Archive
Meetings Last Week with Members of the Knesset About the Current Situation in Israel and Operation Protective Edge
Last Wednesday, our group of J Street leaders from the United States and J Street U students spending the summer in Israel, met with four members of the Knesset to get their perspective on the war – or “Operation” as it’s referred to here. One was from Hatnua (which is Tzipi Livni’s party and part of the government), one from Meretz, and two from Labor.
From Labor and Hatnua, we heard a message of support for the war. That it was necessary and needed to be fought. While the fighting is going on, this type of position is not surprising even given the brutal way that Israel has been conducting the war. I think that they all perceive the tunnels as a very real strategic threat that needs to be destroyed and they have no illusions about the nature of Hamas as a terrorist group actively planning to attack Israel.
Because all of those we spoke with are on the center left, it is not surprising that they emphasized the importance of strengthening President Abbas so that he could be in a position to gain enough political power to execute a deal with the Israelis. They felt that one of the not so obvious benefits of this war is that it opened the eyes of many, not only in the government, but in the general population as well, to the fact that they have someone that they can deal with on the other side. All of a sudden, Abu Mazen has gone from being the “Partner we can’t Trust” to being ‘not so bad’ compared to the alternative. Amram Mitzna, former General and Mayor of Haifa and Yeruham, feels that the Operation will help more people understand that there is no better option than the two state solution. There is no military solution to the conflict because Hamas is more than a military organization – it is a state of mind. Israel can destroy all of the rocket caches, blow up the tunnels and kill all of Hamas leaders, but Hamas’ “death to Israel” message will simply be adopted by new leadership.
But the most surprising and most upsetting thing we heard about is what has been going on in Israeli society. Over the past several years, there has been a steady and significant increase in overt racism in the country. This extreme hatred is now being projected against those who oppose the war. Whether it is at physical protests where marchers have been beaten up and forced to disperse – or online bullying which has gone to the extreme of calling out death threats to those posting pieces against the war – we heard about an ugly atmosphere of hate that is getting stronger and stronger. These MKs were concerned that the Cabinet Ministers have remained silent on denouncing these racist attacks. Rather, said one, Ministers are often actually the ones inciting this conduct. Virtually everyone we spoke with was extremely concerned about the increase in societal hatred – even the American Consul General in a separate meeting. Although the tragedy of the death and destruction from the war is heart wrenching, what hits me the strongest is the changing nature of Israeli society. There is something going on here that is abhorrent and rotten. No one drew any links directly to the Occupation, but it is clear that in order to enforce the Occupation, there is a need to dehumanize the Palestinians as “the other”. And once a society labels one group that way, it is a short hop to applying the same attitude to any other group. This trend is taking Israel further and further away from what most of us consider to be our Jewish values.
Along these lines, we also heard about the deterioration of conduct within the Knesset. Of course, it reminded us of home, seeing that Congress continues to set new lows in obstructionism and lack of decorum. One characterization of the way bills are pushed through the Knesset was “violent”. Not a term that one expects to hear describing legislative functioning. Just as in the U.S., we got the sense that there is a general breakdown in decorum and long-standing unspoken rules of how to relate to your political opponents. Whether this reflects the trends of more explicit and blatant religious, ethnic and, now, political hatred, or leads those trends, isn’t clear. But what was being communicated to us by the MK’s was that this was a serious, serious problem.
Finally, all of the MK’s expressed their appreciation for J Street leaders – particularly the J Street U students – for being in Israel at this time of war, and caring enough to reach out to see and hear what was going on so that we could bring what we saw back to those in the U.S.
Gilad Shalit Is Home – You Already Know That – But Have To Say It Is A Great Day
Haaretz:
IDF: Gilad Shalit back home in Israel after five years in Hamas captivity
Gilad Shalit returns. The debate will now begin on “what this means”. Will the one thousand plus reported prisoners to be released begin new violent attacks on Israel? Does it upstage the P.A.’s bid for membership in the U.N.? Does this strengthen Hamas’ hand vis-a-vis Fatah? These questions and more will debated over the next days and weeks.
For now, I believe that we should all be thankful that Gilad is safe and presumably sound.
Related articles
- Gilad Shalit calls for peace. Israel should listen (blogs.telegraph.co.uk)
Another Rocket From Gaza Today – Will IAF Retaliation Follow?
