That's the current state of
affairs.
Yesterday, the High Court --
totally as expected -- rejected the appeals of families of terror victims and
said that the State had the right, for diplomatic reasons, to effect
the release of the first 26 Palestinian Arab terrorists.
And so, after midnight last night
(the wee hours of Wednesday, the 14th) the arrangements were carried
out by Prison Services, with some being bused to Ramallah and others to the Erez
Crossing into Gaza.
For obvious reasons, Hamas forbid
its populace to have public celebrations over the releases. This would
have been an acknowledgement that Abbas had achieved something in the lead
up to negotiations, which they are dead set against. (More below on
this.)
For equally obvious reasons, the
Palestinian Authority engaged in celebration as the prisoners were brought to
the presidential compound. Israel had specifically requested that the
welcome of the released be kept low key. But Israeli officials must have
known they were blowin' in the wind when they made that request: Israel
cannot prevent us from celebrating, PA officials retorted. There
was music, and there were fireworks. PA officials were there along with
families, offering welcome.
Always and ever, please! keep in
mind, and remind others, what sort of low life villains the Palestinian
Authority is celebrating as heroes.
~~~~~~~~~~
An epiphany: That the bad guys,
our enemies, should achieve a victory of sorts such as
this is disheartening, and indeed sickening. But there is
another way to look at it. That they welcome vile murderers as heroes
throws into stark relief the evidence of what sort of people they are. See
Abbas rejoicing with terrorists:
Credit: Times of
Israel
So, I would suggest, we are able
to look at them, do our own rejoicing because of the difference
between them and ourselves, and thank Heaven for that
difference.
~~~~~~~~~~
Even with the celebrations that
were anticipated, once the names of the prisoners who were scheduled to be
released had been announced, a note of discontent was also voiced in certain
Palestinian Arab circles. That had to do with the fact that no Palestinian
Arabs who hold Israel citizenship or Jerusalem residency were
included.
Kadoura Fares, director of the
Palestinian Prisoners’ Club, referred to a "flaw" created by Israel's selection
of the first group of prisoners. He said it would be discussed by PA officials,
who would seek to have input in future selections.
The reason why no Israel Arab
prisoners were released is obvious: The government was trying to avoid riling
the Israeli populace any more than it already had -- and the release of Israeli
citizens at the behest of Abbas would have been particularly contentious.
I am hardly the only one who feels
that -- as reprehensible as the release of any of the Palestinian Arab
prisoners is -- the release of Israeli Arab citizens who acted in
ways they perceived as doing battle on behalf of an enemy, at the
intercession of that enemy, is especially offensive. It should fall
exclusively to Israel to deal with her own citizens.
Even now I ponder whether there is
some way to stop their release from happening.
With this issue we step into the
very thorny territory of the disloyalty of increasing numbers of Arabs who are
Israeli citizens -- who receive the rights and protections of Israel (and would
not for anything opt to switch that for PA residency and the very dubious to
non-existent rights and protections that would flow from this), and yet are
prepared to identify with Israel's enemy.
The fact is that in recent years
Palestinian Arabs have deliberately prevailed upon Israeli Arab citizens
to project loyalty to the PA "cause" rather than to Israel. This at the
same time that we are accused of being "apartheid" by the PA. I am not
suggesting that the PA prevails overtly upon Israeli Arabs to become terrorists,
I am suggesting something more subtle. But that terrorist groups recruit among
Israeli Arabs is unquestionably the case -- and they are more susceptible to
recruitment if they already identify with the PA.
~~~~~~~~~~
I would shudder to think that PA
authorities would have any say in which prisoners were selected
for each subsequent release -- if indeed all three projected releases are
carried out.
At the hearing before the High
Court, when the families of victims were petitioning for the halt to the
release, a representative of the State said that subsequent releases were
conditional on the "peace talks." If the talks did not proceed,
then there was an "option" to not release further prisoners.
An "option"? Does this
suggest that maybe talks will collapse and we'll continue with the releases
anyway? (That would be what Abbas would demand, surely, claiming
that it was Israel's fault that talks failed.)
