Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Friday, March 04, 2011

Fatah leaders demand that Fayyad get fired

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas' dominant Fatah political faction has demanded that he sack Western-backed Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, according to a letter shown to Reuters on Thursday.

The letter, signed by senior Fatah officials, was sent to Abbas on Saturday, but the president "did not take it seriously," a Fatah official told Reuters.

However, the request underlined deep political friction at the heart of the Palestinian Authority, with many Fatah activists clearly frustrated by Fayyad, who has no significant political base of his own but wields substantial power.

Fayyad, a former World Bank economist, is widely credited by Western governments with transforming the institutional landscape in the West Bank, successfully building the core structures needed for a planned independent Palestinian state.

As prime minister he controls finances and security, leaving many Fatah members to complain bitterly in private that his high-profile activities are overshadowing their own work.

"We suggest you reconsider re-appointing Dr. Fayyad and (instead) ask that a strong Fatah figure do the job," said the letter, backed by Fatah's central revolutionary council.

Hmmm. The president, who is ruling past his legal term limits by invoking emergency powers, can ignore the demands of his people. He ensures that unpopular, unelected officials who are politically valuable can keep their jobs. This president is considered moderate because he supposedly adheres to Western interests and brutally puts down the people who oppose him, but if he would let his people do what they want he would very possibly be replaced with a radical who would be anti-Western and/or Islamist. The West supports him to the hilt even though he is responsible for major human rights abuses and has shown no flexibility in deepening the peace treaty with Israel.

But enough about Mubarak.

Roger Cohen's latest anti-Israel screed a classic piece of propaganda

Roger Cohen in the NYT gives three reasons he thinks Israelis are anxious about the Arab world upheavals.

Israel is anxious. It preferred the old Middle Eastern order. It could count on the despots, like Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak, to suppress the jihadists, reject Iran, and play the Israeli-Palestinian game along lines that created a permanent temporariness ever more favorable to Israeli power.

Notice "permanent temporariness." Cohen is implying that everyone knew deep down that there would be a wave of popular revolutions in the Arab world, and that Camp David was Israel's way of stopping that inevitability in order to impose its hegemony on the region.

I'd love to find the Roger Cohen columns from between 1979 and 2011 that gave us a glimpse of this inevitable Egyptian revolution.

Moreover, his very premise is that the Israel/Egyptian peace agreement was a means to ensure Israel's power. In the end, though, Israel is the only party that took a risk at Camp David - giving up a huge amount of territory for nothing more than a piece of paper. His characterization of the peace agreement as some sort of Israeli coup rather than a frightful gamble is ridiculous and borderline slanderous. (And nowhere in his article does he mention that likely Egyptian leaders are all calling to re-examine Camp David, something that gives great credence to the Israeli fears he likes to downplay.)

Israelis are doubly worried. They wonder, Mr. President, if you like them in a heart-to-heart way. You’ve been to Cairo, you’ve been to Istanbul, so what’s wrong with Jerusalem? Why won’t you come and kvetch with us, President Obama, and feel our pain?

What does this have to do with Egypt? It is true that Israel doesn't feel the same warmth from Obama that it felt from George W. Bush and from Bill Clinton. The reason is because it simply isn't there.

Israelis are triply worried. Elections are unpredictable — just look at Gaza — and now they may be held across the Arab world! There’s the Muslim Brotherhood talking a good line but nursing menace. And what if Jordan goes, too?

"Just look at Gaza?" Perhaps we need to remind this self-styled Middle East expert that Hamas was not only elected in Gaza but by Palestinian Arabs as a whole across the West Bank as well.

Here's a bit of education for Roger Cohen - the 2006 election results by district:

Hamas won in Jerusalem, Tulkarem, Nablus, Salfit, Hebron - and even Ramallah!

But Cohen ignores this and barrels on:

I find all the Israeli anxiety troubling for moral and strategic reasons. The moral reason is simple: What could be closer to the hearts of Jews than the sight of peoples fighting to throw off oppression and gain their dignity and freedom?

