shells landing inside the schoolyard were inaccurate, and the fact that Israeli spokespeople asserted that their forces had only returned fire from gunmen in the vicinity of the school. As in other cases, the blame belongs to Hamas, which used the school and civilians as human shields for its soldiers there.
Imagine a war in which one side (Hamas) openly declares it will wipe out the other (Israel). Imagine that this regime officially refers to its enemies (Jews) as sub-humans responsible for everything evil in history. Imagine this regime is effectively a dictatorship, punishing anyone who contradicts its positions.
Now, imagine an outside group combining the naive and sympathizers, which in effect says: Tell us how evil and terrible your enemy (i.e., would-be victim) is. We will write it all down and use it to isolate, demonize and punish them. What do you expect the result will be?
That is what has happened. Witnesses made propaganda against Israel; the UN collated, endorsed, and broadcast it.
Consider the testimony of the most moderate Palestinian witness, Dr. Iyyad El-Sarraj, a Gaza psychologist. He claimed that Israeli soldiers view Palestinians as demons, are never restrained and kill children or fathers in front of their children; that Israelis build statues to honour those who kill Palestinians; that a Jewish settlement mayor told him he wanted to make Palestinian workers there “put signs on their shoulders,” the equivalent of the yellow star Nazis made Jews wear; and that Israelis identify with Nazis.
Justice Richard Goldstone and the commission challenged none of this. In fact, the only grain of truth proves the opposite: When some settlers built a monument to a Jewish terrorist, the army tore it down.
Anyone who heard this testimony – and there was much worse – should conclude that such individuals are so intent on furthering their cause that they make up things and are unreliable witnesses. Instead, the commission based its findings on such information.
Aside from a campaign to put sanctions on Israel, what is the report's effect?
First, damage to the cause of peace.
* If Israelis are such monsters, why should Arabs or Palestinians make peace with them?
* If Israel is being portrayed as evil, why shouldn't the Palestinian side do nothing and wait for the world to force Israel to give up everything, even to help destroy it?
Second, it encourages repression, war and real war crimes.
* If Hamas's strategy of attacking Israel makes Israel hated and isolated, why not continue doing so?
* If Hamas can use civilians as human shields and hospitals, mosques and schools as fortresses, then gain political victory by having the enemy branded as a war criminal for attacking them, it will continue doing so and others will copy the practice.
* If Hamas can repress its people, teach anti-Semitism, and encourage terrorism daily while being granted victim status by the world, it will even intensify this behaviour.
This report is a disaster for human rights and peace.
*Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), with Walter Laqueur (Viking-Penguin); the paperback edition of The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan); A Chronological History of Terrorism, with Judy Colp Rubin, (Sharpe); and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley). To read and subscribe to MERIA, GLORIA articles, or to order books, go to http://www.gloria-center.org
Micro events
Ira Sharkansky
A British court has rejected a petition from Gaza, via a London law firm, that Defense Minister Ehud Barak be arrested for having committed war crimes during the recent Gaza operation. The petitioners relied, in part, on the Goldstone report to the UN Human Rights Commission.
The British Foreign Office opposed the petition on the ground that Barak was a state guest (in London for talks with the prime minister, defense and foreign officials) and therefore not subject to such lawsuits. Israeli officials asserted that the petition was political in nature, that an arrest would damage Israeli-British relations, and set a precedent that would endanger officials of other countries - including Britain - that fight terrorists in controversial operations.
This is not the first time that Israeli politicians as well as present and former military officers have found themselves the targets of legal actions in Britain and other European countries. They are among the micro events that worry Israelis, far from the drama of war or meetings in the spotlights of the United Nations and world capitals.
Stone throwing directed at a group of non-Jewish European tourists on the Temple Mount, and an spurt of violence in the Old City on the day before Yom Kippur might have reached the international media. Probably below notice were efforts to fire bomb the gas station on the border between Isaweea and French Hill, and subsequent tussles between police and some Isaweea residents, also on the day before Yom Kippur.
There has also been a spurt of rocket, mortar, and small arms firing from Gaza, so far without Israeli casualties.
These may be the signs of a restive population, the efforts of extreme Palestinians always concerned to light a spark that will burst into something greater, the efforts of Palestinians leaders to satisfy those among their supporters who want action, or the leaders' hope that a bit of violence will develop into national salvation.
The use of legislation in European countries against human rights violations wherever they occur has made politicians, military officers and retired officers concerned about foreign travel. It has produced official promises of legal defense, but who wants to risk even temporary arrest when on a personal, business, or family trip to Europe? The Goldstone report has been widely condemned, but it is an official document of the United Nations. It has standing with a judge who wants to honor it, or does not know the difference and responds routinely to a petition submitted in proper form.
While some European politicians and activists support these actions against Israel, others see political motives in a judicial format, and worry about retaliatory actions against their own politicians and military officers who may done something dicey in Iraq, Afghanistan, or another place. Judges in well run democratic countries have considerable independence, and may act on their own even where government officials express opposition to the issuing of arrest warrants.
Israel could retaliate in the case of any country whose court that holds an Israeli by invoking its own laws against human rights violations against visiting military or political officials. That hardly seems likely, given the aspirations for such people to visit and consult with Israelis, and for the larger reason of not giving support to legal devices most likely to be used against Israelis.
There are other actions that Israel can use. Indeed, one can wonder if Palestinian actions against Israelis are in response to the mini actions that Israel takes against Palestinians. Currently in the works is Israel's opposition against the application of Palestinian entrepreneurs to open a second Palestinian cell phone service, which Israeli officials say is in retaliation against the efforts of the Palestine National Authority to charge Israel in the International Court of Justice.
The name of this game is, You make things difficult for us, we will make things difficult for you.
On Israel's list of possibilities are all those roadblocks, and the control of the borders around the West Bank as well as the northern and eastern boundaries of Gaza. Distinguished and not-so distinguished visitors to Palestine and Palestinians do not like delays or rejections when they want to enter or leave, or pass from one part of Palestine to another.
Who starts tit for tat frictions? That is less important in keeping them at a low level, rather than bubbling up to another intifada, Israeli responses, funerals, and property destruction.
Management rather than victory is the goal. There is no end in sight. Neither Barack Obama or anyone else has a better idea.
Ira Sharkansky (Emeritus)
Department of Political Science
Hebrew University
A British court has rejected a petition from Gaza, via a London law firm, that Defense Minister Ehud Barak be arrested for having committed war crimes during the recent Gaza operation. The petitioners relied, in part, on the Goldstone report to the UN Human Rights Commission.
The British Foreign Office opposed the petition on the ground that Barak was a state guest (in London for talks with the prime minister, defense and foreign officials) and therefore not subject to such lawsuits. Israeli officials asserted that the petition was political in nature, that an arrest would damage Israeli-British relations, and set a precedent that would endanger officials of other countries - including Britain - that fight terrorists in controversial operations.
This is not the first time that Israeli politicians as well as present and former military officers have found themselves the targets of legal actions in Britain and other European countries. They are among the micro events that worry Israelis, far from the drama of war or meetings in the spotlights of the United Nations and world capitals.
Stone throwing directed at a group of non-Jewish European tourists on the Temple Mount, and an spurt of violence in the Old City on the day before Yom Kippur might have reached the international media. Probably below notice were efforts to fire bomb the gas station on the border between Isaweea and French Hill, and subsequent tussles between police and some Isaweea residents, also on the day before Yom Kippur.
There has also been a spurt of rocket, mortar, and small arms firing from Gaza, so far without Israeli casualties.
These may be the signs of a restive population, the efforts of extreme Palestinians always concerned to light a spark that will burst into something greater, the efforts of Palestinians leaders to satisfy those among their supporters who want action, or the leaders' hope that a bit of violence will develop into national salvation.
The use of legislation in European countries against human rights violations wherever they occur has made politicians, military officers and retired officers concerned about foreign travel. It has produced official promises of legal defense, but who wants to risk even temporary arrest when on a personal, business, or family trip to Europe? The Goldstone report has been widely condemned, but it is an official document of the United Nations. It has standing with a judge who wants to honor it, or does not know the difference and responds routinely to a petition submitted in proper form.
While some European politicians and activists support these actions against Israel, others see political motives in a judicial format, and worry about retaliatory actions against their own politicians and military officers who may done something dicey in Iraq, Afghanistan, or another place. Judges in well run democratic countries have considerable independence, and may act on their own even where government officials express opposition to the issuing of arrest warrants.
Israel could retaliate in the case of any country whose court that holds an Israeli by invoking its own laws against human rights violations against visiting military or political officials. That hardly seems likely, given the aspirations for such people to visit and consult with Israelis, and for the larger reason of not giving support to legal devices most likely to be used against Israelis.
There are other actions that Israel can use. Indeed, one can wonder if Palestinian actions against Israelis are in response to the mini actions that Israel takes against Palestinians. Currently in the works is Israel's opposition against the application of Palestinian entrepreneurs to open a second Palestinian cell phone service, which Israeli officials say is in retaliation against the efforts of the Palestine National Authority to charge Israel in the International Court of Justice.
The name of this game is, You make things difficult for us, we will make things difficult for you.
On Israel's list of possibilities are all those roadblocks, and the control of the borders around the West Bank as well as the northern and eastern boundaries of Gaza. Distinguished and not-so distinguished visitors to Palestine and Palestinians do not like delays or rejections when they want to enter or leave, or pass from one part of Palestine to another.
Who starts tit for tat frictions? That is less important in keeping them at a low level, rather than bubbling up to another intifada, Israeli responses, funerals, and property destruction.