Seems that there have been rocket firings every couple of days from Gaza. The latest was yesterday (in Israel – 8/11/11). But this has been going on for a while. They are being shot mostly into the “Sha’ar Hanegev Regional Council” which is the administrative area that includes Sderot. They have been sporadic, and since the area is quite sparsely populated, usually have done little harm. However, last week, after rockets landed near Ashkelon and Sderot, the IAF retaliated with several strikes in Northern Gaza. I learned about the attacks live while I was monitoring #J14 on Twitter. #J14 is the Twitter hashtag for the so-called July 14th demonstrations in Israel. (If folks out there are not on Twitter, but would be interested in finding out why I think it is by far the best medium for getting news and commentary, please leave me a comment below. I would be happy to post a blog on why I feel that way and how I use Twitter). It isn’t clear who is firing the rockets (that is, even though Hamas controls Gaza, there are still multiple rouge factions within Hamas – several of whom are far more violent than the main governing organization), or why. With the serious domestic turmoil that is going on throughout Israel, if these provocations lead to a major military action against Gaza, it will probably actually strengthen the current government. Nothing pulls together a country like a good ol’ war.
Anyhow – here are some recent Jerusalem Post posts which provide a flavor of what is going on in the south:
08/11/2011 21:01 Kassam from Gaza lands in Sha’ar Hanegev council; none hurt
08/07/2011 20:35 Kassam lands in Sha’ar Hanegev Regional Council; no injured
08/03/2011 11:25 Kassam explodes in Ashkelon, no injuries reported
8/1/2011 11:11 PM IAF strikes several Gaza targets following Kassam attack
Air Force action comes in response to Kassam rocket fired at southern Israel, moderately injuring a woman in her fifties.
8/1/2011 10:59 PM Kassam explodes near Ashkelon, 1 moderately injured
7/31/2011 3:17 PM Two Kassams from Gaza land in Israel; no injuries reported
7/28/2011 7:46 AM Kassam explodes south of Ashkelon; no injuries or damage
This is clearly terrorism – drip by drip. But let’s be clear. It is not: “thousands of rockets raining down on Israel”. It is not meant to damage property or kill people per se. Rather, it is meant to instill fear and fray nerves because the possiblity of death is very real. Nevertheless, at it’s heart, it is really psychological warfare.
But let’s also be clear: there are indeed 40,000 rockets on the other side of the security fence that would cause widespread death and destruction if used. Let’s hope, for the sake of both sides, that they never are.
Related articles
- Israel: Another day, another rocket fired from Gaza (waronterrornews.typepad.com)
- Fire from Gaza intensifies as three mortars hit southern Israel (via Newsessentials Blog) (thechristiangazette.wordpress.com)
Could The Domestic Social Protests in Israel Be The Greatest Impetus for Moving Towards a Two State Solution?
Tent 48 - Named for 1948, the Year of the Declaration of Israel as a state
With all of the emphasis (and rightly so) on the domestic economic and political crises here in the U.S. , it may be lost on people that there are huge (and growing) demonstrations against Israeli government social policy going on in Israel virtually as we speak. Reports are that Saturday night there were 300-350,000 people in the streets. As Dimi Reider and Azziz Abu Sarah, wrote in an op-ed published last Wednesday,
The protests that are paralyzing Israel began on July 14, when a few professionals in their 20s decided they could no longer tolerate the city’s uncontrolled rents, and pitched six tents at the top of the city’s most elegant street, Rothschild Boulevard. Three weeks later, the six tents have swelled to over 400, and more than 40 similar encampments have spread across the country, forming unlikely alliances between gay activists and yeshiva students, corporate lawyers and the homeless and ultra-Orthodox Jews and Israeli Arabs.
So far, the protesters have managed to remain apolitical, refusing to declare support for any leader or to be hijacked by any political party. But there is one issue conspicuously missing from the protests: Israel’s 44-year occupation of the Palestinian territories, [emphasis added] which exacts a heavy price on the state budget and is directly related to the lack of affordable housing within Israel proper…
Had the protesters begun by hoisting signs against the occupation, they would most likely still be just a few people in tents. By removing the single most divisive issue in Israeli politics, the protesters have created a safe space for Israelis of all ethnic, national and class identities to act together. And by decidedly placing the occupation outside of the debate, the protesters have neutralized much of the fear-mongering traditionally employed in Israel to silence discussions of social issues…
If the protests continue to stir more and more Israelis out of their political despondency, Mr. Netanyahu still holds two possible trump cards: a sudden breakthrough in the negotiations to free the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, held captive in Gaza, or a sudden escalation of armed conflict.
Moreover, the impending United Nations vote on Palestinian statehood in September imposes a deadline of sorts on the protesters. If Palestinians react by marching on Israeli army checkpoints to demand freedom, Israeli protesters will have to choose between losing internal support by siding with the Palestinians, or abandoning any claim of a pro-democracy agenda by siding with the Israeli soldiers charged with suppressing them.