If Israel has come to such a pass that these noble struggles from Benghazi to Bahrain leave it not just cold but troubled, then what has become of the soul of the Jewish state?

The Middle East’s most vibrant democracy is missing the upside of the birth of new ones.

Cohen has now framed his argument by defining his list of Israeli fears and his criticism of those fears. And, like any good propagandist, Cohen does not base his framing on reality but on a skewed perception that serves his purposes.

Cohen does not deign to listen to what Israel's Prime Minister said explicitly.

Unlike Cohen's thesis that Israelis are against democracy in the Arab world, Netanyahu says flatly:

It is obvious that an Egypt that fully embraces the 21st century and that adopts these reforms would be a source of great hope for the entire world, the region and for us.

In Israel, we know the value of democratic institutions and the significance of liberty. We know the value of independent courts that protect the rights of individuals and the rule of law; we appreciate the value of a free press and of a parliamentary system with a coalition and an opposition.

It is clear that an Egypt that rests on these institutions, an Egypt that is anchored in democratic values, would never be a threat to peace. On the contrary, if we have learned anything from modern history, it is that the stronger the foundations of democracy, the stronger the foundations of peace. Peace among democracies is strong, and democracy strengthens the peace.

So much for Cohen's assertion that Israel opposes Arab democracy and "missing the upside of the birth of new ones."

But Cohen's list of Israeli fears ignores the actual fears that Netanyahu mentioned in his speech:

Far away from Washington, Paris, London – and not so far from Jerusalem – is another capital in which there are hopes.

In this capital, there are leaders who can also see the opportunities that change in Egypt could bring.

They also support the millions who took to the streets.

They too speak about the promise of a new day. But for the people in this capital, the promise of a new day is not in its dawn but in the darkness it can bring.

That capital is Teheran, and I assure you, that the leaders in Iran are not interested in the genuine desires of Egyptians for freedom, liberalization or reform, any more than they were interested in answering similar calls for freedom by the Iranian people, their own people, only 18 months ago...

The Iranian regime is not interested in seeing an Egypt that protects the rights of individuals, women and minorities. They are not interested in an enlightened Egypt that embraces the 21st century. They want an Egypt that returns to the Middle Ages.

They want Egypt to become another Gaza, run by radical forces that oppose everything that the democratic world stands for.

We have two separate worlds here, two opposites, two worldviews: that of the free, democratic world and that of the radical world. Which one of them will prevail in Egypt? The answer to this question is crucial to the future of Egypt, of the region and to our own future here in Israel...

Should the forces that wish to carefully reform and democratize Egypt prevail, I am convinced that such positive change would also buttress a wider Arab-Israeli peace. But we are not there yet .

Cohen also downplays the basic Israeli worry:

For over 30 years we have enjoyed peace on two fronts. One is a peaceful border with Egypt, and the second the peaceful border with Jordan... It has changed the world and it has changed the State of Israel. It changed our strategic situation.

That is why preserving the existing peace is vital for us.

Cohen does not even address Iran nor the basic problem of preserving the peace agreement - even though every frontrunner for Egyptian leadership has stated that they would revisit Camp David.

Instead, Cohen's solution for the Middle East is, yet again, to pressure Israel to give more concessions to a group that is increasingly anti-American and intransigent.

Cohen is knowingly ignoring facts, writing columns based on how he wants the world to be as opposed to how it is, and, as always, placing the blame on Israel.

MEMRI translates the Egyptian video on Mubarak's suit

In my scoop about Hosni Mubarak's vanity pinstripe suit, I had embedded an Arabic video.

MEMRI has now translated that video:

The problem with the Egyptian analysis is that they made it sound like the photo was taken very recently, although I can see from the photo's EXIF information that it was taken in October, 2009.

A prominent gay Jew defends Israel

From Michael Lucas in The Advocate:

I wish I could have been there to see it. Last Tuesday, a handful of anti-Israeli activists' heads exploded when they found out that New York's LGBT Center had canceled their planned Israeli Apartheid Week shindig and barred them from meeting at the center ever again.

