As is often the case before
Shabbat, this post will be brief -- primarily a follow-up on the Sinai situation
that I have been watching to the best of my ability.
From Egyptian security agents has
come the information that Cairo is asking Israel to hold off on demands
regarding deployment of troops and introduction of tanks into the
Sinai:
"We are aware of Israeli claims
and concerns, but we want to postpone the discussion due to the sensitive
situation in which the Egyptian regime is currently in as it operates against
Islamist terror organizations in Sinai." This is from Israel
Hayom, citing Ma'an News Agency.
~~~~~~~~~~
And so I find myself, once again,
asking the questions, but having no definitive answers to provide:
Is taking on the
Islamists genuinely the reason a delay is sought?
Or does the "sensitive
situation" have to do with internal politics and the reluctance of a new regime
to look weak by backing down to Israel? I can easily imagine
this. When looking at the Ma'an (PA) news site I picked up a talkback
to an article about Israeli demands that said, "Look, already Egypt is
caving to Israel."
Or is this simply a stalling
mechanism?
And then: How is Israel responding
and what do we do about it?
~~~~~~~~~~
Israel's decision, in part, would
depend upon the assessment of Egyptian intent and sincerity in the matter.
Egypt is certainly
exhibiting no overt belligerency. From the Arabic language daily
in London, Al Hayat comes the information today that the
new Egyptian Defense Minister Abdel Fattah al-Sisi has called
Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak with words of
reassurance:
Cairo, al-Sisi is reported
to have said, is committed to the peace treaty, even though troops are being
brought in right now to fight terrorists. Al Hayat says that
the two ministers "came to terms" over Sinai, although I have no clue as to
what this really means.
Additionally, there are reports
that Egypt is taking out additional smuggling tunnels with
explosives.
~~~~~~~~~~
Israel's options are
limited. It is essential that we register concern about anything
Egypt does that is not coordinated with us or hasn't been agreed upon. And
it is highly constructive that we are talking to the Egyptians.
But it may well be that "coming to
terms" between the two ministers simply means that Barak said, "All right, I get
it, we'll cut you slack for now." I don't know this -- it is
simply reasonable speculation.
As we contemplate the countdown to
an attack on Iran, we are not about to challenge Egypt militarily, nor do
we wish to escalate tensions with Cairo.
What is more, in the face of the
announcement of Obama's invitation to Morsi to come to the White House, we
would be foolish to expect much, if anything, in the way of American
intervention on this issue. Here is a test of American readiness
to honor a commitment to Israel.
~~~~~~~~~~
I wrote yesterday about the fact
that Amos Gilad said there were no anti-aircraft missiles in Sinai -- a
statement that startled me because of solid information that had come through
less than a week ago to the contrary. I pondered the question of
whether the original information was erroneous, or whether they might have
been taken out under Israeli protest.
Aaron Lerner, writing on IMRA,
poses a couple of other possibilities, which highlight the
complexity of the situation: Maybe, he said, those missiles are
still there but Gilad prefers not to escalate tensions right now. Or
perhaps a third party is working on getting them removed, but has requested that
there be no public spotlight on the issue.
Maybe... perhaps...
~~~~~~~~~~
I dearly hope to turn to other
subjects after Shabbat.
I'll end here on a good
note: According to the Bloomberg Ratings, Israel is the 6th healthiest
country in the world, falling behind only Singapore, Italy, Australia,
Switzerland, and Japan. The US is 33rd .
Another sign that we're doing
something (or a host of somethings) right.
~~~~~~~~~~
©
Arlene Kushner. This material is produced by Arlene Kushner,
functioning as an independent journalist. Permission is granted for it to be
reproduced only
with
proper attribution.
This material
is transmitted by Arlene only to persons who have requested it or agreed to
receive it. If you are on the list and wish to be removed, contact Arlene and
include your name in the text of the
message.
No comments:
Post a Comment