A different
interpretation: Less than two weeks ago, Israeli negotiator Tzipi Livni
said release of further prisoners will depend upon the progress
of the talks.
No way to pin down Israeli
intentions on this now. Diplomats have said that Netanyahu does intend to
demand in the future that dangerous prisoners who are released be deported out
of the area -- something Abbas has declared will not happen.
~~~~~~~~~~
What is greatly distressing, if
true, with regard to those who were selected for the current release, is a
report from Maariv: Apparently the responsible committee
ignored recommendations of the Shin Bet (Israeli internal security), which
had provided a list of 40 prisoners -- who represented the least
security threat -- from which to select the 26.
Some of those names were
reportedly passed over and others substituted because they had more popularity
in the Palestinian Arab street and thus might provide a bigger boost to the
popularity of Abbas.
I give credence to this is part
because elsewhere I read that there had been some changes in the list before it
was released.
Heading that committee
was Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon. And my immediate response
was, Bogie? Even
Bogie? He did vote for the prisoner release, which was a great
disappointment. I know that he knows better, which makes it even more
painful, if true, than if he actually believed peace with the PA was around the
corner. (See his cynical assessment below.)
Did the PA have input into the
matter of which prisoners have the most street popularity?
~~~~~~~~~~
And so, as far as we know,
"negotiations" did begin today here in Jerusalem, with the agenda, the place and
the time kept secret. There is supposed to be a full media blackout as talks
proceed, but I see this as exceedingly unlikely -- most particularly from the PA
side.
~~~~~~~~~~
Moshe Ya'alon told reporters
(emphasis added):
"We set ourselves the goal of nine
months in which we will try to reach something with the Palestinians. We've been
trying for 20 years since Oslo, and for over 120 years of the conflict.
The skepticism in the tone of my remarks is apparent, but we've
decided to give it a chance."
~~~~~~~~~
Mahmoud Al-Zahar, a
Gaza-based Hamas official, has made it clear that Hamas will not be bound
by any outcome of the negotiations. This is hardly a surprise.
But we need to follow this
further: Hamas officials are angry that "the PA has dealt the final blow to
reconciliation talks." Thus, says Al-Zahar, Hamas needs to isolate Abbas
and strip him of any authority to negotiate.
Hamas intentions to
undermine Abbas among his own people, and to destabilize the PA, represent
yet other reasons not to negotiate with the PA. Abbas is without the
backing to make his actions credible and is exceedingly vulnerable.
A handful of prisoners that are
popular on the street may have been released by Israel in an attempt to garner
further support for him. But in the end that will be a very small matter
that does not significantly alter the situation. The mere fact that there
was concern about the need to strengthen Abbas speaks volumes.
~~~~~~~~~~
I note here that the talks
presumably have begun in spite of the pronunciations of Yasser Abed Rabbo, a
senior PLO official. who was put out with the very recent announcement of an
additional almost 800 apartments to be built in Jerusalem neighborhoods past the
Green Line.
Abed Rabbo said the approval of this building "could" (not
"would") bring about the "collapse" of the talks: "This settlement
expansion is unprecedented. It threatens to make talks fail even before
they have started."
Mere talk only -- the sort of carrying on that we might expect. What was more interesting to me was that almost immediately Kerry advised that no one should get too upset about this.
Kerry?
It was clear as it might be then that there had been an understanding between Kerry and Netanyahu. I can imagine Netanyahu telling Kerry that the only way he could pull off the prisoner release was if he made the right wing of his government happy by approving building. And indeed, subsequently Kerry acknowledged that Netanyahu had told him forthrightly that since there was no agreement with regard to a building freeze there would be building.
This is what he said yesterday (emphasis added):
"Let me make it clear: The policy of the United States of America with respect to all settlements is that they are illegitimate, and we oppose settlements taking place at any time, not just the time of the peace process.
But – here’s the but – that said, Prime Minister Netanyahu was completely upfront with me and with President Abbas that he would be announcing some additional building that would take place in places that will not affect the peace map, that will not have any impact on the capacity to have a peace agreement. That means that it is building within the so-called blocs in areas that many people make a presumption – obviously not some Palestinians or others – will be part of Israel in the future. He has specifically agreed not to disturb what might be the potential for peace going forward.