The only explanation they could find for this horrible injustice: A porn star named Michael Lucas had used "his wealth and connections" to shut them down. While decrying characterizations of their group as anti-Semitic, they blamed rich Jews for forcing the LGBT Center's hand.

Their Jewish conspiracy theory allowed them to ignore the true reason the LGBT Center decided to disassociate itself from their cause: Their advocacy is hateful, runs counter to the cause of LGBT rights, and has no place at an organization established as a safe space for all members of the LGBT community.

Read the whole thing. It is actually a very good rebuttal to the many misguided LGBTs who embrace radical anti-Israel causes.

I am told that if enough people comment, the Advocate will be more likely to run Lucas' pro-Israel views in the future.

It is a shame that it is so hard to find liberal straight Jews who are as passionate about Israel as Lucas is.

Fascinating account of meetings between FDR and Ibn Saud

I stumbled across this small book at an anti-Israel site. Written by William Eddy, a State Department Arabist who facilitated and attended meetings between US Presidents and the leaders of Saudi Arabia.

While it was written from an unabashedly pro-Arab perspective, the details are believable.

The last sentence by Truman is what has made this a popular quote at Israel-hating sites.

It's a good thing that the Brotherhood can't sing

The Hamas newspaper Palestine Times shows a video of Muslim Brotherhood leaders in Cairo singing a song called "Birds of Guidance."

Seriously, you call this singing?

It's almost as bad as al-Qaradawi's song:

It's almost as if they got singing lessons from BDSers.

When Facebook becomes a weapon in the Middle East (NewsRealBlog)

My latest post on NewsRealBlog:

Arabs have historically been very susceptible to rumors, no matter how bizarre. (One only has to look at the many rumors about Zionist control of animals that I documented recently.) Much of the Arabic news media will happily pass on rumors as fact.

Now, Facebook and other social media tools can be used to make Arab rumor mongering much more effective.

I recently saw a rumor in an Arabic news source that there was an attempted coup in Oman a couple of weeks ago. Tracing it back, it appears to have been started on, you guessed it, Facebook:

Read the whole thing.

Afternoon links

It is not only Hamas that is dead-set against UNRWA teaching the Holocaust. Our moderate friends from Fatah are as well.

But it is unclear that UNRWA ever had any intention to teach it anyway.

IsraeliGirl asks why Amnesty International goes soft on Iran, not demanding the same arms emrbargo that it demands from other states whose human rights records are not close to being as bad as Iran's.

So just how pro-Israel are the attendees at J-Street's conference?

Abbas continues to insult the US, calling US demands for accountability of where he spends US money "extortion."

Literally under the radar: Syria's impending purchase of supersonic cruise missiles and what that means.

Honest Reporting gives us the top five arguments against Israel Apartheid Week.

Speaking of, my "apartheid?" posters have been making appearances. Here and at this French site.

An Italian site picked up on my story about the insulting Palestinian Arab walkout in Geneva.

The Top Ten Gaddafi Toads.

(h/t Zach N, Israel Matzav and a cast of thousands....)

The PR firm that helped Libya (Mother Jones)

Another article about the unseen hands that guide our news coverage:

In February 2007 Harvard professor Joseph Nye Jr., who developed the concept of "soft power", visited Libya and sipped tea for three hours with Muammar Qaddafi. Months later, he penned an elegant description of the chat for The New Republic, reporting that Qaddafi had been interested in discussing "direct democracy." Nye noted that "there is no doubt that" the Libyan autocrat "acts differently on the world stage today than he did in decades past. And the fact that he took so much time to discuss ideas—including soft power—with a visiting professor suggests that he is actively seeking a new strategy." The article struck a hopeful tone: that there was a new Qaddafi. It also noted that Nye had gone to Libya "at the invitation of the Monitor Group, a consulting company that is helping Libya open itself to the global economy."