Management rather than victory is the goal. There is no end in sight. Neither Barack Obama or anyone else has a better idea.
Ira Sharkansky (Emeritus)
Department of Political Science
Hebrew University
Lessons of the Yom Kippur War
y Rob Eshman
What lessons are still to be learned from a war Israel fought 36 years ago today?
As Haaretz.com reported, Israel marked on Tuesday the 36th anniversary of the Yom Kippur War, one of the most costly and traumatic conflicts in the country’s history.
At a state ceremony at Israel’s national cemetery on Mount Herzl, Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai (Labor) spoke of the bravery of the Israel Defense Forces soldiers who repelled the assault. “Whoever fought in the tough battles in the [Suez] Canal and the Golan Heights is well aware that it was not the wisdom of leaders but the heroism of warriors in the battlefields that saved the State of Israel,” he said.
A coalition of Arab states led by Egypt and Syria launched the war in a surprise attack on the Jewish holiday in 1973.
More than 2,600 Israelis were killed in the hostilities, which had far-reaching effects on Israel and the entire Middle East.
Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin also attended the ceremony, during which a cantor recited the Hebrew prayer of mourning El Malei Rachamim.
Vilnai added: “The Yom Kippur War is going further and further away… [but] the impression the war left on the state and on the army’s preparedness is very deep.”
The military and political lessons are by now fairly straightforward, as this article makes clear:
What did Israel get out of the Yom Kippur War?
Despite the initial successes of the Egyptian and Syrian forces, the war proved once again how effective the Israeli military could be. After the initial set-backs, the war served as a huge morale boost to Israelis. Despite a co-ordinated attack on two fronts, Israel had survived and had pushed back the nations that had initially broken through Israel’s defences.
Though the Americans provided the Israeli military with weaponry, they also provided Israel with something far more important – intelligence. Documents relating to the American spy-plane, the ‘SR-71 Blackbird’, show that the Israelis knew where major concentrations of Arab forces were as they were supplied with this information as a result of a SR-71 flying over the war zone. With such knowledge, the Israelis knew where to deploy their forces for maximum effect. What appeared to be intuitive devastating counter-attacks by the Israelis, were based on very detailed information gained from American intelligence. Basically, the Israelis knew where their enemy was and could co-ordinate an attack accordingly.
The war also served as a salutary lesson to the Arab nations that surrounded Israel in that initial victories had to be built on. The failure of the Egyptian and Syrian forces to defeat Israel pushed Sadat towards adopting a diplomatic approach. It also encouraged some Palestinians to more extreme actions. On the diplomatic front, the Camp David talks took place while the actions of the PLO became more violent.
Why didn’t the Arab nations build on their initial successes?
Clearly, the use of intelligence massively benefited the Israelis. However, as in 1948, the Arab nations did not fight as one unit. Their command structure was not unified and each fighting unit (in the Sinai and the Golan Heights) acted as individual units. With up to nine different nationalities involved on the Arab side, mere co-ordination would have been extremely difficult.
Secondly, the Israelis had to work to one simple equation: if they lost, the state of Israel would cease to exist. Therefore, for Israel it was a fight to the finish – literally “death or glory”. If the various Arab nations lost, they could survive for another day.
Those lessons and lasting effects of the Yom Kippur War are well-reviewed in a brilliant column by Yossi Klein Halevi, called, “War and Atonement,” written in 2003 on the 30th anniversary of the war:
For 30 years, Israel has been obsessed with the political and strategic consequences of the Yom Kippur War, when the nation learned the limits of power and the treachery of self-confidence — and learned, too, how the heroism of ordinary soldiers could compensate for the incompetence of their leaders.
Each of those lessons has had profound consequences for the Israeli soul. But Israel has yet to fully understand the spiritual effects of the war that began on the Day of Atonement.
Historian Michael Oren has called the Yom Kippur War the moment when Effi Eitam started, and Yossi Beilin stopped, putting on tefillin. Eitam, a former secular kibbutznik and now head of the National Religious Party, emerged from the war convinced that only a divine miracle had saved the Jewish state and that ultimately there was no one to depend on but God.
Beilin, by contrast, had abandoned his secular upbringing and, as a teenager, become an observant Jew. Like Eitam, he emerged from the war convinced that all of Israel’s political and military leaders had failed. But Beilin went one step further: He determined that God had failed, too.
Oren’s formulation is a reminder that the political decisions taken after 1973 by Eitam and Beilin and so many other Israelis on the Right and the Left were, in fact, responses to the spiritual shattering that took place in that war.
Tellingly, both Gush Emunim and Peace Now were founded not after the Six Day War but only after Yom Kippur 1973. Though both movements presented themselves as optimistic, they were driven more by the apocalyptic dread of 1973 than by the utopian dreams of 1967.
In the first chaotic days of the Yom Kippur War, Israel glimpsed its own mortality. By reopening the question of Israel’s permanence, Yom Kippur returned Israelis, in some sense, to the anxiety of pre-state Jewish existence.
Israelis had experienced that uncertainty in the weeks before the Six Day War, when trenches were dug in public parks as potential mass graves. But the extraordinary victory of 1967 seemed to still any doubts about Israel’s ability to survive in the Middle East.
Despite the daunting security challenges that confronted Israel after the Six Day War — the globalization of PLO terrorism and the War of Attrition along the Suez Canal — Israelis experienced an unprecedented sense of invulnerability. The Arabs could still threaten the lives of individual Jews, but they couldn’t threaten the life of the Jewish state.
Even as we lost faith in the imminence of peace, which many Israelis naively believed would happen during the summer of 1967, the question of survival that had obsessed the Jews at least since the destruction of the Second Temple had apparently been resolved.
In 1973, I was a student at the Hebrew University overseas program. That Yom Kippur, I was in synagogue when the siren went off at 2 p.m. A man sitting next to me said, smiling: The war will be over by nightfall; the Arabs must have been crazy to start with us again.
That night, Moshe Dayan appeared on TV. It’s a big desert, he said, with his half smile and his eye patch like a wink. But clearly the war hadn’t ended by nightfall. Something had gone wrong. Only afterward did the home front learn how close we’d come to the end of the Zionist story.
THE DISASTROUS failure of the Labor government to correctly read the intelligence warnings and to adequately prepare for war was more than a lapse of leadership. It marked the disgraced end of the generation of the founders. Labor leaders had infused the nation with their optimism and assurance that obstacles existed only to be overcome. Now, that Israeli self-confidence was shattered.
The collapse of Labor’s authority was ultimately a spiritual trauma. Secular Zionism — whose main carrier was Labor — had provided Israelis with an alternative faith, especially after the Holocaust when many Jews had lost confidence in traditional Judaism. Secular Zionism’s happy ending to Jewish history had been the Jews’ emotional defense against the Holocaust, making it bearable again to be a Jew. Now, though, there was no defense against the abyss.
If 1967 represented the Jewish triumph over history, 1973 was the counterrevolution, the unraveling of 1967.
Yom Kippur 1973 undermined the Zionist revolution in one more crucial way: It restored the pathology of Jewish relations with “the world,” as the language of Jewish despair put it.
The current wave of anti-Israel demonization in Europe and elsewhere was prefigured then, in the months after the Yom Kippur War. The Arab oil boycott turned Israel into a pariah; fewer countries had diplomatic relations with the Jewish state than with the PLO, which didn’t even pretend to seek anything but Israel’s destruction. The UN General Assembly gave a standing ovation to Yasser Arafat, who wore a pistol to the session and preached the destruction of a UN member state. In the terrible phrase of the late historian J. L. Talmon, the state of the Jews became the Jew of the states.
Zionism had been the Jews’ final strategy for acceptance, ending their status as a ghost people haunting the nations, as Zionist thinker Leo Pinsker put it. Yet not only had Zionism failed to win Jews acceptance, Zionism itself became the pretext for the latest assault on Jewish legitimacy.
The result was the greatest theological crisis among Jews since the Holocaust.
WHY DID every attempt to create a normal Jewish relationship with the world seem to fail? Why were we cursed? The urgent question that confronted Israeli society after 1973 was how to avert the return of the exilic condition. The settlement movement and the peace movement were both attempts to outwit the imposition of the ghetto on the Zionist dream — the first through divine redemption, the second through utopian peace.
Some Israelis, though, concluded that the proper response wasn’t to try to resist the ghetto but to embrace it.
For the first time in well over a century, the seemingly unstoppable movement of Jews out of Orthodoxy was at least partly reversed. Thousands of secular Israelis did the unthinkable and embraced ultra-Orthodoxy. It was the ultimate repudiation of Zionism, a post-Yom Kippur surprise attack on secular Israel. Uri Zohar, filmmaker and Bohemian symbol, was the best known of the new haredi (ultra-Orthodox) penitents. They included many others drawn from the Ashkenazi elite, kibbutzniks and artists, pilots and commandos.
The term “haredi” — one who fears — is a useful definition for that initial wave of penitence. For the counterrevolution against Zionist normalization was driven by fear — the fear that no matter what Jews did to try to be accepted by the nations, whether assimilating as individuals in pre-Nazi Germany or assimilating collectively via statehood into the community of nations, in the end every attempt would be thwarted. Because it was the Jews’ divine destiny to be outcasts.
The religious penitents were atoning for the sin of Zionist normalization. As Uri Zohar insisted, Zionism, that cleverly disguised assimilationist movement, was itself the sin.
Not since the pre-Holocaust era did Jews become as obsessed with the relationship between sin and punishment as they did in the wake of the Yom Kippur War. The Holocaust, with its excess of punishment, had suspended the traditional discourse on the relationship between Jewish suffering and Jewish misdeeds. The Yom Kippur War, though, restored that relationship — for secular as well as religious Israelis.
