Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Thursday, December 20, 2018

A Twitter conversation with Americans for Peace Now @PeaceNowUS

From last Friday:

Seriously? Does Hamas shoot rockets to Ashkelon because of settlers? Were bus bombs in Tel Aviv because of settlers?

Are you really effing blaming the pregnant woman for being shot because she chooses to live in Judea?

You are despicable with your excusing terror.
— ElderOfZiyon (@elderofziyon) December 14, 2018

So, as promised, here's the exchange. Americans for Peace Now claim that I'm the one who is ignoring everything the other says and that I "got mad."

Needless to say, APN didn't post their withering takedown of this supposed "right wing extremist" on their blog. (I have little problem with a two state solution - if Israel had an actual peace partner that would allow Jews to live there, to buy land and to freely visit their holy places without fear. The fact that the idea of such a solution is so absurd is the real problem, not Israeli intransigence.)

The post I linked to from 2010 is an important one. Peace Now's main argument is that "We advocate a negotiated Isr-Pal peace agreement, w/ 1-to-1 land swaps, that would leave most Israelis where they live now in the West Bank. Israel would then have complete moral high ground and full int'l support when responding to terrorism."

But does Israel really have full international support for Gaza operations after its full withdrawal? Does it really have full international support to respond to Hezbollah after its full withdrawal from Lebanon? It is an absurd fallacy, and Peace Now's entire existence is based on this fallacy of "IF Israel does what we want, THEN things will be peachy keen."

No one can argue that the "if/then" formulation is anything but wishful thinking. But it is the entire basis for Peace Now's existence!

It never worked before, but groups like Peace Now insist, without any evidence, that it will work - next time. And if it doesn't, well, it is because Israel didn't do enough.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

From IMEMC News:

Palestinian teacher Rana Ziada, from al-Zahra School, in Gaza, has been chosen among the 50 shortlisted for the world’s best teacher prize.

Ziada is competing for the best teacher, in the US $1 million Global Teacher Prize, which is carried out by Varkey Foundation.

Here are pictures from her Facebook page that romanticize violence:

She also recently featured this picture of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar:

I didn't know that teachers who teach their kids violence were praiseworthy.

UPDATE: On her nomination page, it says, "In 2004 Rana started work as a teacher in the East Gaza area of Palestine, an area near the dividing line with the occupied territories."

Meaning that the Global Teacher Prize considers all of Israel to be "occupied territories." (And, interestingly, since this text was clearly submitted by the teacher herself, she doesn't consider Gaza to be occupied!)

(h/t Mat2580)

__________________________

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

12/19 Links Pt2: Ben Shapiro: The Left Lends Cover to Anti-Semitism; Everyone is Misreporting the Texas BDS Lawsuit; How Historians Will See Canary Mission Years From Now

From Ian:

Ben Shapiro: The Left Lends Cover to Anti-Semitism

And Walker isn’t alone. In fact, anti-Semitism is often accepted by prominent black intellectuals on the left. Marc Lamont Hill trafficked in anti-Semitism for years before losing his CNN contributorship over preaching a Hamas slogan before the United Nations. Cornel West suggested that Israel was born because “Jews jumped out of the burning buildings of Europe in a Jew-hating Europe led by a gangster named Hitler, right? They landed on the backs of some Arabs in the 1940s.” Toni Morrison explained that “a lot of black people . . . believe that Jews in this country, by and large, have become white. They behave like white people rather than Jewish people.” James Baldwin suggested the same thing, explaining, “The Jew profits from his status in America, and he must expect Negroes to distrust him for it. The Jew does not realize that the credential he offers, the fact that he has been despised and slaughtered, does not increase the Negro’s understanding. It increases the Negro’s rage.”