Interestingly, It didn’t get much press reporting here in the U.S., but the night after this op-ed was published, the Israel Air Force conducted several bombing raids in northern Gaza. However, unless Bibi has some pull with Hamas that nobody is aware of, this was a legitimate (in Israeli terms) response to several rockets that had been launched at Ashkelon and Sderot the previous day. Obviously, from Didi and Azziz’ point of view, whoever fired these rockets (not necessarily the Hamas government itself – there are various factions both within and outside of Hamas which hold varying degree of militancy) played directly into the hands of Netanyahu by providing a pretext for this military action which could potentially take the spotlight off of the domestic protests. For now, the raids have not the averted the attention of the demonstrators – as shown by the fact that the largest turnout yet was on Saturday night.
Bibi finally began to react to the protestors this week with new proposals for more government subsidies for housing and new building. But the protestors don’t seem to be buying that and Bibi is trying desperately day-by-day to get the situation under control.
So, we will just have to watch and see what happens. Certainly, one eventual outcome could be the fall of the current government. And that is what this post’s title refers to is just that. If the government does fall – though it might be based solely on domestic issues – it might well be replaced with a new government that at the same time makes a significant change in Israel’s foreign policy. They might really understand the dangers inherent in the status quo, and do everything possible to make a two state solution happen.
Related articles
- Israel’s middle class launches mass protest at rising cost of living (rainbowwarrior2005.wordpress.com)
Breaking News: Salam Fayyed Says He Is Going To Remain As Palestinian Prime Minister
Image by World Economic Forum via Flickr
Bloomberg News has reported that Salam Fayyad plans to remain as Palestinian Prime Minister. The significance of this is that Hamas has previously stated that Fayyad is unacceptable, so if this holds up it almost certainly means that the unification deal between Hamas and Fatah will fall apart (as has happened before – and therefore was predicted by many). Fayyad is very well liked and respected in the West because he has a PhD in Economics from the University of Texas, he has cleaned up a tremendous amount of corruption, he has administered the country such that the current economic growth rate is claimed to be about 7%, and finally, his Palestinian police force has worked so well with US General Dayton and the IDF that many checkpoints were able to be eliminated.
Come to think of it – those are probably the same reasons that Hamas rejected him.
From the Bloomberg report:
Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad said he will resist pressure to resign and aims to continue in office while the rival Hamas and Fatah factions try to form a joint government.
Fayyad, speaking to reporters today in the West Bank city of Ramallah, said he wants to at least complete his two-year plan to build the institutions for Palestinian statehood that are supposed to be ready in August.
Related articles
- Hamas rejects Fayyad nomination for prime minister (jta.org)
- Fatah-Hamas unity meeting canceled (jta.org)
- In Cairo, Palestinian factions talk unity Cabinet (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
- Fatah nominates Fayyad to head interim Palestinian government (cnn.com)
Critical Meeting Between Fatah and Hamas Tomorrow re: Unification Government
According to previous reports, Hamas has rejected Fatah‘s nomination of Salam Fayyad as the Prime Minister of the unified government. His selection would almost certainly be viewed favorably by both Israel and the United States. Whether Hamas can be convinced otherwise may be decided tomorrow.
According to the Palestinian News Network:
Dr Mahmoud al Zahar, member of the political office of Hamas, told newspapers on Monday that the Hamas-Fatah meeting in Cairo on Tuesday will tackle all unsolved issues.
It will be interesting to hear the results.
Related articles
- Hamas Rejects Fayyad to Head New Palestinian Government (waronterrornews.typepad.com)
- Impasse as Hamas rejects Fatah’s nomination for prime minister (independent.co.uk)
- Fatah nominates Fayyad to head interim Palestinian government (cnn.com)
- Hamas rejects Fatah’s PM nominee (bbc.co.uk)
- Hamas rejects Fayyad nomination for prime minister (jta.org)
A Response To A Recent Comment
I received a very good comment on one of my most recent posts that deserves an extended response.
The comment is as follows:
The mistake of the Bush administration was to subscribe to LBJ’s theory that “better to piss from inside the tent……………”, thinking that once Hamas had to pick up the garbage and deliver the mail, they would become more responsible, yet it turns out it just afforded them the opportunity to switch from the mafia to a thugacracy , steal much more which gives them more power to push their #1 agenda: radical Islam and Jihad. Abbas is little better and has shown time and again he is a Holocaust denier and duplicitous. If Israel has a partner in peace even remotely close to Anwar Sadat, this conflict would be settled within 6 months.
You act as if Israel has not lost thousands in their wars of defense and only desires domination. It reminds me of the German-Jewish family standing on the platform before being transported to the camps believing they can’t possibly be such monsters……. ” but, We are German.” This is a time for staying strong as much as we all long for peace.