Clearly, the War of the Day of Atonement had been a warning. But against what sin? Each segment of Israeli society suggested a different answer.
The various options which post-’73 Israel developed were all strategies of atonement. Peace Now and Gush Emunim were both attempts to atone for the perceived sins of Israeli society in the years between 1967 and 1973. For both secular Left and religious Right, those sins were not merely tactical mistakes but fundamental flaws in the Israeli character.
For the Left, Israel’s post-’67 sin was arrogance. Israel had become intoxicated by power and territories. Hadn’t Dayan said, Better Sharm e-Sheikh without peace than peace without Sharm e-Sheikh? The result, claimed the Left, was that Israel had missed Anwar Sadat’s peace feelers before Yom Kippur 1973. A nation that spurns the pursuit of peace is destined to be pursued by war.
For Gush Emunim, the sin was ingratitude. Israeli society had not been diligent in settling the biblical lands, had ignored a divine opportunity to restore wholeness to the nation. If we didn’t begin settling the land, the rabbis of religious Zionism now argued, God would rescind His gift. A nation that spurns blessing is destined to be pursued by curse.
There was one more Israeli response, which emerged tentatively at first but then with increasing assertiveness. The Israeli sin, some began to suspect, was to believe in ourselves and in our national mythology — in fact, to believe in anything at all. The state was just a state, without metaphysical or even historical meaning. What mattered was survival of the individual, not the collective. “Don’t call me a nation,” sang Shalom Hanoch. Every Israeli for himself.
DISILLUSIONMENT WITH all systems and ideologies is the starting point for both nihilism and spiritual search. Together, those two options help define today’s Israel.
When a person is suddenly confronted with mortality, he tends to react in one of two extreme ways. One is to cling to this world, cherish the threatened body and pursue its pleasures. The second is to seek transcendence, to live for eternity instead of the transient moment.
Israeli society has simultaneously pursued both options. The trance and Ecstasy parties, the mass flight to Goa, the weekend shopping trips to London — all are symptoms of nihilistic despair.
At the same time, Israel has become a world center for every new spiritual movement and alternative therapy. For all its maddening shallowness, New Age is a re-assertion of meaning and faith. In recent years, God has emerged as a major protagonist in Israeli popular music. Groups like Sheva, Esta, Shotei Hanevuah (The Fools of Prophesy) sing of their search for the Divine Presence. The hard rock band Hayehudim (The Jews) evokes the pain of life without faith and expresses envy for those who have it.
If anything, the crisis that began with the Yom Kippur War has only deepened.
The question of Israel’s permanence has become even more urgent in recent years. No Western society lives in greater intimacy with death than Israel; none has a more urgent need to find answers to the questions of meaning.
So, too, the crisis of authority — political, religious, moral — has become acute. As one popular bumper sticker puts it, “There is no one to trust except our Father in Heaven.” The political attempts at atonement have failed. We now know that Peace Now was wrong to assume that the blame for the absence of peace belonged to the lack of Israeli initiative, rather than the Arab world’s refusal to accept our sovereignty over any part of the land. As for Gush Emunim, the Israeli rejection of permanent occupation of another people isn’t a sign of spiritual weakness but vitality.
In fact, Israeli society has begun to repent for the arrogance of our one-dimensional certainties. Speak to partisans of the Left and the Right and many will quietly concede that they failed to recognize the complexity of our dilemma — that we can’t occupy the Palestinians and we can’t make peace with them.
That acknowledgment isn’t just a political but a spiritual awakening, atonement for our failure to heed each other’s warnings, to embrace complexity.
WITH THE collapse of the absolute truths of Left and Right — each partially right, each disastrously wrong — the next Israeli debate over the country’s spiritual identity begins in earnest. Once again, the temptation is to choose between absolutist visions: a know-nothing secularism vs. a know-everything Orthodoxy. The state, of course, has reinforced that simplistic divide, by imprisoning Judaism within the Orthodox establishment.
That politically cozy and spiritually smothering arrangement has left the vast majority of Israelis religiously disenfranchised. (To this day, no word exists in Hebrew for a religious non-Orthodox Jew.) But just as the Left-Right schism faded into history, resolved by the failure of both sides, so too will the sterile secular-Orthodox divide give way to new religious options.
Indeed, the Yom Kippur War, which taught Israelis to stop relying on official structures and trust their own initiative, has opened the way for experimental forms of Israeli Judaism. Those first signs are evident in the new study centers around the country where non-Orthodox Israelis reclaim Jewish texts and traditions without becoming Orthodox. The signs are evident, too, at the mass youth festivals on Rosh Hashana and Pessah and Shavuot, where Jewish rituals are simply accepted as part of the culture, along with Eastern and even Native American rituals.
In that new spiritual movement, “secular‘ and ’religious” are no longer contradictions — they are, in fact, meaningless identities.
Two years ago, I participated in the Shantipi festival, held on the holiday of Shavuot. The high point was a Friday night concert by Sheva, a Galilee-based band that fuses Middle Eastern and reggae and rock music and draws its lyrics from Muslim, Hindu and especially Jewish prayer.
For two hours, Sheva turned Shantipi into a New Age-style synagogue. Thousands of young people sang along with the band’s powerful version of Psalm 121: “I will lift up my eyes to the hills, from where will my help come? My help comes from God, creator of heaven and earth.‘ Then the band played a reggae rendition of the first stanza of Birkat Hamazon, the grace after meals, and the young people leaped and sang, ’Blessed are You, Adonai, King of the universe, Who sustains the world.”
If you’d asked them whether they were “religious,‘ most would have shrugged and denied it. That’s because Israeli society has forfeited Jewish authenticity to Orthodoxy, whose definition of religiosity denies non-Orthodox Israelis Judaic validation. (Consider that old secular Israeli expression, ’The synagogue I don’t go to is Orthodox.‘) And how could a concert happening on Friday night possibly be ’religious”?
Yet, standing with thousands of young people calling out for God’s protection and mercy at this time was one of the most moving religious moments I’ve experienced as an Israeli.
True, the first signs of indigenous Israeli forms of non-Orthodox Judaism are still immature, and, like all experiments, much can go wrong. But in taking responsibility for our spiritual state, we will atone for our failure to create an authentically Israeli Judaism, at once rooted and open to the world, worthy of the return of a sovereign people to its land.
That is the next phase of Israeli response to Yom Kippur 1973. The signs all around us indicate that it has already begun.
What lessons are still to be learned from a war Israel fought 36 years ago today?
As Haaretz.com reported, Israel marked on Tuesday the 36th anniversary of the Yom Kippur War, one of the most costly and traumatic conflicts in the country’s history.
At a state ceremony at Israel’s national cemetery on Mount Herzl, Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai (Labor) spoke of the bravery of the Israel Defense Forces soldiers who repelled the assault. “Whoever fought in the tough battles in the [Suez] Canal and the Golan Heights is well aware that it was not the wisdom of leaders but the heroism of warriors in the battlefields that saved the State of Israel,” he said.
A coalition of Arab states led by Egypt and Syria launched the war in a surprise attack on the Jewish holiday in 1973.
More than 2,600 Israelis were killed in the hostilities, which had far-reaching effects on Israel and the entire Middle East.
Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin also attended the ceremony, during which a cantor recited the Hebrew prayer of mourning El Malei Rachamim.
Vilnai added: “The Yom Kippur War is going further and further away… [but] the impression the war left on the state and on the army’s preparedness is very deep.”
The military and political lessons are by now fairly straightforward, as this article makes clear:
What did Israel get out of the Yom Kippur War?
Despite the initial successes of the Egyptian and Syrian forces, the war proved once again how effective the Israeli military could be. After the initial set-backs, the war served as a huge morale boost to Israelis. Despite a co-ordinated attack on two fronts, Israel had survived and had pushed back the nations that had initially broken through Israel’s defences.
Though the Americans provided the Israeli military with weaponry, they also provided Israel with something far more important – intelligence. Documents relating to the American spy-plane, the ‘SR-71 Blackbird’, show that the Israelis knew where major concentrations of Arab forces were as they were supplied with this information as a result of a SR-71 flying over the war zone. With such knowledge, the Israelis knew where to deploy their forces for maximum effect. What appeared to be intuitive devastating counter-attacks by the Israelis, were based on very detailed information gained from American intelligence. Basically, the Israelis knew where their enemy was and could co-ordinate an attack accordingly.
The war also served as a salutary lesson to the Arab nations that surrounded Israel in that initial victories had to be built on. The failure of the Egyptian and Syrian forces to defeat Israel pushed Sadat towards adopting a diplomatic approach. It also encouraged some Palestinians to more extreme actions. On the diplomatic front, the Camp David talks took place while the actions of the PLO became more violent.
Why didn’t the Arab nations build on their initial successes?
Clearly, the use of intelligence massively benefited the Israelis. However, as in 1948, the Arab nations did not fight as one unit. Their command structure was not unified and each fighting unit (in the Sinai and the Golan Heights) acted as individual units. With up to nine different nationalities involved on the Arab side, mere co-ordination would have been extremely difficult.
Secondly, the Israelis had to work to one simple equation: if they lost, the state of Israel would cease to exist. Therefore, for Israel it was a fight to the finish – literally “death or glory”. If the various Arab nations lost, they could survive for another day.