Now, we still believe it would be better not to be doing it, but there are realities within life in Israel that also have to be taken into account here going forward.
http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213105.htm
I note here that he says that Abbas was informed of this, and so we can assume that all the PA grandstanding is just that. What is more, that they lied when they said, as they did, that Kerry promised that there would be no building.
Altogether, I find this an interesting state of affairs. Is Kerry starting to publicly indicate impatience with Abbas?
~~~~~~~~~~
What Kerry said here about the Israeli position represents it accurately. The prime minister's office is saying that building will take place only in blocs in Judea and Samaria or in neighborhoods in Jerusalem that we would be retaining in any negotiated agreement. The notion that our building in neighborhoods such as Gilo or Har Homa represents a threat to "the peace process" is beyond ridiculous, frankly.
Of course Uri Ariel, Housing and Construction Minister, says:
"No other nation on the planet accepts diktats from other countries on where it can build and where it can't. We're going to continue issuing tenders for apartments and we're going to build all over Israel, according to our citizens' needs."
What I can report with certainty is Israeli delight at the prospect of housing being constructed, when there has been a shortage for some while. I've noted this before: the construction of housing in Israel so often carries political implications that are assumed to be paramount.
But the bottom line is that people in Israel need places to live. We are, thank Heaven, a growing population. We have more children per couple than Jews anywhere else in the world. Our kids grow up, get married, and seek homes of their own.
~~~~~~~~~~
Mere talk only -- the sort of carrying on that we might expect. What was more interesting to me was that almost immediately Kerry advised that no one should get too upset about this.
Kerry?
It was clear as it might be then that there had been an understanding between Kerry and Netanyahu. I can imagine Netanyahu telling Kerry that the only way he could pull off the prisoner release was if he made the right wing of his government happy by approving building. And indeed, subsequently Kerry acknowledged that Netanyahu had told him forthrightly that since there was no agreement with regard to a building freeze there would be building.
This is what he said yesterday (emphasis added):
"Let me make it clear: The policy of the United States of America with respect to all settlements is that they are illegitimate, and we oppose settlements taking place at any time, not just the time of the peace process.
But – here’s the but – that said, Prime Minister Netanyahu was completely upfront with me and with President Abbas that he would be announcing some additional building that would take place in places that will not affect the peace map, that will not have any impact on the capacity to have a peace agreement. That means that it is building within the so-called blocs in areas that many people make a presumption – obviously not some Palestinians or others – will be part of Israel in the future. He has specifically agreed not to disturb what might be the potential for peace going forward.
Now, we still believe it would be better not to be doing it, but there are realities within life in Israel that also have to be taken into account here going forward.
http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/213105.htm
I note here that he says that Abbas was informed of this, and so we can assume that all the PA grandstanding is just that. What is more, that they lied when they said, as they did, that Kerry promised that there would be no building.
Altogether, I find this an interesting state of affairs. Is Kerry starting to publicly indicate impatience with Abbas?
~~~~~~~~~~
What Kerry said here about the Israeli position represents it accurately. The prime minister's office is saying that building will take place only in blocs in Judea and Samaria or in neighborhoods in Jerusalem that we would be retaining in any negotiated agreement. The notion that our building in neighborhoods such as Gilo or Har Homa represents a threat to "the peace process" is beyond ridiculous, frankly.
Of course Uri Ariel, Housing and Construction Minister, says:
"No other nation on the planet accepts diktats from other countries on where it can build and where it can't. We're going to continue issuing tenders for apartments and we're going to build all over Israel, according to our citizens' needs."
What I can report with certainty is Israeli delight at the prospect of housing being constructed, when there has been a shortage for some while. I've noted this before: the construction of housing in Israel so often carries political implications that are assumed to be paramount.
But the bottom line is that people in Israel need places to live. We are, thank Heaven, a growing population. We have more children per couple than Jews anywhere else in the world. Our kids grow up, get married, and seek homes of their own.
~~~~~~~~~~
©
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.
If
it is reproduced and emphasis is added, the fact that it has been added must be
noted.
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