And these are the intellectuals. A bevy of black “community leaders” have been similarly anti-Semitic, and survived and thrived. Rabid anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan was still welcome at Aretha Franklin’s funeral, where he hobnobbed with Bill Clinton. Al Sharpton, whose anti-Semitic record includes helping to incite a riot against Jews in Crown Heights in 1991 and an arson in 1995, has a show on MSNBC, and Democratic presidential candidates come to pay him homage. And while we tend to downplay it now, it’s rather telling that Barack Obama sat in the pews of anti-Semitic pastor Jeremiah Wright for two decades.

It’s a mark of the Left’s intersectional priorities that anti-Semitism from minority groups has been so widely ignored. It is a simple fact that anti-Semitism in the United States does not break down evenly by race. An Anti-Defamation League survey in 2016 found that 23 percent of black Americans had “anti-Semitic propensities,” as measured by an eleven-factor survey, compared with 10 percent of white Americans. That disproportion has been the norm since the ADL began the survey in 2007. Similar disproportionate anti-Semitism exists in the Hispanic community as well. But none of that draws any media coverage. As the New York Times admitted in its survey of anti-Semitic violence in New York City, “bias stemming from longstanding ethnic tensions in the city presents complexities that many liberals have chosen simply to ignore.”

Ignoring anti-Semitism depending on the perpetrator’s ethnicity or background is simply lending cover to anti-Semitism. Alice Walker should be just as toxic for her anti-Semitism as David Duke is for his. After all, they push the same message when it comes to Jews. Failing to acknowledge as much lends credence to the anti-Semitic idea that Jews have somehow earned their hatred from certain groups.

Media Once Again Wakes From Coma, Discovers Liberal Icon Is Anti-Semite

And yet just in the past few months, Walker has been interviewed by NPR, MSNBC (twice), BBC Radio, and now the Times with scarce a mention of her unconventional views. In the rare moments Walker's kooky beliefs have received media coverage, they are inevitably downplayed. Take the Associated Press article on the latest fiasco, obtusely headlined "Author Alice Walker criticized for support of writer's book."

Or take this April interview with the Atlanta-Journal Constitution, in which Walker said the following:
"David is actually brilliant, and I think people should listen more to what he has to say," she said. Reptilians? "What about it? My parents always said that the white people around us were like snakes, because of the way they treated us."

AJC‘s headline, amazingly, was "Author Alice Walker on women, men, and the fate of the planet."

It'd be easy to chalk this all up as a blind spot for Walker, an iconic African-American author. But it mirrors the recent muted reaction to an exhaustively-researched Tablet piece about the Women's March. The magazine confirmed that the feminist organization has been teeming with anti-Semitism from the outset, with national leaders berating their Jewish peers, repeating conspiracy theories about Jews, and outsourcing security to the militant wing of the Nation of Islam.

However, a Lexis Nexis search finds the Tablet piece got minimal coverage in the national media outside of Jewish and conservative outlets. The Washington Post mentioned the controversy in an aside in a piece about the Women's March rolling out a new platform. It received a short blurb in The Guardian‘s live-blog. Only New York Magazine asked "What the Hell Is Going on With the Women’s March?", and even that piece was more about a PR firm's inept attempt to deflect from the controversy.

Aaaaand, that's it. Three mentions.

Time and time again, the media fails at due diligence and ignores the warning signs of anti-semitism in those they agree with. Often they end up with egg on their face, as when CNN ignored complaints about contributor Marc Lamont Hill taking smiling photos with Louis Farrakhan, only to have to fire him a month later for a second anti-Semitism controversy.

The New York Times learned the same lesson yesterday. Ignore hate all you like, but don't act surprised when you end up publishing it.