Those lessons and lasting effects of the Yom Kippur War are well-reviewed in a brilliant column by Yossi Klein Halevi, called, “War and Atonement,” written in 2003 on the 30th anniversary of the war:
For 30 years, Israel has been obsessed with the political and strategic consequences of the Yom Kippur War, when the nation learned the limits of power and the treachery of self-confidence — and learned, too, how the heroism of ordinary soldiers could compensate for the incompetence of their leaders.
Each of those lessons has had profound consequences for the Israeli soul. But Israel has yet to fully understand the spiritual effects of the war that began on the Day of Atonement.
Historian Michael Oren has called the Yom Kippur War the moment when Effi Eitam started, and Yossi Beilin stopped, putting on tefillin. Eitam, a former secular kibbutznik and now head of the National Religious Party, emerged from the war convinced that only a divine miracle had saved the Jewish state and that ultimately there was no one to depend on but God.
Beilin, by contrast, had abandoned his secular upbringing and, as a teenager, become an observant Jew. Like Eitam, he emerged from the war convinced that all of Israel’s political and military leaders had failed. But Beilin went one step further: He determined that God had failed, too.
Oren’s formulation is a reminder that the political decisions taken after 1973 by Eitam and Beilin and so many other Israelis on the Right and the Left were, in fact, responses to the spiritual shattering that took place in that war.
Tellingly, both Gush Emunim and Peace Now were founded not after the Six Day War but only after Yom Kippur 1973. Though both movements presented themselves as optimistic, they were driven more by the apocalyptic dread of 1973 than by the utopian dreams of 1967.
In the first chaotic days of the Yom Kippur War, Israel glimpsed its own mortality. By reopening the question of Israel’s permanence, Yom Kippur returned Israelis, in some sense, to the anxiety of pre-state Jewish existence.
Israelis had experienced that uncertainty in the weeks before the Six Day War, when trenches were dug in public parks as potential mass graves. But the extraordinary victory of 1967 seemed to still any doubts about Israel’s ability to survive in the Middle East.
Despite the daunting security challenges that confronted Israel after the Six Day War — the globalization of PLO terrorism and the War of Attrition along the Suez Canal — Israelis experienced an unprecedented sense of invulnerability. The Arabs could still threaten the lives of individual Jews, but they couldn’t threaten the life of the Jewish state.
Even as we lost faith in the imminence of peace, which many Israelis naively believed would happen during the summer of 1967, the question of survival that had obsessed the Jews at least since the destruction of the Second Temple had apparently been resolved.
In 1973, I was a student at the Hebrew University overseas program. That Yom Kippur, I was in synagogue when the siren went off at 2 p.m. A man sitting next to me said, smiling: The war will be over by nightfall; the Arabs must have been crazy to start with us again.
That night, Moshe Dayan appeared on TV. It’s a big desert, he said, with his half smile and his eye patch like a wink. But clearly the war hadn’t ended by nightfall. Something had gone wrong. Only afterward did the home front learn how close we’d come to the end of the Zionist story.
THE DISASTROUS failure of the Labor government to correctly read the intelligence warnings and to adequately prepare for war was more than a lapse of leadership. It marked the disgraced end of the generation of the founders. Labor leaders had infused the nation with their optimism and assurance that obstacles existed only to be overcome. Now, that Israeli self-confidence was shattered.
The collapse of Labor’s authority was ultimately a spiritual trauma. Secular Zionism — whose main carrier was Labor — had provided Israelis with an alternative faith, especially after the Holocaust when many Jews had lost confidence in traditional Judaism. Secular Zionism’s happy ending to Jewish history had been the Jews’ emotional defense against the Holocaust, making it bearable again to be a Jew. Now, though, there was no defense against the abyss.
If 1967 represented the Jewish triumph over history, 1973 was the counterrevolution, the unraveling of 1967.
Yom Kippur 1973 undermined the Zionist revolution in one more crucial way: It restored the pathology of Jewish relations with “the world,” as the language of Jewish despair put it.
The current wave of anti-Israel demonization in Europe and elsewhere was prefigured then, in the months after the Yom Kippur War. The Arab oil boycott turned Israel into a pariah; fewer countries had diplomatic relations with the Jewish state than with the PLO, which didn’t even pretend to seek anything but Israel’s destruction. The UN General Assembly gave a standing ovation to Yasser Arafat, who wore a pistol to the session and preached the destruction of a UN member state. In the terrible phrase of the late historian J. L. Talmon, the state of the Jews became the Jew of the states.
Zionism had been the Jews’ final strategy for acceptance, ending their status as a ghost people haunting the nations, as Zionist thinker Leo Pinsker put it. Yet not only had Zionism failed to win Jews acceptance, Zionism itself became the pretext for the latest assault on Jewish legitimacy.
The result was the greatest theological crisis among Jews since the Holocaust.
WHY DID every attempt to create a normal Jewish relationship with the world seem to fail? Why were we cursed? The urgent question that confronted Israeli society after 1973 was how to avert the return of the exilic condition. The settlement movement and the peace movement were both attempts to outwit the imposition of the ghetto on the Zionist dream — the first through divine redemption, the second through utopian peace.
Some Israelis, though, concluded that the proper response wasn’t to try to resist the ghetto but to embrace it.
For the first time in well over a century, the seemingly unstoppable movement of Jews out of Orthodoxy was at least partly reversed. Thousands of secular Israelis did the unthinkable and embraced ultra-Orthodoxy. It was the ultimate repudiation of Zionism, a post-Yom Kippur surprise attack on secular Israel. Uri Zohar, filmmaker and Bohemian symbol, was the best known of the new haredi (ultra-Orthodox) penitents. They included many others drawn from the Ashkenazi elite, kibbutzniks and artists, pilots and commandos.
The term “haredi” — one who fears — is a useful definition for that initial wave of penitence. For the counterrevolution against Zionist normalization was driven by fear — the fear that no matter what Jews did to try to be accepted by the nations, whether assimilating as individuals in pre-Nazi Germany or assimilating collectively via statehood into the community of nations, in the end every attempt would be thwarted. Because it was the Jews’ divine destiny to be outcasts.
The religious penitents were atoning for the sin of Zionist normalization. As Uri Zohar insisted, Zionism, that cleverly disguised assimilationist movement, was itself the sin.
Not since the pre-Holocaust era did Jews become as obsessed with the relationship between sin and punishment as they did in the wake of the Yom Kippur War. The Holocaust, with its excess of punishment, had suspended the traditional discourse on the relationship between Jewish suffering and Jewish misdeeds. The Yom Kippur War, though, restored that relationship — for secular as well as religious Israelis.
Clearly, the War of the Day of Atonement had been a warning. But against what sin? Each segment of Israeli society suggested a different answer.
The various options which post-’73 Israel developed were all strategies of atonement. Peace Now and Gush Emunim were both attempts to atone for the perceived sins of Israeli society in the years between 1967 and 1973. For both secular Left and religious Right, those sins were not merely tactical mistakes but fundamental flaws in the Israeli character.
For the Left, Israel’s post-’67 sin was arrogance. Israel had become intoxicated by power and territories. Hadn’t Dayan said, Better Sharm e-Sheikh without peace than peace without Sharm e-Sheikh? The result, claimed the Left, was that Israel had missed Anwar Sadat’s peace feelers before Yom Kippur 1973. A nation that spurns the pursuit of peace is destined to be pursued by war.
For Gush Emunim, the sin was ingratitude. Israeli society had not been diligent in settling the biblical lands, had ignored a divine opportunity to restore wholeness to the nation. If we didn’t begin settling the land, the rabbis of religious Zionism now argued, God would rescind His gift. A nation that spurns blessing is destined to be pursued by curse.
There was one more Israeli response, which emerged tentatively at first but then with increasing assertiveness. The Israeli sin, some began to suspect, was to believe in ourselves and in our national mythology — in fact, to believe in anything at all. The state was just a state, without metaphysical or even historical meaning. What mattered was survival of the individual, not the collective. “Don’t call me a nation,” sang Shalom Hanoch. Every Israeli for himself.
DISILLUSIONMENT WITH all systems and ideologies is the starting point for both nihilism and spiritual search. Together, those two options help define today’s Israel.
When a person is suddenly confronted with mortality, he tends to react in one of two extreme ways. One is to cling to this world, cherish the threatened body and pursue its pleasures. The second is to seek transcendence, to live for eternity instead of the transient moment.
Israeli society has simultaneously pursued both options. The trance and Ecstasy parties, the mass flight to Goa, the weekend shopping trips to London — all are symptoms of nihilistic despair.
At the same time, Israel has become a world center for every new spiritual movement and alternative therapy. For all its maddening shallowness, New Age is a re-assertion of meaning and faith. In recent years, God has emerged as a major protagonist in Israeli popular music. Groups like Sheva, Esta, Shotei Hanevuah (The Fools of Prophesy) sing of their search for the Divine Presence. The hard rock band Hayehudim (The Jews) evokes the pain of life without faith and expresses envy for those who have it.
If anything, the crisis that began with the Yom Kippur War has only deepened.
The question of Israel’s permanence has become even more urgent in recent years. No Western society lives in greater intimacy with death than Israel; none has a more urgent need to find answers to the questions of meaning.
So, too, the crisis of authority — political, religious, moral — has become acute. As one popular bumper sticker puts it, “There is no one to trust except our Father in Heaven.” The political attempts at atonement have failed. We now know that Peace Now was wrong to assume that the blame for the absence of peace belonged to the lack of Israeli initiative, rather than the Arab world’s refusal to accept our sovereignty over any part of the land. As for Gush Emunim, the Israeli rejection of permanent occupation of another people isn’t a sign of spiritual weakness but vitality.