My reply:
Actually, the history of Hamas post the 2006 election (which as you correctly imply was encouraged by the Bush Administration) is mixed. Although much attention, including decidedly biased accusations against Israel, continues to focus on Operation Cast Lead, collective memory seems to forget that there was a six month ceasefire agreement signed in June, 2008 which held quite well through November, 2008 (Hamas reduced the number of rockets from about 300 in May to about 20 per month (per NYT report December 19, 2008) when the rocket fire began again. The reasons that the cease-fire broke down was an incursion by IDF troops into Gaza on November 4 to eliminate the threat of a tunnel being dug to the Israeli side of the border presumably to allow for the kidnapping of additional IDF soldiers. According to the IDF, Hamas responded with 61 rockets on November 5 aimed at Israeli civilian populations, but essentially curtailed the bombardment at noon. Obviously, each side defended its actions based upon each of their interpretation of the facts. This essentially was the beginning of the end of the cease-fire, and led to Operation Cast Lead.
My point here is not in any way to defend Hamas’ use of rocket fire indiscriminately aimed at civilians, nor to question Israel’s right to defend itself militarily (it certainly has that right), but instead it is to address two very important strategic questions: a) whether Hamas can be trusted to comply with any agreements, and b) to consider the strategic effectiveness of Operation Cast Lead.
The facts seem to indicate that Hamas can be somewhat trusted to comply with agreements. The cease-fire was enforced pretty well by Hamas leadership. Although the Hamas charter is an abhorrent document that cannot be ignored, and it is clear that there are people both inside Hamas and in other organizations like the Al Aqsa Brigade and the Islamic Brotherhood who clearly continue to seek the destruction of Israel and the killing of all Zionists anywhere in the world, the evidence provided by the cease-fire is that there are more moderate and pragmatic elements within Hamas who were strong enough to control the more radical elements. In addition to this circumstantial evidence, I have heard the same from people who have met directly with Khalid Mashaal and other Hamas leaders. My argument is that both Israel and the United States are better off supporting the moderate elements. Rejecting these moderate elements only strengthens the hands of the radical elements. That is seemingly not in Israel’s long-term best interests.
This is actually supported by evaluating the current situation post-Cast Lead. Reports indicate that there are now twice as many rockets (with both enhanced range and guidance systems) in Gaza as there were before Operation Cast Lead. Would it have been better or worse without Operation Cast Lead? No one can say. But I think that one can say that the strategic threat from Gaza is much worse today than it was in July-October, 2008 during the cease-fire. As Secretary of State Clinton said during her speech at the 2010 AIPAC Policy Conference, technological developments are not necessarily on the side of the Israelis. Iron Dome is an amazing technological success. But I don’t think it is a strategic success. Why? Each Iron Dome missile reportedly costs close to $35-50,000. Each of the 40,000 Hamas’ rockets (and presumably a similar number of Hezbollah’ rockets on the Lebanon border) cost hundreds of dollars each, let alone artillery and morter shell. So, even without a nuclear weapon, Iran’s de facto control of these organizations poses a very real existential threat to Israel’s population today. I have heard all of the arguments against “linkage” and I agree that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not the cause of Islamic jihadism, however that it does not automatically follow that the converse is not true. That is, I think that the creation of a Palestinian state could be the biggest blow to Iran’s aim for increased hegemony in the region . (But that is an entirely separate topic).
I Think That There Are Actually People Out There Trying To Paint President Obama As Anti-Israel!
SECRET MAP OF PRESIDENT OBAMA’S PROPOSED BORDERS
Far be it from me to speculate what the motivations would be for people to want to mischaracterize the President’s positions and actions towards Israel, but it certainly appears that there are indeed folks out their who are claiming that, based upon the speeches which Mr. Obama made over the past week, he is the most “Anti-Israel President ” ever. (Shockingly, some of these comments have even been heard from those who are normally fair and balanced). What is even more upsetting is that if I am wrong (which I am known to be occasionally) and those people are correct in saying that he is insidiously anti-Israel, we have a bigger problem. Because that would mean, since their veiwpoints are so closely tied as you will see, that Prime Minister Netanyahu would be the most anti-Israel Prime Minister that Israel has ever had! And somebody had better wake up the Israelis ASAP so that they can drum this guy out of office because things are tough enough without having their country run by an imposter who is clearly as anti-Israel as this Obama no-goodnik.
Why do I say this, you might ask? Because I have actually gone through the transcripts of the four speeches given since last Thursday and discovered something that really is surprising. When you strip away the audiences and all those standing ovations, when you look at the texts of these speeches, not only are each of their positions virtually identical, but they even use almost exactly the same themes. And, everyone talks about the importance of there being “no daylight” between the US and Israel, and I’ve got to tell you, when I compare the differences between Barrack and Bibi’s positions, I am surely not being blinded by the light.