Everyone is Misreporting the Texas BDS Lawsuit

Speech pathologist Bahia Amawi, who works as a contractor for the Pflugerville Independent School District in Texas, has filed a lawsuit claiming that an anti-boycott-of-Israel pledge she was asked to sign violates her First Amendment right to freedom of speech. This was reported first by Glenn Greenwald at the Intercept, who set the tone for the media coverage by claiming, in his typical exaggerated and dishonest fashion, that the lawsuit arose after Amawi "refused to sign an oath vowing that she 'does not' and 'will not' engage in a boycott of Israel or 'otherwise tak[e] any action that is intended to inflict economic harm' on that foreign nation." (Greenwald's headline is even more misleading, and demagogic in a way that undoubtedly appeals to anti-Semites, claiming that Ms. Amawi was required to sign a "pro-Israel oath.")

There are a lot of things I could say about the law and the lawsuit, but I have some time constraints, so I will just explain why Greenwald's take, repeated ingenuously by reporters apparently too lazy to look up the actual text of the underlying law and what Ms. Amawi was asked to sign, is wrong.

Texas has a law banning state entities from contracting with businesses, including sole proprietorships, that boycott Israel. As a result, just like local governments require contractors to certify that they adhere to many other state laws, such as anti-discrimination laws and financial propriety laws, they also must certify, in compliance with state law, that their business does not boycott Israel.

Note that, consistent with the language and obvious intent of the law (see the text here, it's even titled "PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTS WITH COMPANIES BOYCOTTING ISRAEL"), the school district certification applies to the business, "it," not the individual "she." Contrary to what I've been reading all over the internet, Ms. Amawi is not being asked to pledge that she, in her personal capacity, will not privately boycott Israel, much less that, e.g., she will not advocate for boycotting Israel or otherwise refrain from criticizing Israel.

No, a Texas woman did NOT lose her job for refusing to sign “pro-Israel pledge”

Here’s the headline of a Dec. 18th article at The Independent:

The claim that a Texas woman was forced to sign a “pro-Israel pledge” is repeated in the opening paragraph of the article.

A speech pathologist at a Texas elementary school has sued after allegedly being forced out of her contract job at an elementary school for refusing to sign a mandatory pro-Israel pledge.

First, it’s telling that the article is based on a report at the Intercept by Glenn Greenwald, a far-left activist who never misses an opportunity to smear Israel and its supporters, often by using antisemitic tropes and dog whistles. In fact, the Indy’s characterization of the requirement as a “pro-Israel pledge” was clearly inspired by language used by Greenwald in his report.

“I’ve been meaning to discuss this with you,” began my husband as he turned from Route 60 onto el-Amal St. We often turn off here to avoid the Gush Etzion-Jerusalem highway, which is invariably congested. It wasn’t built to handle the number of people who call Gush Etzion their home. El-Amal St. leads one to the intersection of what we locals call “Derech Wallajah” since the road passes the al-Wallajah village (though we never actually see the village). “Not that I want to speak of these things, but if something happens, what would you do?”

I feinted as if to scoot down into the well at the front of my seat, the front passenger seat, then looked to him for approval. “That’s good,” he said, “But now move to your left as you get down.”

I did it. “That’s right,” he said, explaining that this way was a better angle, a longer angle, that would help me fold my body into the tiny area.

In general, we feel safe on this road. The area is populated in the main by Christian Arabs. They are not out for our throats, though possibly for our business. Most of the small businesses, and several dentists letter their signs in Hebrew, too. Why not? Our shekels are just as good as anyone else’s.

But there have been so many attacks of late, ever since the UN declined to pass a resolution designating Hamas a terror organization. And even before that, an Israeli man was stabbed at the little mom and pop store called Ricardo, that lies just past the junction. We pass that store all the time, and wondered what would happen if we went in there.

Probably nothing. A friend often stops there for the 3 NIS cokes. For some reason, products available in Arab shops are dirt cheap. And anyway, we don’t believe it was a local, Christian Arab who stabbed the Jewish man, though who knows?

This isn’t the first time my husband has given me a mini-course on what to do in the event of a terror attack. Look, we’ve been in Gush Etzion since before the first Intifada. They called us “electioneers,” since settling us there was a bid to get Yitzchak Shamir elected. (P.S. It worked.)