In fact, Israeli society has begun to repent for the arrogance of our one-dimensional certainties. Speak to partisans of the Left and the Right and many will quietly concede that they failed to recognize the complexity of our dilemma — that we can’t occupy the Palestinians and we can’t make peace with them.
That acknowledgment isn’t just a political but a spiritual awakening, atonement for our failure to heed each other’s warnings, to embrace complexity.
WITH THE collapse of the absolute truths of Left and Right — each partially right, each disastrously wrong — the next Israeli debate over the country’s spiritual identity begins in earnest. Once again, the temptation is to choose between absolutist visions: a know-nothing secularism vs. a know-everything Orthodoxy. The state, of course, has reinforced that simplistic divide, by imprisoning Judaism within the Orthodox establishment.
That politically cozy and spiritually smothering arrangement has left the vast majority of Israelis religiously disenfranchised. (To this day, no word exists in Hebrew for a religious non-Orthodox Jew.) But just as the Left-Right schism faded into history, resolved by the failure of both sides, so too will the sterile secular-Orthodox divide give way to new religious options.
Indeed, the Yom Kippur War, which taught Israelis to stop relying on official structures and trust their own initiative, has opened the way for experimental forms of Israeli Judaism. Those first signs are evident in the new study centers around the country where non-Orthodox Israelis reclaim Jewish texts and traditions without becoming Orthodox. The signs are evident, too, at the mass youth festivals on Rosh Hashana and Pessah and Shavuot, where Jewish rituals are simply accepted as part of the culture, along with Eastern and even Native American rituals.
In that new spiritual movement, “secular‘ and ’religious” are no longer contradictions — they are, in fact, meaningless identities.
Two years ago, I participated in the Shantipi festival, held on the holiday of Shavuot. The high point was a Friday night concert by Sheva, a Galilee-based band that fuses Middle Eastern and reggae and rock music and draws its lyrics from Muslim, Hindu and especially Jewish prayer.
For two hours, Sheva turned Shantipi into a New Age-style synagogue. Thousands of young people sang along with the band’s powerful version of Psalm 121: “I will lift up my eyes to the hills, from where will my help come? My help comes from God, creator of heaven and earth.‘ Then the band played a reggae rendition of the first stanza of Birkat Hamazon, the grace after meals, and the young people leaped and sang, ’Blessed are You, Adonai, King of the universe, Who sustains the world.”
If you’d asked them whether they were “religious,‘ most would have shrugged and denied it. That’s because Israeli society has forfeited Jewish authenticity to Orthodoxy, whose definition of religiosity denies non-Orthodox Israelis Judaic validation. (Consider that old secular Israeli expression, ’The synagogue I don’t go to is Orthodox.‘) And how could a concert happening on Friday night possibly be ’religious”?
Yet, standing with thousands of young people calling out for God’s protection and mercy at this time was one of the most moving religious moments I’ve experienced as an Israeli.
True, the first signs of indigenous Israeli forms of non-Orthodox Judaism are still immature, and, like all experiments, much can go wrong. But in taking responsibility for our spiritual state, we will atone for our failure to create an authentically Israeli Judaism, at once rooted and open to the world, worthy of the return of a sovereign people to its land.
That is the next phase of Israeli response to Yom Kippur 1973. The signs all around us indicate that it has already begun.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Tel Dan: Archaeology, Nature and Biblical History
Shalom Pollack
A7 News
Want to see a sensational archaeological find in the middle of one of the most beautiful places in Israel? Make the trip to Israel’s northeast corner where the Jordan River spills into the always lush Hula Valley, the foot of majestic and sometimes snow-capped Mount Hermon. Tel Dan is a favorite place to take visitors and to marvel at. Why do so many people love this place? Tel Dan gets embraces archaeology, nature, and Biblical history in one sweep.
Known as Laish to its original Canaanite inhabitants, the area was conquered by the tribe of Dan (Judges: 18) when they sought a safer place to live in the wake of recurring Philistine attacks in their original tribal portion near Beit Shemesh. The place was perfect, as beautiful and bountiful as it is today.
Tel Dan-Israelite Gate
Wikimedia Commons
When Lot, Abraham’s nephew was captured by the four kings of the north, Abraham led an expedition to free him (Genesis 14:14). The city gates of Dan from Abraham’s time have since been uncovered by archaeologists -- imagine! You can sit in the very gate that Abraham sat. This is more than just where the Bible comes alive. You can also view inscriptions with the words, “House of David, King of Israel.”
Apparently this was part of a boast made by Hazael, King of Aram in which he falsely claimed to defeat the Jewish forces that stemmed from the Davidic dynasty.
When Yirovam ben Navat broke away from the kingdom of Rechavam, son of Solomon, he took 10 of the12 tribes with him to prevent the kingdom from reuniting. To distract the people from the lawful king and from the symbol of unity -- the Temple in Jerusalem -- he established pagan worship in the form of golden calves (Kings I 1: 28) and erected them at the borders of his kingdom, one in Beit El on the southern border with Judah (Judea) on the way to Jerusalem, and the other at the northern border, Dan.
Tel Dan-Canaanite Gate
Wikimedia Commons
You will be able to see the actual altar of Yiravam ben Navat. It’s as if you’re viewing the actual drama unfold from the Book of Kings.
Tel Dan didn’t seem to lose any of its original beauty and vitality during the long exile of the Jewish People and absence from their land. It didn’t become a wasteland under the thumb of brutal conquests and neglect as much of Israel did. The waters of Mount Hermon have not ceased rushing through her streams from time immemorial. The majestic streams have maintained its youthful beauty.
Snow-capped Mt. Hermon
Ministry of Tourism
In 1939, Tel Dan was established, despite the fact that its creation was against British law. The British occupying administration at the time had issued the infamous “White Paper” severely curtailing Jewish immigration to Israel, just as the Jews were fleeing Hitler’s grasp. The British placed a “settlement freeze” on the Jews, one that was ignored by young idealistic pioneers, who resisted the draconian anti-Jewish decrees to establish new Jewish villages throughout the land.
During the 1948 War of Independence when Arabs attacked from the Golan, the Dan kibbutz evacuated women and children and stood fast against the Syrians that advanced towards them from Syria’s high vantage point. The Jewish residents lived for 19 years under the shadow of the Syrian guns.
In 1967, all that changed. With the Syrians swept from the Golan, Kibbutz Dan could breath easy and enjoy the exquisite beauty of their home.
When visiting the nature reserve today, one can enjoy the calming effects of the sounds of rushing water, the chirping of exotic birds and the sights and smells of a collage of ferns, plants and trees. At the crossroads of three continents and sitting on the great Syrian-African rift, Tel Dan hosts a wide variety of species within its 120 acres.
Shalom Pollack is a veteran Israel tour guide, who guides and plans tours for families and groups. He also writes and lectures on Israel and will be on a lecture tour in the U.S. in October-November
Think Cuban missile crisis
THE JERUSALEM POST
Iran recently became aware that its adversaries had uncovered the existence of a nuclear facility in Qom. Last week, the US shared what it knew with Russia and China, trying to persuade them to support tougher sanctions against Teheran. Late Thursday, the mullahs abruptly "reported" the secret uranium enrichment plant still under construction to the International Atomic Energy Agency. And on Friday, the US, Britain and France announced that Iran had been exposed - for the third time - trying to deceive the world.
The underground facility, ensconced inside an Islamic Revolutionary Guards base, was described by US Defense Secretary Robert Gates as "part of a pattern" of "lies" that has characterized Iran's nuclear program from "the very beginning."
But don't expect Teheran to show contrition when it meets in Geneva on Thursday with the five permanent members of the Security Council - the US, Russia, China, Britain, France, plus Germany; its first official "engagement" with Washington in decades.
Iran will express, as did Ali Akbar Salehi, head of its Atomic Energy Organization on Saturday, shock at the negative reaction to Qom. In 2003, it promised to reveal any new facilities to the IAEA as soon as it made plans to build them, but later backtracked, allowing Salehi to argue that Iran had had no obligation to tell the IAEA about Qom any sooner.
Add Qom to the scary list of facilities - at Bushehr, Isfahan, Natanz and Arak, and who knows where else - where Islamist fanaticism is being wedded to weapons of mass destruction.
The Iranian leadership's unvarnished thinking on the Qom expose was enunciated by Mohammad Mohammadi Golpayegani, supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's bureau chief: "God willing, this plant will be put into operation soon, and will blind the eyes of the enemies."
WHAT happens next? President Barack Obama declared that his "offer of a serious, meaningful dialogue to resolve this issue remains open." But he wants Iran to "come clean" and "make a choice" - cooperation or "confrontation" with the international community. Obama says his policy of engagement and multilateral consultations means that if "diplomacy does not work, we will be in a much stronger position to, for example, apply sanctions that have bite."
That is doubtful. Iran's game continues to be a cunning combination of cooperation and recalcitrance. One step forward, two steps back. For example, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told The Washington Post that he is willing to have his nuclear experts meet with scientists from the United States as a confidence-building measure. Of course these experts will be in no position to answer questions about Iran's nuclear infractions.
The autocrat who stole a basically fixed Iranian election in which only vetted candidates could compete, who believes a cabal of Jews controls the world, that the Holocaust never happened and Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth, has now given his word that Iran has no interest in acquiring nuclear weapons: "We fundamentally believe nuclear bombs are the wrong thing to have."
Iran's stratagem is to "engage" as it pushes ahead with its bomb, thereby making it hard for the international community to impose meaningful sanctions. Once it feels certain it has all the pieces of the nuclear weapon's puzzle in place - fuel, warhead, delivery system - it might offer Obama a stop just short of a test detonation, in return for a long list of Western concessions.