Although a lot was made of the “1967 borders” issue, anyone who listened to the speech or even read the transcript had to understand that “1967 borders with mutually agreed land swaps” was all part of a single phrase which should never have been parsed out separately. Also, as the President said in his speech to AIPAC, anyone who has spent any time at all following the current status of the peace process knows that virutally everyone agrees that any agreement will almost certainly involve just that: 1967 borders plus swaps. And when you actually read the details of what Bibi and Barrack both said about this, they really didn’t disagree.
As to the Right of Return and Jerusalem, granted Obama did not agree with Bibi. On the other hand, he didn’t disagree either. What he was doing, it is clear, was trying to bring the parties together using the two issues that various reports (including Bernard Avishai’s NYT Magazine article about Olmert and Abbas negotiations) indicated they were close on: Borders and Security. The idea was that if they could show some progress on these issues, it could build trust and goodwill before moving on to the even more intransigent issues.
So, my only conclusion, as difficult as it is for me to believe, is that there are actually people out there that want to misrepresent Obama’s stand towards Israel. And, heaven forbid, they may even be doing it for political purposes!
Finally, I believe so strongly that the content spoken by Obama and Netanyahu is almost exactly the same (with the partial exception of the Right of Return & Jerusalem issues as stated above), that I challenge anyone out there to prove me wrong. If you can come up with some valid evidence using direct language from these speeches showing me where I have missed significant disagreements, then I have a crisp $100 bill here that I am prepared to give to Magen David Adom. Let me know. I’m up for the challenge. Either way, it’s win-win. Kind of like a peace agreement might be…
Below is a topic-by-topic comparison of selections from the four speeches:
1. Obama at the State Department, May 19
4. Netanyahu before Congress, May 24
|
TOPIC |
OBAMA-STATE DEPT |
OBAMA-AIPAC |
NETANYAHU-AIPAC |
NETANYAHU-CONGRESS |
| Borders | The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states. | The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states. | ||
| Borders The Sequel | By definition, it means that the parties themselves – Israelis and Palestinians – will negotiate a border that is different than the one that existed on June 4, 1967. It is a well known formula to all who have worked on this issue for a generation | The status of the settlements will be decided only in negotiations. But we must also be honest. So I am saying today something that should be said publicly by anyone serious about peace. In any peace agreement that ends the conflict, some settlements will end up beyond Israel’s borders. The precise delineation of those borders must be negotiated. |
||
| Borders III | It allows the parties themselves to account for the changes that have taken place over the last forty-four years, including the new demographic realities on the ground and the needs of both sides. | This compromise must reflect the dramatic demographic changes that have occurred since 1967. | ||
| Enough with the Borders Already | We will be very generous on the size of a future Palestinian state. But as President Obama said, the border will be different than the one that existed on June 4, 1967. Israel will not return to the indefensible lines of 1967. | |||
| Palestinian Right of Return | Open issue | Palestinians from around the world should have a right to immigrate, if they so choose, to a Palestinian state. This means that the Palestinian refugee problem will be resolved outside the borders of Israel. |
||
| Jerusalem | Open issue | As for Jerusalem, only a democratic Israel has protected freedom of worship for all faiths in the city. Jerusalem must never again be divided. Jerusalem must remain the united capital of Israel. I know that this is a difficult issue for Palestinians. But I believe with creativity and goodwill a solution can be found. |
||
| Israel as a Jewish State | Israel as a Jewish state and the homeland for the Jewish people, and the state of Palestine as the homeland for the Palestinian people; each state enjoying self-determination, mutual recognition, and peace. [Emphasis added] | My friends, this must come to an end. President Abbas must do what I have done. I stood before my people, and I told you it wasn’t easy for me, and I said… “I will accept a Palestinian state.” It is time for President Abbas to stand before his people and say… “I will accept a Jewish state.” |
||
| Self-Defense | As for security, every state has the right to self-defense, and Israel must be able to defend itself — by itself — against any threat | As for security, every state has the right to self-defense, and Israel must be able to defend itself – by itself – against any threat. | When we say never again, we mean never again. Israel always reserves the right to defend itself. | |
| Security | Provisions must also be robust enough to prevent a resurgence of terrorism; to stop the infiltration of weapons; and to provide effective border security. The full and phased withdrawal of Israeli military forces should be coordinated with the assumption of Palestinian security responsibility in a sovereign, non-militarized state. The duration of this transition period must be agreed, and the effectiveness of security arrangements must be demonstrated.[Emphasis added] | Provisions must also be robust enough to prevent a resurgence of terrorism; to stop the infiltration of weapons; and to provide effective border security. The full and phased withdrawal of Israeli military forces should be coordinated with the assumption of Palestinian security responsibility in a sovereign, non-militarized state. The duration of this transition period must be agreed, and the effectiveness of security arrangements must be demonstrated. | So it is therefore absolutely vital for Israel’s security that a Palestinian state be fully demilitarized. And it is vital that Israel maintain a long-term military presence along the Jordan River. Solid security arrangements on the ground are necessary not only to protect the peace, they are necessary to protect Israel in case the peace unravels. For in our unstable region, no one can guarantee that our peace partners today will be there tomorrow. | |