We lived with our very large family in a flimsy little “caravan” on a windy hilltop. But my husband had to go overseas to visit his family back in Chicago. He worried about leaving us. So he practiced with me what to do should a terrorist infiltrate our home. Dov had me flip up the mattress against the wall, and mock shoot around the corners of doorways with my Uzi, until he was satisfied I knew my stuff.

The idea of practicing for terror attacks must be very disconcerting to people who don’t live where we live. And they might wonder that we chose to raise our children in such a place. Maybe they think we are crazy. Or that we are thrill seekers.

Others hate and revile us, because they think we have no right to live in our indigenous territory. These people have turned the word “settler” into a pejorative (though I have always seen it as the most honorable designation possible).

I do not sympathize with people who profiteer from tragedy. I have no sympathy for robbers. | Opinionhttps://t.co/h9cWBSVJE3
— Haaretz.com (@haaretzcom) December 16, 2018

But the truth is, we live in a state of protective denial. We live here because we believe that the more people who live here, the safer it is for all of us. For us it can’t only be lip service or part time. We have to be here, feel compelled to secure the land for our people. It’s a mitzvah called Kibush Haaretz.

I’m too old for thrill-seeking and my sanity is in check. Most of the time, I’m just fine. I don’t think about the danger. But sometimes it gets to me. After all, I tell people, I’m a writer. My imagination gets carried away.

So sometimes I’m in bed on a Friday night, resting after a hard day of cooking while the men are in shul, and my mind starts to wander. I imagine a knock at the door, and when I answer, an Arab sprays my face with bullets. I picture myself crumpling to the ground. My husband coming home to see me in a pool of blood.

Or sometimes I’ll be washing dishes at the kitchen sink, and I’ll imagine an Arab construction worker coming up to the window, smashing it in with a brick, climbing in and grabbing me by the neck, then stabbing me multiple times until I am dead. My children coming home from school and finding me like that.

It’s just my imagination running wild. But it echoes so many scenarios that have actually happened in our part of the world. There was an attack in Kiryat Arba in 2003, that happened just like that knock on the door on a Sabbath eve scenario. Which is why it haunts me.

But most of the time, I don’t think about any of this. Because you really can’t live like that, breathing danger. It’s no way to live. You use the Stanislavsky method and act as if everything is okay, and you (and your family) are safe. It’s a kind of protective shield, this active denial and I welcome it (and dread those moments when my imagination runs away with itself).

When people ask me if I’m not frightened to live where I do, I ask them if Squirrel Hill, where I grew up around the corner from Tree of Life Synagogue, is safe. What is safe, where is safe, when one is Jewish?

Is it better to live in Squirrel Hill believing you are safe, or is it better to live in Gush Etzion, as prepared as anyone can be for the worst, and hanging tough? What is the point of dying as a Jew in someone else’s country?

I always think that if I die in a terror attack in Gush Etzion, God forbid, at least I will have lived a life worth living. If it has to happen, and I hope it won’t—I know I have a lot of living left to do—at least I will have done my part for my people, strengthening our inheritance, the land.

Here I will make a confession: not all of my children share my deepest religious convictions. But all 12 of them share a deep and abiding affection for the land. So maybe I didn’t get all of it right, but I think I got some of it right—the part that has to do with love of country.

And if I could do it all over again, live anywhere else in the world, I know I’d want to be right here in Judea, living in protective denial and hanging tough.

My heart wants nothing more.

The Whole AirBnB Fiasco Is A Good Pretext For Not Cleaning My House (PreOccupied Territory)

Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory.

Check out their Facebook page.

The Whole AirBnB Fiasco Is A Good Pretext For Not Cleaning My House

By Yaakov Cohen, Gush Etzion resident

Efrata, December 19 - Don't tell my wife, but the recent foofaraw over de-listing Jewish-owned short-term rental properties in Judea and Samaria provides just the excuse I need to delay clearing out that spare bedroom we've been using as storage space and making it livable again.