Anyway, the pace of economic sanctions is way out of sync with the progress the mullahs are making on their bomb. Even if Russia and China accepted a winter embargo on refined petroleum products entering Iran, is there any reason to imagine that the mere discomfort of the Iranian masses would take precedence for Khameini and Ahmadinejad over the bomb?
Obama should leapfrog over futile intermediate steps and place draconian sanctions on the table, now. To paraphrase John Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis, this would mean that all ships and planes bound for Iran, from whatever nation, would be turned back.
Perhaps this prospect, coupled with a complete land, sea and air quarantine, can influence Iran's leaders to rethink their one-step-forward-two-steps-back strategy, and save humanity from an Iranian bomb.
This article can also be read at http://www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1254163536876&pagename=JPArticle%2FShowFull
Iran recently became aware that its adversaries had uncovered the existence of a nuclear facility in Qom. Last week, the US shared what it knew with Russia and China, trying to persuade them to support tougher sanctions against Teheran. Late Thursday, the mullahs abruptly "reported" the secret uranium enrichment plant still under construction to the International Atomic Energy Agency. And on Friday, the US, Britain and France announced that Iran had been exposed - for the third time - trying to deceive the world.
The underground facility, ensconced inside an Islamic Revolutionary Guards base, was described by US Defense Secretary Robert Gates as "part of a pattern" of "lies" that has characterized Iran's nuclear program from "the very beginning."
But don't expect Teheran to show contrition when it meets in Geneva on Thursday with the five permanent members of the Security Council - the US, Russia, China, Britain, France, plus Germany; its first official "engagement" with Washington in decades.
Iran will express, as did Ali Akbar Salehi, head of its Atomic Energy Organization on Saturday, shock at the negative reaction to Qom. In 2003, it promised to reveal any new facilities to the IAEA as soon as it made plans to build them, but later backtracked, allowing Salehi to argue that Iran had had no obligation to tell the IAEA about Qom any sooner.
Add Qom to the scary list of facilities - at Bushehr, Isfahan, Natanz and Arak, and who knows where else - where Islamist fanaticism is being wedded to weapons of mass destruction.
The Iranian leadership's unvarnished thinking on the Qom expose was enunciated by Mohammad Mohammadi Golpayegani, supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's bureau chief: "God willing, this plant will be put into operation soon, and will blind the eyes of the enemies."
WHAT happens next? President Barack Obama declared that his "offer of a serious, meaningful dialogue to resolve this issue remains open." But he wants Iran to "come clean" and "make a choice" - cooperation or "confrontation" with the international community. Obama says his policy of engagement and multilateral consultations means that if "diplomacy does not work, we will be in a much stronger position to, for example, apply sanctions that have bite."
That is doubtful. Iran's game continues to be a cunning combination of cooperation and recalcitrance. One step forward, two steps back. For example, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told The Washington Post that he is willing to have his nuclear experts meet with scientists from the United States as a confidence-building measure. Of course these experts will be in no position to answer questions about Iran's nuclear infractions.
The autocrat who stole a basically fixed Iranian election in which only vetted candidates could compete, who believes a cabal of Jews controls the world, that the Holocaust never happened and Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth, has now given his word that Iran has no interest in acquiring nuclear weapons: "We fundamentally believe nuclear bombs are the wrong thing to have."
Iran's stratagem is to "engage" as it pushes ahead with its bomb, thereby making it hard for the international community to impose meaningful sanctions. Once it feels certain it has all the pieces of the nuclear weapon's puzzle in place - fuel, warhead, delivery system - it might offer Obama a stop just short of a test detonation, in return for a long list of Western concessions.
Anyway, the pace of economic sanctions is way out of sync with the progress the mullahs are making on their bomb. Even if Russia and China accepted a winter embargo on refined petroleum products entering Iran, is there any reason to imagine that the mere discomfort of the Iranian masses would take precedence for Khameini and Ahmadinejad over the bomb?
Obama should leapfrog over futile intermediate steps and place draconian sanctions on the table, now. To paraphrase John Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis, this would mean that all ships and planes bound for Iran, from whatever nation, would be turned back.
Perhaps this prospect, coupled with a complete land, sea and air quarantine, can influence Iran's leaders to rethink their one-step-forward-two-steps-back strategy, and save humanity from an Iranian bomb.
This article can also be read at http://www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1254163536876&pagename=JPArticle%2FShowFull
Arabs riot in east Jerusalem on Yom Kippur
Riots that erupted at Temple Mount spread to Old City neighborhood of Isawiya, where locals throw firebombs, set trees on fire. 'It sounded like war,' Jewish resident of nearby neighborhood says
Efrat Weiss
YNET News
Five Israel Police and Border Guard officers were lightly injured Sunday night from stones thrown at them by Arabs in the village of Isawiya in northern Jerusalem. During the riots dozens of Arabs hurled firebombs at security forces and set fire to tires at the entrance to the village.
Residents of Isawiya also set a number of trees on fire, but the blaze was extinguished by firefighters who were dispatched to the scene.
"It sounded like war," a Jewish resident of a nearby neighborhood said.
Also on Yom Kippur, Arabs threw two Molotov cocktails towards Jewish homes in east Jerusalem's Silwan neighborhood, causing no injuries or damage.
The violence in Isawiya came on the heels of Sunday morning's clashes between police and Muslim worshippers at the Temple Mount compound in the Old City, which reportedly erupted when a group of tourists entered the compound accompanied by a police force. Eleven Arabs were detained.
Later on in the day stones were thrown at security forces in the Old City's Sa'adia neighborhood. Three Border Guard officers sustained light injuries. Stun grenades were used to contain the riot.
Comment:On the highest of Jewish days of worship Arabs demonstrate their true personality, their true feelings and their authentic desire for co-existence by attacking Israelis attempting no more than to observe their day.I hear no outrage from the UN, nor do I hear from the Hague any violation of Jewish rights and all of the "concerned" peace groups are mute. Here is the truth about those the international community is trying to dictate us to negotiate. We will not allow this behavior to influence our rights for peace in our land.
Efrat Weiss
YNET News
Five Israel Police and Border Guard officers were lightly injured Sunday night from stones thrown at them by Arabs in the village of Isawiya in northern Jerusalem. During the riots dozens of Arabs hurled firebombs at security forces and set fire to tires at the entrance to the village.
Residents of Isawiya also set a number of trees on fire, but the blaze was extinguished by firefighters who were dispatched to the scene.
"It sounded like war," a Jewish resident of a nearby neighborhood said.
Also on Yom Kippur, Arabs threw two Molotov cocktails towards Jewish homes in east Jerusalem's Silwan neighborhood, causing no injuries or damage.
The violence in Isawiya came on the heels of Sunday morning's clashes between police and Muslim worshippers at the Temple Mount compound in the Old City, which reportedly erupted when a group of tourists entered the compound accompanied by a police force. Eleven Arabs were detained.
Later on in the day stones were thrown at security forces in the Old City's Sa'adia neighborhood. Three Border Guard officers sustained light injuries. Stun grenades were used to contain the riot.
Comment:On the highest of Jewish days of worship Arabs demonstrate their true personality, their true feelings and their authentic desire for co-existence by attacking Israelis attempting no more than to observe their day.I hear no outrage from the UN, nor do I hear from the Hague any violation of Jewish rights and all of the "concerned" peace groups are mute. Here is the truth about those the international community is trying to dictate us to negotiate. We will not allow this behavior to influence our rights for peace in our land.
No we are not-this sounds familiar...what ru planning?
Palestinians warn Israel after Jerusalem clash
Chief Palestinian negotiator Erekat says incident at Temple Mount on eve of Yom Kippur redolent of former PM Sharon's visit to site in 2000, which sparked second intifada; 'providing police escort for settlers who are against peace at all costs not act of someone who is committed to peace,' he says
Reuters
YNET News
Palestinian leaders warned Israel on Sunday not to stoke tension in Jerusalem in the hope of thwarting peace talks, after clashes at a sacred site in which Palestinians and Israeli police were injured. "At a time when (US) President (Barack) Obama is trying to bridge the divide between Palestinians and Israelis, and to get negotiations back on track, Israel is deliberately escalating tensions in Jerusalem," chief peace negotiator Saeb Erekat said.
"We've seen this before, and we know what the consequences are," the Palestinian minister added, in a statement that recalled the visit of then Israeli opposition leader Ariel Sharon to the site in Jerusalem's Old City in 2000.
Sharon's presence at al-Aqsa mosque, the third holiest site in Islam, triggered the second Palestinian uprising and dealt the biggest setback to peace efforts in years.
The reasons behind Sunday's clash were disputed.
According to legislator Hathem Abdel Kader and other Palestinian sources, the clash erupted in the early morning when Palestinians inside the complex -- sacred to both Islam and Judaism -- saw a group of 15 religious Jews trying to enter.
The Jews never managed to get into the complex, because several hundred Palestinians, who were on alert for such a possibility, began a loud protest. Israeli police responded with tear gas then stun grenades.
The clash occurred hours before the start of Yom Kippur, the solemn "Day of Atonement" which is the holiest day in the Jewish calendar.
Police were on alert for violent protests in several flashpoints where Jews and Arabs live side by side.
Palestinians: No tourists were involved
Protesters threw stones, chairs and whatever they could lay hands on as riot police rushed to the scene. Video showed them trying to drive police away from the doorway of the al-Aqsa mosque, but there was no sign that police entered it.