| Obama Admin Commitment to Israel | As for Israel, our friendship is rooted deeply in a shared history and shared values. Our commitment to Israel’s security is unshakeable. And we will stand against attempts to single it out for criticism in international forums. But precisely because of our friendship, it is important that we tell the truth: the status quo is unsustainable, and Israel too must act boldly to advance a lasting peace. | Yesterday President Obama spoke about his ironclad commitment to Israel’s security. He rightly said that our security cooperation is unprecedented. He spoke of that commitment in front of AIPAC. He spoke about it in two speeches heard throughout the Arab world. And he has backed those words with deeds. |
||
| Security Cooperation | It’s why we’ve increased cooperation between our militaries to unprecedented levels. | He rightly said that our security cooperation is unprecedented | ||
| Advanced Technologies | It’s why we’re making our most advanced technologies available to our Israeli allies | |||
| Military $$ | And it’s why, despite tough fiscal times, we’ve increased foreign military financing to record levels. | I know these are tough economic times. So I want to thank the president and Congress for providing Israel with vital assistance so that Israel can defend itself by itself |
Thank you all, and thank you President Obama, for your steadfast commitment to Israel’s security. I know economic times are tough. I deeply appreciate this. |
|
| Iron Dome | That includes additional support – beyond regular military aid – for the Iron Dome anti-rocket system. This is a powerful example of American-Israel cooperation which has already intercepted rockets from Gaza and helped saved innocent Israeli lives. … make no mistake, we will maintain Israel’s qualitative military edge. | I want to thank you all for supporting the Iron Dome missile defense system |
||
| Agreement Must Be Between the Two Parties | These are the facts. I firmly believe, and repeated on Thursday, that peace cannot be imposed on the parties to the conflict. | |||
| Delegitimization | For the Palestinians, efforts to delegitimize Israel will end in failure. Symbolic actions to isolate Israel at the United Nations in September won’t create an independent state. | You also see our commitment to Israel’s security in our steadfast opposition to any attempt to de-legitimize the State of Israel. As I said at the United Nation’s last year, “Israel’s existence must not be a subject for debate,” and “efforts to chip away at Israel’s legitimacy will only be met by the unshakeable opposition of the United States.”…No vote at the United Nations will ever create an independent Palestinian state. And the United States will stand up against efforts to single Israel out at the UN or in any international forum. Because Israel’s legitimacy is not a matter for debate. | ||
| Hamas As a Partner | Palestinian leaders will not achieve peace or prosperity if Hamas insists on a path of terror and rejection. | Moreover, we know that peace demands a partner – which is why I said that Israel cannot be expected to negotiate with Palestinians who do not recognize its right to exist, and we will hold the Palestinians accountable for their actions and their rhetoric. | And Hamas is not a partner for peace. Hamas remains committed to Israel’s destruction and to terrorism. They have a charter. That charter not only calls for the obliteration of Israel, but says ‘kill the Jews wherever you find them’. Hamas’ leader condemned the killing of Osama bin Laden and praised him as a holy warrior. |
|
| Hamas-Fatah Unification | the recent announcement of an agreement between Fatah and Hamas raises profound and legitimate questions for Israel — how can one negotiate with a party that has shown itself unwilling to recognize your right to exist. In the weeks and months to come, Palestinian leaders will have to provide a credible answer to that question. | And I indicated on Thursday that the recent agreement between Fatah and Hamas poses an enormous obstacle to peace. No country can be expected to negotiate with a terrorist organization sworn to its destruction. We will continue to demand that Hamas accept the basic responsibilities of peace: recognizing Israel’s right to exist, rejecting violence, and adhering to all existing agreements | ||
| Israel’s Right to Exist | And Palestinians will never realize their independence by denying the right of Israel to exist. | My friends, this must come to an end. President Abbas must do what I have done. I stood before my people, and I told you it wasn’t easy for me, and I said… “I will accept a Palestinian state.” It is time for President Abbas to stand before his people and say… “I will accept a Jewish state.” |
||
| Gilad Shalit | And we once again call on Hamas to release Gilad Shalit, who has been kept from his family for five long years. | And you’ve joined President Obama and me in denouncing Hamas and demanding that it release our captive soldier, Gilad Shalit |
||
| New Proposals? | There was nothing particularly original in my proposal; this basic framework for negotiations has long been the basis for discussions among the parties, including previous U.S. Administrations.…By definition, it means that the parties themselves – Israelis and Palestinians – will negotiate a border that is different than the one that existed on June 4, 1967. It is a well known formula to all who have worked on this issue for a generation …If there’s a controversy, then, it’s not based in substance. What I did on Thursday was to say publicly what has long been acknowledged privately. [Emphasis added] | |||
| Palestinian intransigence | So why has peace not been achieved? Because so far, the Palestinians have been unwilling to accept a Palestinian state, if it meant accepting a Jewish state alongside it.…You see, our conflict has never been about the establishment of a Palestinian state. It has always been about the existence of the Jewish state. |