I'm going to dress it up in just the right terms when we talk, though. One does have to maintain appearances for diplomacy's sake. "Oh, wouldn't you know it, I was just about to find a better place for those boxes of old textbooks and binders, but it doesn't make so much sense now, huh. Those bastards." "Yeah, I know, I was also looking forward to earning a bit of extra income on that room, but you know how it goes." That kind of thing.

Renting out the room on AirBnB was my idea in the first place, so this helps me save face, at least temporarily. I suppose I owe Human Rights Watch a little thank you for their efforts in saving me some hard work. While I'm at it, you don't think any of them would like an old wooden cradle? I think it's an antique. My brother-in-law slept in it as a baby fifty years ago, so it's gotta be worth something. Couldn't bear to just chuck it. Well, in the back of the spare bedroom it stays. No need to disturb anything there now. Certainly not the boxes of audio cassettes I haven't gotten around to converting to digital. Any month now on that score. I think there might even be a Lez Miz original Broadway cast album in there.

Outwardly I have to act as if I'm really annoyed, that it's unconscionable for AirBnB to cave like that to propaganda and harassment by so-called human rights organizations. All that's true, but I'm finding it hard to get totally into the indignation when the situation suits me just fine. I mean, Lord knows what the hell I was going to do with those random cables and connectors I could swear we'll have a desperate need for within days of getting rid of them.

Still, there could be a reversal. Even if there isn't, my wife might hear about any of the dozen alternatives to AirBnB such as Booking.com, VRBO, or this new Israeli site launched specifically to address the AirBnB thing, OlehStay. Then I could really be in trouble.

Here's hoping they don't cave.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

12/19 Links Pt1: Netanyahu calls Hezbollah tunnel-digging ‘act of war’; Israel to present evidence proving Lebanese army assists Hezbollah; Poll shows Hamas leader would defeat Abbas to win Palestinian elections

From Ian:

Ahead of UN meet, Netanyahu calls Hezbollah tunnel-digging ‘act of war’

Ahead of a United Nations Security Council meeting on the attack tunnels Hezbollah dug across the Lebanese-Israeli border, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday urged the international community to take decisive action against the Shiite terrorist group.

At an English-language press conference at the Knesset, Netanyahu called Hezbollah’s tunnel-digging an “act of war,” and accused the Lebanese Armed Forces of doing nothing to counter those acts. While Beirut did not know about the tunnels while they were being dug, its military now knows but still fails to act, he maintained.

He also revealed that he recently spoke to Russian President Vladimir Putin in a bid to convince Moscow not to defend Hezbollah and its Iranian sponsors during Wednesday’s Security Council session.

Netanyahu said that the four tunnels the Israeli army has so far discovered in its recently launched, ongoing effort to uncover such passages were aimed to “penetrate our territory, kidnap our people, including civilians, murder civilians, and conquer the northern piece of the Galilee. This is not merely an act of aggression. It’s an act of war. It’s part of a war plan, I would say.”

Every third house in South Lebanon is used in one way or another to hide Hezbollah’s tunnel-digging project, the prime minister charged. “It’s targeting Israeli civilians while hiding behind Lebanese civilians. That’s a double war crime,” he charged.

Israel to present evidence proving Lebanese army assists Hezbollah

Some two weeks after Israel launched Operation Northern Shield to eliminate Hezbollah's cross-border attack tunnels from Lebanon, Israel has said it will present the U.N. Security Council with damning evidence proving that the Lebanese army has been helping Hezbollah in its excavation efforts in violation of the U.N.'s resolutions.

The council was set to meet on Wednesday, days after the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon concluded that the tunnels snaking under the Israel-Lebanon border and jutting into Israeli territory were a violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701.

The resolution, which ended the 2006 Second Lebanon War between Israel and Hezbollah, prohibits the presence of any Lebanese armed group south of the Litani River, apart from the central government's military, known as the Lebanese Armed Forces.