Police said 17 officers were hurt and 11 rioters arrested, and medics said 13 Palestinians were treated for injuries. There were no reports of serious injury or death.
Israeli police said it began when religious Palestinians angered by immodestly dressed tourists grew violent.
Palestinians dismissed that account, saying no tourists were involved. There was no further comment from Israeli authorities, who were observing the Yom Kippur silence.
"Providing a police escort for settlers who are against peace at all costs, and whose presence is deliberately designed to provoke a reaction, are not the actions of someone who is committed to peace, but of someone who will go to extraordinary lengths to scuttle all hopes of peace," Erekat said.
He said it was "deliberately timed to coincide with the eve of the anniversary of that visit" by a government "emboldened by its ability to fend off calls for a settlement freeze".
The complex is known to Jews as the Temple Mount and to Muslims as the Haram al-Sharif (Noble Sanctuary). Located above the Jewish prayer site at the Western Wall, it includes al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock mosque.
In Muslim tradition, the Prophet Mohammad ascended to heaven from the rock at the centre of what is now the Dome of the Rock shrine. The gilded dome sits over the spot where Jews believe Abraham was about to sacrifice his son Isaac to God before an angel stayed his hand.
Jewish visitors need permission from Israeli police to visit this part of the site. During mass Muslim prayers, Israel also restricts access by Palestinian Muslim men under 50.
Israel captured the site in the 1967 Middle East war and annexed it with the rest of East Jerusalem, in a move not recognized internationally.
Sharon's visit enraged Palestinians and the resulting uprising rapidly escalated, with numerous suicide bomb attacks on Israeli civilians.
Comment:The PA lost at the UN, their credibility continues to slide outside the Arab world and within it. When pressed, the Arabs turn to an old tactic,blame the Jews and begin to set the stage for "But the Jews made us do it"-begin another intifada. Not this time, I am calling you out on this lie you just told the press. I agree with you on one point, we have seen this before and before and before!
Monday, September 28, 2009
Introspection
Ari Bussel
“Israeli society, over all, is moderate centrist, value-driven (even if there are times of crises) and strong. For decades I hear cries from the Right (similar to your own) and the Left, and see what a wonder – not one of these comes into being. I suggest you breathe deeply, calm down and look at the positive sides: a reasonable economy, a stable democracy, fight-to-the-end at public corruption, fight against organized crime, a public health care system, a new and promising education minister, a nation that enlisted and reduced 20% from its home water consumption due to the drought and on and on and on.” An Israeli “Zionist” September 2009 “None of the promises fulfilled, all the warnings coming into being” is the lesson one learns evaluating the “cries” from the Right and the Left. There are numerous success stories – from Israeli companies publicly traded in NY to mega-billionaires living in Israel – but if I were to describe Israel today, I would stay away exactly from these areas mentioned.
There are even more people who live from one pay check to another suffering from chronic overdraft, soldiers who would not go home for the weekend to spare their parents who have little food and those who live below the poverty level, including many foreigners who were brought to Israel as foreign, cheap labor. There is prostitution, violence and Mafia, and corruption has spread through every good parcel, especially at the very top among elected and appointed officials.
The hallmark of the Israeli “stable” democracy can best be described by the byline of a local Beverly Hills non-profit headed by a billionaire who raises funds from others to overhaul the system in Israel, stating that over its 62 year of existence as a modern land, Israel saw more than 30 governments. Another description of the “solidness” of the Israeli system is derived from a guest of the same non-profit organization who just visited Beverly Hills. Ms. Livni, the former Foreign Minister and the head of the opposition was unable to form a coalition government thus necessitating the country go into election mode, following which her party won a majority. Yet she sits in the opposition and does not lead.
The public health care system, the type of “socialized medicine” our own President aspires to institute, has been fast approaching the hallmarks of the USA, from litigation to costly mistakes by doctors who only expedite operations if the patient’s family pays on the side. Some may call it “black marketeering.” No one would use such a system as a teaching tool at a school of medicine.
The Israeli academic system has produced some of the finest “Post Zionist” professors, including those “few on the outskirts” at Ben Gurion University of the Negev, who called last month to “BOYCOTT ISRAEL” since it is an “Apartheid State.” These professors train the next generation of thinkers and influencers.
The brain drain has characterized Israel for the past couple of decades, to the extent it became a hot topic of discussion during the recent prominent gathering of minds at the Herzelia Conference. Many hoped the global financial meltdown would convince some to return to Israel, and decision makers were urged both to prevent future brain drain and prepare to welcome back those who had left.
Is the situation any better at the elementary or high school levels? The reference to a new minister is to differentiate the new minister from his predecessor, Prof. Yuli Tamir, who removed Zionism from the textbooks of Israeli youth. She instituted, instead, the study of “Nakba,” the notion of a “disaster” to those who woke to destroy the infant state but failed. In modern, Post-Zionist Israel, there are some who believe that we must teach the other side’s propaganda as part of the curriculum.
Education in Israel has been recognized as one of the foremost priorities requiring immediate corrective action. Basic math, science, history and languages (other than English and the power of money, greed and “haves” vs. “have nots”) are lacking greatly – similar to what is happening in the USA. In the USA many youngsters cannot tell if Canada is north or south of their country, or where in the world Venezuela might be. Similar examples can be given in many other subjects regarding students in Israel.
A simple process of elimination leaves one with only “water saving techniques” as the highlight of Israel’s current achievements according to this Israeli “Zionist.” A success story? Hardly. Israel knew for many years its main water reservoir, the Sea of Galilee, is at a critical level. One red line was past after the next, but no changes of substance were effected. As the situation worsened and reached a catastrophic and irreversible level, the realization that immediate action is required replaced neglect and inaction.
Short-term measures touted as “success stories” are a miserable cover to consistent failures at systematically addressing a problem. Acute water shortage was clear and visible to all over a period of many decades. Yet neither education and measures to change wasteful habits nor long term planning and the needed investment were in place. The situation is not much different than in Los Angeles, a desert area that despite the image of trees and greenery is fed by aqueducts. Can anyone dismiss years of watering the curves with fresh water with the ten percent mandatory reduction instituted this year?
During this period between the Jewish New Year and the Jewish Day of Atonement, we must think and evaluate. Introspection, as the one triggered by a letter from an Israeli academic from which I quoted above, is a wonderful way to carry out self-exam.
The Israeli is badly mistaken. Israel is weak today. Mainstream Israelis have grown accustomed to the good life after six decades of existence as a modern country. Materialism rules. It results in shortsightedness the likes of which almost blinds the looker. They indulge in today, here and now. They have convinced themselves they are tired of fighting and terrorism. They marvel at their own successes and live in euphoria. They have succumbed to the rhetoric of a skillful enemy and are calling to “give back” the “occupied territories.”
Israelis need to read and re-read the Declaration of Independence. They need to open THE BOOK and start in Genesis. They need to focus of the story of the deliverance from slavery to freedom and independence, the meaning of Shabbat and the existence of the Almighty. Saying is insufficient. Living in all parts of our being is what is missing, and the need only intensifies as our condition continues to deteriorate. Jewish people have a history and, as with all people, when it is ignored or forgotten, tragedy ensues.
Israel will awaken to the hardest hit in recent memory. A generation ago on Atonement Day 1973, Israel was caught off guard. She was attacked. She was completely unprepared despite highly visible warning signs. It took her many, long months and a very heavy price to recoup. She did, but the dream-victory of 1967 will forever be gone.
Now a new enemy has emerged, one who knows how to manipulate the Israeli psych as well as that of the world. We learned to pity a new people, recognize a new dream for nationhood and even use a devised history as justification. The Jewish-Israeli narrative was borrowed and a new “People” dressed up in it. Not surprisingly, we all accepted the story line, for we knew it first hand. Except, it is the story of three thousand years, of a Holocaust and a new birth of the Jewish State, it is the story of the Israelites, from Abraham’s time to the present.
From the Oslo Accords onward, through the Intifadas, presented as legitimate armed struggles against an oppressor, we transposed reality, equating barbarism to the best there is: a state based on Jewish principles.
Suddenly martyrs exploding themselves amidst holiday celebrations, families spending an afternoon at an eatery or youth dancing the night away became “freedom fighters” and their means justified the goal. The goal, for those who refuse to see, is the utter destruction of the Jewish State and the elimination of the Jewish “race.” It is the same drive of the Nazis, albeit in the third millennium.
Humanity stood still and forgot to speak. Out of the horror of death, mayhem and destruction, we were being fed new sound bites – “legitimate struggle,” “Apartheid,” “genocide,” “oppression” – to which new blood libels were added with increasing daily dosage.
New calls to action were being heard: boycott and divest. Fight the oppression.
Israel is being demonized and Israelis participate in this evil dance designed to create a trance during which the body-Israel will be stubbed and mutilated, its limbs torn apart, its organs torn out with a barbaric-satanic roar.
The race intensified. New players entered the arena, including the President of Iran whose calls to wipe the Jewish Homeland off the map and lies the Holocaust never happened are exclaimed from the dais of the United Nations. From the least likely of places, friends turned into enemies, and those on the sidelines suddenly took a courageous stand (albeit self-serving) to side with the Jews.
As we look around we notice the signs. They are clear and appear in greater numbers and with ever increasing frequency. The enemy tells us what it wants – to destroy the Jewish Homeland and then to establish a new caliphate extending from Iran Eastward and Westward until the sphere of influence is all-encompassing. A new era is being ushered in, and Israel is the first to pay the price.