Nye did not disclose all. He had actually traveled to Tripoli as a paid consultant of the Monitor Group (a relationship he disclosed in an email to Mother Jones), and the firm was working under a $3 million-per-year contract with Libya. Monitor, a Boston-based consulting firm with ties to the Harvard Business School, had been retained, according to internal documents obtained by a Libyan dissident group, not to promote economic development, but "to enhance the profile of Libya and Muammar Qadhafi." So The New Republic published an article sympathetic to Qaddafi that had been written by a prominent American intellectual paid by a firm that was being compensated by Libya to burnish the dictator's image.

The Nye article was but one PR coup the Monitor Group delivered for Qaddafi. But the firm also succeeded on other fronts. The two chief goals of the project, according to an internal document describing Monitor's Libya operations, were to produce a makeover for Libya and to introduce Qaddafi "as a thinker and intellectual, independent of his more widely-known and very public persona as the Leader of the Revolution in Libya."

In 2006 and 2007, Benjamin Barber, an author specializing in democracy studies and a senior fellow at Demos, a pro-democracy think tank, took three trips to Libya as a paid consultant to Monitor. On these visits, Barber met with Libyan lawyers, officials, and activists interested in democratic reform—and Qaddafi, too....

Barber says he believed that the main aim of the Monitor Group's Libya project was to stir reform there—trying to "turn Libya from a rogue state into a better state." He was encouraged by small steps he saw in the country. And in August 2007, Barber wrote an op-ed for TheWashington Post, noting that Libya had finally released five Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian doctor who each had been condemned to death for allegedly infecting children in a Libyan hospital with HIV. In the article—headlined "Gaddafi's Libya: An Ally for America?"—Barber wrote that his one-on-one conversations with Qaddafi had convinced him that the Libyan leader had arranged for their release to show his desire for "a genuine rapprochement with the United States."

"Libya," Barber noted, "under Gaddafi has embarked on a journey that could make it the first Arab state to transition peacefully and without overt Western intervention to a stable, non-autocratic government." He reported that Qaddafi, whom the United States and other governments had identified as a possible ally in the war against Al Qaeda, had been "holding open conversations" with Western intellectuals.

But Barber did not mention in the Post piece that he himself had been a paid consultant for the Monitor Group.

...Anthony Giddens, a leading British intellectual, made two Monitor-guided trips to Libya in 2007. According to Monitor documents, he published two articles about Libya after each trip. In one of those pieces—"My chat with the colonel," posted by The Guardian—Giddens noted, "As one-party states go, Libya is not especially repressive. Gadafy seems genuinely popular." He observed, "Will real progress be possible only when Gadafy leaves the scene? I tend to think the opposite. If he is sincere in wanting change, as I think he is, he could play a role in muting conflict that might otherwise arise as modernisation takes hold." The article did not mention the Monitor Group.

The document that Mother Jones from the Monitor Group unearthed shows that they were not only trying to influence journalists and intellectuals but politicians as well:

Many of the visitors Monitor brought to Libya have individually briefed all levels of the United States government including specifically the President, Vice President, Heads of National Security and Intelligence as well as the Secretary of State.

It also lists the people that the Monitor Group brought to Libya, along with their subsequent speeches of articles. They include Richard Perle, Anthony Giddens, Francis Fukuyama, Nicholas Negroponte, American Sheikh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani, Bernard Lewis, David Frost, Benjamin Barber and Joseph Nye. In addition, the Monitor Group maintained contacts with other influential people to get them to be more sympathetic to Libya, including George Soros, Fareed Zakaria, and Thomas Friedman.

Some of this is perfectly fine; it is not unusual for governments to invite influential people over. But the lack of transparency, especially for those who were paid consultants and published articles or gave speeches without proper disclosure, is really bad - and it makes one wonder what other autocracies are doing the same thing.

Could the Vogue reporter have been on the Syrian payroll?

(h/t Silke)

Why is Israel under pressure to help create an authoritarian state?

Here is a sentence in the New York Times by Isabel Kershner, from an article about Israel possibly proposing an interim peace plan:

With the Middle East in turmoil and the West eager to encourage moderate forces in the region, Israel is under pressure to show some movement on the Palestinian issue.