On Tuesday, Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Danny Danon said that "now that UNIFIL has confirmed that the Hezbollah tunnels are a severe breach of Resolution 1701, the Security Council is duty-bound to use every means at its disposal against Hezbollah, which continues its buildup under the auspices of the Lebanese government."

Danon plans to emphasize that Lebanese troops have given their tacit approval and turned a blind eye to Hezbollah's tunneling activity, effectively sanctioning it.

IDF: Suspicious rock formation, strange fire helped locate 4th Hezbollah tunnel

The Israeli military on Wednesday said it had become aware of a recently uncovered cross-border tunnel from Lebanon thanks to a number of suspicious incidents in the area in recent years.

The tunnel near the Lebanese village of Ramyeh, the fourth uncovered so far in the army’s operation to unearth and destroy Hezbollah attack tunnels, had been monitored for years before the Israel Defense Forces launched Operation Northern Shield this month.

The IDF noted that several factors had led it to suspect that a tunnel was being dug from a forested area near Ramyeh: the burning of a single tree in May 2016, the appearance of a new rock formation at the site, and the creation of new and unnatural paths in the area.

The army said the tunnel, which it uncovered over the weekend, crossed a few meters into Israeli territory but was not yet operational.

The village is opposite the Israeli town of Zarit, where residents in the past complained of hearing digging sounds, prompting an IDF investigation in 2014. But the military said that probe had not had results, and the tunnel was found unrelated to locals’ reports. There were no details on when Hezbollah began building the tunnel.

The army said IDF chief Gadi Eisenkot toured the area with other top military commanders Wednesday to survey the digging operation.

“The effort to expose and neutralize terror tunnels will continue as needed,” the military said in a statement.

Last week I reported that a major Netflix movie, The Old Story, was being filmed in Jordan as a stand-in for Israel, and filming was stopped when angry residents complained that Jews would be present for a scene where a terrorist hides in a mosque after a bombing.

Now, the Minister of Islamic Affairs in Jordan is trying to reassure residents that they have nothing to fear.

After investigation, he is pleased to announce that not a single Jew is involved in the filming in Jordan.

In a press conference, minister Abdullah al-Abbadi said that the filming in the mosque of Abu Nusair al-Kabir does not harm the Islamic religion and "there is no form of normalization with the occupation. "

In a meeting with the parliamentary committee to discuss the subject of the film yesterday he denied the presence of any Jews in the film, stressing that the only people involved were Jordanians and Palestinians and non-Jewish foreigners.

He said the production company has vowed not to insult any religion, but rather to spread tolerance and peace among people, and not to carry out any bombings inside the mosque and to return the mosque to its previous state in the event of any damage. He also said that the film "serves our cause," i.e., it won't make anyone look bad but Israelis.

He also said that the the American producer of the film donated over $42,000 to the mosque.

The deputy head of the committee, Yahya al-Saud, adopted a memorandum of confidence in the Minister of Awqaf, Nasser Abu al-Basal, against the backdrop of filming the film, stressing that the Jordanian people reject any normalization with the "occupation."

"Occupation" is, of course, how Jordan and other Arab states refer to all of Israel.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

A new poll from the Palestine Center for Policy and Survey Research shows that Palestinians are once again supporting terror over peace.

A plurality of 44% say "armed struggle" is the most effective means of establishing a Palestinian state next to the state of Israel while 28% believe that negotiation is the most effective means and 23% think non-violent resistance is the most effective means. Three months ago, 39% said negotiation is best and only 33% said armed struggle is the way to go.

In the past, specific attacks against Israelis have gained widespread support among Palestinians, and the recent flurry of shooting attacks and their fawning coverage in Arabic media no doubt is partially responsible for this change towards supporting terror.

Similarly, in light of Palestinian refusal to join negotiations, 54% of Palestinians support a return to an armed intifada.. Three months ago, only 46% said they prefer a return to armed intifada.