|||
| Iran | See below | A nuclear-armed Iran would ignite a nuclear arms race in the Middle East…This is why I ask you to continue to send an unequivocal message: That America will never permit Iran to develop nuclear weapons. | ||
| Obama’s Actions Against Iran | You also see our commitment to our shared security in our determination to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Here in the U.S., we’ve imposed the toughest sanctions ever on the Iranian regime. At the United Nations, we’ve secured the most comprehensive international sanctions on the regime, which have been joined by allies and partners around the world. Today, Iran is virtually cut off from large parts of the international financial system, and we are going to keep up the pressure. So let me be absolutely clear – we remain committed to preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. | It is even worse because there are many who rush to condemn Israel for defending itself against Iran’s terror proxies. But not you. Not America. You have acted differently. You’ve condemned the Iranian regime for its genocidal aims. You’ve passed tough sanctions against Iran. History will salute you America. President Obama has said that the United States is determined to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. He successfully led the Security Council to adopt sanctions against Iran. You in Congress passed even tougher sanctions. These words and deeds are vitally important. |
||
| Arab Teaching Hatred | For Israelis, it has meant living with the fear that their children could get blown up on a bus or by rockets fired at their homes, as well as the pain of knowing that other children in the region are taught to hate them. | They continue to educate their children to hate. They continue to name public squares after terrorists. And worst of all, they continue to perpetuate the fantasy that Israel will one day be flooded by the descendants of Palestinian refugees. |
Related articles
- Israel’s 1967 borders ‘indefensible’, Netanyahu tells Aipac (guardian.co.uk)
- “Former AIPAC Official Dodges Questions On Whether 1967 Borders Has Been US Policy ‘For Years’” and related posts (wonkroom.thinkprogress.org)
Hillel’s Message to AIPAC and all American Jews: Now Is The Time To Make A Two State Solution Happen (Part 3 of 3)
|
“If I am not for myself, then who will be for me?
And if I am only for myself, then what am I?
And if not now, when?”
|
“And if not now, when?”
Hillel ends his admonition with an imperative: The time is now. And so it is for Israelis and Americans who truly want to preserve Israel as a democratic homeland for the Jewish people. Although it has been said for years that the window of opportunity is closing, like the boy who cried wolf, this time it is really true.
Map of Israel and Territories
There are three major trends in the Middle East which underscore why it is so critical to move boldly and swiftly towards peace. The first is the Arab Spring. Everybody loves democratic uprisings – when they first begin. However, they do not always end up quite the way we hope. The very nature of grass-roots rebellions is that they tend to be short on organization, which opens them up to co-option as things move from the emotional frenzy of demonstrations in the streets to the reality of picking up the garbage in the streets. In Egypt, which is probably the best example of successful regime change, the final outcome is indeed still open to question. But the response of the Israelis seems to be that of delay. In March, we spoke with Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky who had just come back from Israel bearing the message from Israelis leaders that “Now is not the time for action. We need to let things settle down.” While there is some logic in that point of view, the counter argument carries a lot of weight as well. That is, it might make better sense to get an agreement moving farther along (including the support of other world nations) before things blow up around or in the Palestinian territories. In other words, it seems just as likely that spontaneous developments in the region will actually give the Israelis less control at the negotiating table than they have now.
The second factor is the movement towards a unified government that Fatah and Hamas have taken. This took everyone by surprise (by all accounts, Mahmoud Abbas included) and as a result it is not totally clear whether the arrangement will work out or what the results will be if it does. But what is clear from the reaction of the Israeli and American governments is that everyone on this side of the table is scared to death. Although the excuse is that Hamas is a terrorist organization, it seems that the real fear is that no one really understands Hamas’ motivations or its ability to politically control and organize its factions. I am not sure why people are reacting with such repulsion. It seems to me that we should take the advice of that old Texan, LBJ, on this one: “It’s much better to have him (LBJ referring to J. Edgar Hoover) inside the tent pissing out, than having him outside pissing in.” It would certainly be much easier to assess what Hamas is thinking if we met with them rather than to simply turn our backs – which is what both the Israelis and Americans are doing. A former Israeli General once said to me: Never turn your back on a Arab (which by the way, was not said with malice or derision, but simply as honest
advice). So why turn your backs on Hamas? Additionally, the current position gives Fatah nowhere to turn. Simply saying “it’s Israel or Hamas” makes good political rhetoric, but if you think about it, it actually gives additional power to Hamas because they know that Abbas does not have enough political support to reject Hamas at this point in time – so the Israelis haven’t given him a real choice. Under normal circumstances, it might be best to wait to see what happens between these two factions. However, there is a third
factor that overrides this: September.