Only when the price becomes so steep, Israelis will ask how have they erred so grievously– from a failing educational system to a health system that is less than desirable, from a new generation that does not want – and does not understand the need – to serve and to protect to a generation that feels it has done enough and it is time for peace. In retrospect Israelis will lament not the craving for peace but the foolishness of their ways. Instead of getting ready, they drifted along a euphoric path toward a dream of peace. This well-intentioned movement turned out to be a death row march to the guillotine.
Wake up, Jewish State. It is on your shoulders the world stands. If Europe and the United States fall, China, India, Japan and the rest of the East will follow suit, for the globe is interconnected, one cannot exist without the other.
Strengthen yourself from within, Israel. Focus solely on education and medicine, science and technology and other advancements. But learn your history and protect the old Covenant, a story told to a child before birth and whispered throughout the ages: The G-d of the Hebrews has chosen His nation from among all nations. A great burden and an even greater responsibility is therefore carried by the Jewish People. Carry it with pride, reignite and rekindle, for you are, and you must forever serve as a LIGHT ONTO THE NATIONS.
“Israeli society, over all, is moderate centrist, value-driven (even if there are times of crises) and strong. For decades I hear cries from the Right (similar to your own) and the Left, and see what a wonder – not one of these comes into being. I suggest you breathe deeply, calm down and look at the positive sides: a reasonable economy, a stable democracy, fight-to-the-end at public corruption, fight against organized crime, a public health care system, a new and promising education minister, a nation that enlisted and reduced 20% from its home water consumption due to the drought and on and on and on.” An Israeli “Zionist” September 2009 “None of the promises fulfilled, all the warnings coming into being” is the lesson one learns evaluating the “cries” from the Right and the Left. There are numerous success stories – from Israeli companies publicly traded in NY to mega-billionaires living in Israel – but if I were to describe Israel today, I would stay away exactly from these areas mentioned.
There are even more people who live from one pay check to another suffering from chronic overdraft, soldiers who would not go home for the weekend to spare their parents who have little food and those who live below the poverty level, including many foreigners who were brought to Israel as foreign, cheap labor. There is prostitution, violence and Mafia, and corruption has spread through every good parcel, especially at the very top among elected and appointed officials.
The hallmark of the Israeli “stable” democracy can best be described by the byline of a local Beverly Hills non-profit headed by a billionaire who raises funds from others to overhaul the system in Israel, stating that over its 62 year of existence as a modern land, Israel saw more than 30 governments. Another description of the “solidness” of the Israeli system is derived from a guest of the same non-profit organization who just visited Beverly Hills. Ms. Livni, the former Foreign Minister and the head of the opposition was unable to form a coalition government thus necessitating the country go into election mode, following which her party won a majority. Yet she sits in the opposition and does not lead.
The public health care system, the type of “socialized medicine” our own President aspires to institute, has been fast approaching the hallmarks of the USA, from litigation to costly mistakes by doctors who only expedite operations if the patient’s family pays on the side. Some may call it “black marketeering.” No one would use such a system as a teaching tool at a school of medicine.
The Israeli academic system has produced some of the finest “Post Zionist” professors, including those “few on the outskirts” at Ben Gurion University of the Negev, who called last month to “BOYCOTT ISRAEL” since it is an “Apartheid State.” These professors train the next generation of thinkers and influencers.
The brain drain has characterized Israel for the past couple of decades, to the extent it became a hot topic of discussion during the recent prominent gathering of minds at the Herzelia Conference. Many hoped the global financial meltdown would convince some to return to Israel, and decision makers were urged both to prevent future brain drain and prepare to welcome back those who had left.
Is the situation any better at the elementary or high school levels? The reference to a new minister is to differentiate the new minister from his predecessor, Prof. Yuli Tamir, who removed Zionism from the textbooks of Israeli youth. She instituted, instead, the study of “Nakba,” the notion of a “disaster” to those who woke to destroy the infant state but failed. In modern, Post-Zionist Israel, there are some who believe that we must teach the other side’s propaganda as part of the curriculum.
Education in Israel has been recognized as one of the foremost priorities requiring immediate corrective action. Basic math, science, history and languages (other than English and the power of money, greed and “haves” vs. “have nots”) are lacking greatly – similar to what is happening in the USA. In the USA many youngsters cannot tell if Canada is north or south of their country, or where in the world Venezuela might be. Similar examples can be given in many other subjects regarding students in Israel.
A simple process of elimination leaves one with only “water saving techniques” as the highlight of Israel’s current achievements according to this Israeli “Zionist.” A success story? Hardly. Israel knew for many years its main water reservoir, the Sea of Galilee, is at a critical level. One red line was past after the next, but no changes of substance were effected. As the situation worsened and reached a catastrophic and irreversible level, the realization that immediate action is required replaced neglect and inaction.
Short-term measures touted as “success stories” are a miserable cover to consistent failures at systematically addressing a problem. Acute water shortage was clear and visible to all over a period of many decades. Yet neither education and measures to change wasteful habits nor long term planning and the needed investment were in place. The situation is not much different than in Los Angeles, a desert area that despite the image of trees and greenery is fed by aqueducts. Can anyone dismiss years of watering the curves with fresh water with the ten percent mandatory reduction instituted this year?
During this period between the Jewish New Year and the Jewish Day of Atonement, we must think and evaluate. Introspection, as the one triggered by a letter from an Israeli academic from which I quoted above, is a wonderful way to carry out self-exam.
The Israeli is badly mistaken. Israel is weak today. Mainstream Israelis have grown accustomed to the good life after six decades of existence as a modern country. Materialism rules. It results in shortsightedness the likes of which almost blinds the looker. They indulge in today, here and now. They have convinced themselves they are tired of fighting and terrorism. They marvel at their own successes and live in euphoria. They have succumbed to the rhetoric of a skillful enemy and are calling to “give back” the “occupied territories.”
Israelis need to read and re-read the Declaration of Independence. They need to open THE BOOK and start in Genesis. They need to focus of the story of the deliverance from slavery to freedom and independence, the meaning of Shabbat and the existence of the Almighty. Saying is insufficient. Living in all parts of our being is what is missing, and the need only intensifies as our condition continues to deteriorate. Jewish people have a history and, as with all people, when it is ignored or forgotten, tragedy ensues.
Israel will awaken to the hardest hit in recent memory. A generation ago on Atonement Day 1973, Israel was caught off guard. She was attacked. She was completely unprepared despite highly visible warning signs. It took her many, long months and a very heavy price to recoup. She did, but the dream-victory of 1967 will forever be gone.
Now a new enemy has emerged, one who knows how to manipulate the Israeli psych as well as that of the world. We learned to pity a new people, recognize a new dream for nationhood and even use a devised history as justification. The Jewish-Israeli narrative was borrowed and a new “People” dressed up in it. Not surprisingly, we all accepted the story line, for we knew it first hand. Except, it is the story of three thousand years, of a Holocaust and a new birth of the Jewish State, it is the story of the Israelites, from Abraham’s time to the present.
From the Oslo Accords onward, through the Intifadas, presented as legitimate armed struggles against an oppressor, we transposed reality, equating barbarism to the best there is: a state based on Jewish principles.
Suddenly martyrs exploding themselves amidst holiday celebrations, families spending an afternoon at an eatery or youth dancing the night away became “freedom fighters” and their means justified the goal. The goal, for those who refuse to see, is the utter destruction of the Jewish State and the elimination of the Jewish “race.” It is the same drive of the Nazis, albeit in the third millennium.
Humanity stood still and forgot to speak. Out of the horror of death, mayhem and destruction, we were being fed new sound bites – “legitimate struggle,” “Apartheid,” “genocide,” “oppression” – to which new blood libels were added with increasing daily dosage.
New calls to action were being heard: boycott and divest. Fight the oppression.
Israel is being demonized and Israelis participate in this evil dance designed to create a trance during which the body-Israel will be stubbed and mutilated, its limbs torn apart, its organs torn out with a barbaric-satanic roar.
The race intensified. New players entered the arena, including the President of Iran whose calls to wipe the Jewish Homeland off the map and lies the Holocaust never happened are exclaimed from the dais of the United Nations. From the least likely of places, friends turned into enemies, and those on the sidelines suddenly took a courageous stand (albeit self-serving) to side with the Jews.
As we look around we notice the signs. They are clear and appear in greater numbers and with ever increasing frequency. The enemy tells us what it wants – to destroy the Jewish Homeland and then to establish a new caliphate extending from Iran Eastward and Westward until the sphere of influence is all-encompassing. A new era is being ushered in, and Israel is the first to pay the price.
Only when the price becomes so steep, Israelis will ask how have they erred so grievously– from a failing educational system to a health system that is less than desirable, from a new generation that does not want – and does not understand the need – to serve and to protect to a generation that feels it has done enough and it is time for peace. In retrospect Israelis will lament not the craving for peace but the foolishness of their ways. Instead of getting ready, they drifted along a euphoric path toward a dream of peace. This well-intentioned movement turned out to be a death row march to the guillotine.
Wake up, Jewish State. It is on your shoulders the world stands. If Europe and the United States fall, China, India, Japan and the rest of the East will follow suit, for the globe is interconnected, one cannot exist without the other.
Strengthen yourself from within, Israel. Focus solely on education and medicine, science and technology and other advancements. But learn your history and protect the old Covenant, a story told to a child before birth and whispered throughout the ages: The G-d of the Hebrews has chosen His nation from among all nations. A great burden and an even greater responsibility is therefore carried by the Jewish People. Carry it with pride, reignite and rekindle, for you are, and you must forever serve as a LIGHT ONTO THE NATIONS.