Let's parse this a bit.

The uprisings in the Middle East have been against unelected, authoritarian regimes over frustration over the economy and lack of freedoms.

The PA is an unelected, authoritarian regime with an economy that is wholly dependent on outside assistance and no freedom to criticize the regime.

According to the PA's own laws, Abbas' term as president expired in January 2009. Fayyad was never elected. The last elections brought Hamas into power.

Why is Israel under pressure to help create a new state that would not only be opposed to Israel's existence, but whose already existing institutions are illegal, undemocratic and anti-freedom? Aren't the exact same issues causing Arabs to revolt and demonstrate across the entire region?

The "peace process" has evolved into a religion, one not based on any logic or sense. This is only one tiny example where a statement that seems uncontroversial at first sight is in fact completely counter-factual.

Just no one in the media or in Western governments seems to have the ability to think beyond sound bites.

(h/t David G)

Oh, by the way, Gaddafi tried to rape a female reporter

A vignette in a Benny Morris article:

Which reminds me of a story a fine, young journalist once told me about her experiences in Tripoli. It was in the 1980s, I think. She had come to interview Qaddafi. She was ushered into the famous tent. Qaddafi sent his aides away and the two of them shared lunch. And then Qaddafi tried to caress her. Flustered, she got up to leave. He then chased her around the table, bent on rape. She was brave and apparently fit; she outran him, at least long enough for his aides to rush in at the sound of her screams. Rape averted.

And then he makes this astute observation:

It is a shame journalists did not usually publish their impressions of and experiences with Qaddafi. This no doubt facilitated Western and Arab acceptance of cooperation with this almost unique, base specimen of humanity.

Unfortunately, this is still happening today. Only after the people start revolting does the Western media wake up and say, "Oh, I knew about how evil that despot was for years!"

Of course, they never reported it at the time.

And usually they still refuse to. It is an insidious game where the reporters know much more than they are willing to report, because they want to push certain narratives more than they want to contradict them.

(h/t Silke)

Everyone is ripping off my Mubarak suit story

I knew that this story would be popular, so I put a watermark on the photo of the suit with his name on it to stop people from stealing it:

But I was not obnoxious enough....and my photo is being cropped by other bloggers without credit and are getting picked up in news stories again without any credit to me.

Alas, another scoop that got away from me.

Is there going to be a march from Cairo to Gaza?

Palestine Today reports that the "January 25th youth" will march from Cairo to Rafah tomorrow and attempt to enter Gaza in a bid to open the border between Egypt and Gaza and "end the siege."

The organizers say that the march will have some 100 Egyptians, "including leaders of the January 25th revolution," and about 100 foreigners.

Interestingly, a similar march was scheduled for February 26th, and seems to have fizzled out.

The distance from Cairo to Rafah is over 300 kilometers. Good luck with your march, guys.

Israel allows Gazans to export cherry tomatoes. The PA denies it.

From YNet:

Palestinian farmers will start exporting cherry tomatoes from the Gaza Strip this week, as part of a government decision from the end of 2010 to expand the Strip's agricultural exports.

The first stage will see some 50 tons of tomatoes sent to Europe through Israel. According to estimates, the exports will yield Gaza's farmers some €150,000 (about $206,500).

The Palestinian farmers will deliver the tomatoes through the Kerem Shalom crossing to Israeli agricultural export company Agrexco, which markets the produce in Europe. The money is transferred to agricultural cooperatives, which will hand it over to the Palestinian farmers.

The Agrexco company stresses that it has lists of the growers and ensures that the money reaches them.

As part of the exports, which began in November 2010, the Strip's farmers export strawberries, carnations and peppers. Meanwhile, the pepper exports have been halted due to technical problems.

So far, Gaza's farmers have exported some 367 tons of strawberries worth €1.8 million ($2.5 million), about 5.3 million carnations worth €850,000 ($1.17 million) and 6 tons of peppers.