In a presidential election between Abbas and Hamas leader Haniyeh, Haniyeh would win, 49% to 42%. But most would prefer to elect terrorist Marwan Barghouti, now in an Israeli prison.

88% of Palestinians say that other Palestinians who sell property to Israeli Jews are traitors while 9% call them merely "corrupt and unpatriotic." A clear majority of Palestinians, 64%, support the death penalty for anyone who sells land to Jews.

Interestingly, a large majority of Palestinians both in Gaza and the West Bank support Qatari efforts to provide salaries to Hamas employees in Gaza as well as its providing fuel for electricity, both of which the PA vehemently oppose.

55% oppose a two state solution, without being asked what they want to see. Other polls from different organisations have consistently shown that most Palestinians want a single Palestinian state and no Israel, either immediately or after a stage of a two state phase. It is a shame that this polling outfit does not want to ask that question, albeit for obvious reasons, because it would show how Palestinians are really not interested in real peace.

But even the questions that were asked now show that conclusion. And therefore those questions will be ignored or spun by the media.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

From The Jerusalem Post:

Any Israeli-Palestinian peace plan not based on the pre-1967 lines will fail, eight European Union member states warned US President Donald Trump on Tuesday evening.

“We, the European Union members of the Council, would like to reiterate once more and emphasize the EU’s strong continued commitment to the internationally agreed parameters for a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, based on international law, relevant UN resolutions and previous agreements,” ambassadors from the eight nations said in a joint statement they read to the media.

“Any peace plan that fails to recognize these internationally agreed parameters would risk being condemned to failure,” they said.

Let's understand this.

If anything can be considered a failure, it is the "everybody knows what peace will look like" formulas of all the previous peace plans from Camp David through John Kerry.

Every single one of those plans were rejected out of hand by the Palestinians.

The EU's faith in peace being realized by a tweak of those failed plans (one that pressures only Israel) is not rational.

It borders on religious fanaticism.

Or perhaps it more closely resembles someone who already spent her fortune on a bad investment and wants to throw good money after bad, convinced that eventually things will turn around.

The still not yet released US peace plan is clearly a threat to these EU states - such a threat that they are trying to sabotage it before it is released.

Why are they so frightened?

Here are some possibilities, and I suspect it is a combination of these factors.

1) They have not moved past the mentality of the 1970s when the Arab world was unified enough to use the oil weapon combined with the threat of terror in Europe in support of Palestinians. That fear, more than anything else, caused these weak-willed nations to desire to sacrifice Israel to avoid their own citizens being victimized by Islamist terror. (Look how well that worked.)

2) They have adopted the Arab model of an honor/shame society. They have put so much political capital into these failed UN resolutions and their own peace initiatives (i.e., The Quartet) that they don't want to be told that they have utterly failed. It makes them look bad, and appearances are more important than peace.

3) The idea that a boor like Trump could be more successful than they have been in reaching Middle East peace is too much to bear.

4) They really don't want peace. They want Israel to disappear under the slow drip-drip of "peace plan" after "peace plan" where Israel slowly loses land and its Jewish character and eventually gets converted into yet another Arab state.

5) The central idea of the plan, that the Arab world should be involved as part of the solution, is scary - because they want the Arab world to remain a bogeyman. The ever present and bogus threat of the "Arab street" plays into their (quite bigoted) view of the world, and if the Arab world embraces the plan it ends their ability to push their policies out of fear rather than out of doing what's right.

No matter what the reason, these major EU states have made clear that they want to sabotage the peace plan - more than Hamas does.

Which makes them even more irrelevant than they already have been.

Nikki Haley, in her final speech to the UN yesterday, specifically warned the EU against doing exactly what they just did:

My friends at the United Nations – in particular my Arab and European brothers and sisters – will also play a very important part. You will face the same choice. The choice between a hopeful future that sheds the tired, old, and unrealistic demands of the past or a darker future that sticks with the proven failed talking points of the past. The world will be watching. More importantly, the Palestinians and the Israelis will be watching. Their response will be affected by your response.