The Palestinians have slowly and methodically been paving the way to go to the UN in September to seek recognition as a nation of the world. The resolution will first go to
UN Flag
the Security Council where the US will be able to veto it. However, it will then move to the General Assembly for a vote of all of the nations. It is quite likely that they will be able to
get the votes needed to pass the resolution as there are already over 100 countries that have recognized the Palestinian Authority. One Israeli official has been quoted as calling the possibility of UN ratification a “train wreck”, and rightfully so. If Palestine is recognized as a sovereign nation, it totally changes the legal relationship with Israel according to accepted international law. And while many American and Israeli spokesmen have minimized the validity of the vote and its potential impact, that seems to be the naïve point of view.
So, the Arab Spring, the Fatah-Hamas détente, and most importantly, the anticipated Palestinian quest for statehood at the UN, all underscore the fact that time is closing in on Israel’s opportunities to control their own fate. But instead of urgency, what we hear loudest from the American Jewish community is denial. American Jews can stonewall and contend that the Israelis cannot possibly deal with terrorists (although let’s recall that the PLO was the foremost terrorist group in the world at one time) and that there is no one to make a deal with, and that the world is delegitimizing Israel, and that that old UN is once again being anti-Israel and anti-Semitic. We can do that. But that doesn’t stop the clock towards UN declaration of a Palestinian state from ticking. Why do we want to put the fate of Israel and Palestine in the hands of the UN? If we don’t act now to do everything we can to get the Israelis and the Palestinians to the table, we may well leave setting the terms of the agreement to others.
Instead of continually reciting all of the obstacles to peace, we American Jews should do all we can to urge Israel to engage with the Palestinians. And soon. Instead of a wholesale rejection of Hamas, why not be creative? Find some clever way of giving Hamas an out that will allow them to save face with their own people, while providing some assurance to the Israelis that they are moderating. For example, while some in Hamas have maintained their hateful rhetoric, Hamas leader Khalid Mashaal has already indicated his openness to accepting an agreement under certain circumstances. Why shouldn’t Israel use these statements to open the door – even if it’s just a crack?
This is just an example, but if you examine the information being distributed and promoted by the Major American Jewish Organizations, most of it consists of reasons why peace cannot be accomplished. It lists all of the obstacles to peace. Underlying all of this is an unstated (or sometimes stated) assumption that Israel has too much to risk by making peace. But there are two problems with that. First, it fails to recognize that
it is no longer 1948. The relative powers in the region are very different than they were back then. As Hillary Clinton said last year at the AIPAC Policy Conference, the real dangers to Israel lie in demography, ideology, and technology – not from conventional military attack. And secondly, it fails to recognize the very real risks of doing nothing. More former Israeli political and military leaders than you can count have emphasized that the status quo is simply unsustainable.
So, my hope is that my fellow AIPAC members and the rest of the mainstream American Jewish community will go beyond the same old platitudes that give all the reasons that peace is not possible and instead, urge the Israeli government and our elected leaders to make definitive, substantive steps towards peace. It is time to be bold and brave. We Jews are strong enough, we are tough enough, and we are smart enough to cut a deal with the Palestinians that, if well thought out, implemented and monitored, can bring better lives to everyone in the region.
The time is now.
Related articles
- Netanyahu to Outline Peace Plan to Congress (abcnews.go.com)
Could This Be the Beginning of Important Change on the Palestinian Side? Abbas Accepts Hamas Outreach Towards Fatah-Hamas Unification
Image via Wikipedia
There is some interesting news that may (or may not) be foreshadowing a major restructuring of the Palestinian government. Following simultaneous demonstrations in Gaza and the West Bank on Tuesday, Haaretz reported that Mahmoud Abbas made a speech to his party today which included an important new announcement.
Abbas has accepted an invitation from Ismail Haniyeh, Gaza’s prime minister, to go to Gaza to discuss ending the chasm between the two Palestinian political factions that has remained wide open since Hamas took over control of Gaza by force in June, 2007. Abbas said:
I declare that I am ready to go to Gaza tomorrow so as to end the split and form a new government”
He went on to call for elections and re-emphasized the fact that he will not stand for re-election:
beyondzerosum 