The agricultural activity in the Strip is conducted with the help of the Dutch government, as part of a special project training farmers and providing them with infrastructure through a Palestinian agricultural company.

But the PA is saying that this is not true. From their official WAFA news agency:

Abdel Karim Ashur, head of Agricultural Relief Committee in Gaza Strip, denied news Wednesday about an Israeli permit to export vegetables and specifically tomatoes from the Gaza Strip to European markets.

However, Israeli media claimed that Israel allowed the export of tomatoes from Gaza into European markets through Karm Abu Salem crossing.

Ashur told WAFA that Israeli authorities allowed on Tuesday and for the first time the export of only two tons of cherry tomatoes, almost at the end of the tomato season, pointing out that Palestinian farmers agreed to that only to maintain their presence in European markets.

Ashur added that this permit is not a gift from Israel but is a result of pressure on Israel, by Dutch companies cooperating with Palestinian companies, to allow export of cherries, pepper and tomatoes.

Israel is still refusing to allow the export of tomatoes and other fruits and vegetables to European markets and even West Bank markets which offer better prices than Europe, according to Ashur.

He added these measures restrict economic development in Palestine and specially that of the agricultural sector.

Ummm...the photos seem to show otherwise:

A Palestinian worker checks a truckload of cherry tomatoes bound for Europe before it crosses into Israel at the Kerem Shalom crossing point near Rafah, in the southern Gaza Strip, March 2, 2011.

Boxes of cherry tomatoes from the Gaza Strip bound for Europe are seen at the Kerem Shalom crossing terminal March 2, 2011

Coral is the brand name of Palestinian Arab produce marketed by Agrexco to Europe.

And as I have shown recently, BDSers want the boycott of Israeli products to include Palestinian Arab produce as well!

Gaza banks close because of Hamas robberies

From Ma'an:

The Palestinian Monetary Authority announced Thursday that all banks in Gaza would close on Thursday, following the perpetration of a robbery by unknown gunmen who stole cash from the Palestine Investment Bank in Gaza City.

PMA officials did not report the amount of cash taken from the bank, but said the financial institutions would remain closed until the funds were returned.

A statement from the body condemned the robbery, saying the use of weapons against the people of Gaza was unacceptable. The PMA "resents, denounces and condemns the attack," the statement said.

While it is unclear who robbed the bank, it seems strange that the banks would close from an ordinary armed robbery. More likely the bank suspects that the robbers were none other than Hamas, as Ma'an explains has happened before:

[Last summer] the Palestine Islamic Bank in Gaza City reported three incidents of cash being "withdrawn by force" by Gaza government officials, and in June suspended operations in protest over the actions.

Palestine Press Agency adds that Hamas has also taken over the Palestinian Investment Fund's offices and cash, and that other tenants of the same building were forced to leave. The Fund was meant to be an independent institution to help out businesses in Gaza.

This is only the latest takeover by Hamas of previously private Gaza institutions. These takeovers are one major reason why a reconciliation between Hamas and Fatah are increasingly unlikely, as Hamas' control of Gaza is cemented.

UPDATE: The Jerusalem Post via Reuters fills in the blanks, and Ma'an is shown once again to dance around the truth so as not to upset Hamas (h/t T34):

Banks in Gaza closed on Thursday in protest against Hamas's seizure of $250,000 in cash in a dispute with the Palestinian Authority.

A banking official said Hamas police went to the Palestine Investment Bank on Wednesday and demanded the money from the account of the PA-backed Palestine Investment Fund, which Hamas alleged had been illegally transferring money out of Gaza.

"(Hamas police) said unless they were given the money, they would take it by force," the official told Reuters. He said the police left with bags of cash filled with Israeli shekels worth $250,000 after several hours of discussion.

"All banks closed their doors today to protest against Hamas's assault on the Palestine Investment Bank," said the official, who declined to be identified.

A West Bank official for the Palestinian Monetary Authority, which oversees banking in Gaza and the West Bank, said the Hamas police had committed "armed robbery." In a statement, the monetary authority demanded the return of the cash.