These EU nations have already consciously chosen to be against the most comprehensive peace plan ever devised by any nation. They need to explain why they are against even trying.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Nikki Haley's last UN speech (video and transcript)

Excellent, as usual.

________________________________

Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Mr. Mladenov, for your briefing.

When I first came to the United Nations two years ago, I was taken back a bit by this monthly meeting. The fact that the UN would consider the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was not striking. It is, after all, a matter of international peace and security. What was striking was the frequency of the discussion and the one-sidedness of it.

Members of the Security Council have heard me say this many times. The problems of the Middle East are numerous, and yet we spend vastly disproportionate amount of time on just one of them. And the UN has shown itself to be hopelessly biased, as we witnessed again just two weeks ago when the General Assembly failed to condemn Hamas’s terrorist activity against Israel.

Over the past two years, I have attempted to provide more value in this monthly meeting by using my time to speak about other pressing problems in the Middle East. I have spoken about Iran’s illegal weapons transfers and destabilizing support for terrorism throughout the region. I have spoken about the barbarism of the Assad regime in Syria. I have spoken about Hamas’s illegal and diabolical use of human shields. I have spoken about Hezbollah jeopardizing the safety of the Lebanese people and its violations of Israeli sovereignty which have come to light even more clearly in the last month. I have spoken about Iraq and Yemen, about refugees and humanitarian crises.

I have done this for two reasons. I’ve done it to illustrate that most of the region’s problems have absolutely nothing to do with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And I’ve done it to encourage the UN to move away from its obsession with Israel. This UN obsession has been entirely unproductive. It’s actually worse than that. The UN’s obsession with this issue has been counterproductive. It has sent a loud and false message to the Palestinians that they just might be able to achieve their goals by relying on the UN, rather than through direct negotiations. And it has sent a loud and accurate message to the Israelis that they can never trust the UN. This biased obsession is not the path to peace. It is the path to an endless stalemate.

Today is my last time addressing this monthly session as the United States Ambassador. Because it is, I’m going to deviate from my practice of the last two years. Today, I will directly address the Israel-Palestinian issue. Given my record, some may mistakenly conclude that I am unsympathetic to the Palestinian people. Nothing could be further from the truth. Here’s how I see it.

Israel is a thriving, strong, prosperous country. It has always wanted peace with its neighbors. It has clearly demonstrated its willingness to make big sacrifices for peace, including giving up large areas of land. But Israel will not make a peace agreement at just any price, and it shouldn’t. No UN resolutions, anti-Semitic boycotts, or terrorist threats will ever change that. Throughout its existence, and even today, Israel has been surrounded by threats to its security. It would be foolish for it to make a deal that weakened its security. And yet, even in the face of constant threats, Israel has become one of the leading nations in the world. Israel wants a peace agreement, but it doesn’t need one.

And then there are the Palestinian people. Like the Israelis, they are a deservedly proud people. They too do not need to accept a peace agreement at any price. But the condition of the Palestinian people is very different. Economic opportunity, health care, even electricity are all scarce in the Palestinian territories. Terrorists rule much of the territory, undermining the safety of all civilians. The Palestinian people are suffering terribly while their leadership clings to 50-year-old demands that have only become less and less realistic. What awaits the Palestinian people with a peace agreement are the prospects of a massive improvement in the quality of their lives and far greater control over their political future.

It is time we faced a hard truth: both sides would benefit greatly from a peace agreement, but the Palestinians would benefit more, and the Israelis would risk more.

It is with this backdrop in mind that the Trump Administration has crafted its plan for peace between Israel and the Palestinians. I don’t expect anyone to comment on a peace proposal they have not read. But I have read it. And I will share some thoughts on it now.

Unlike previous attempts at addressing this conflict, this plan is not just a few pages, containing unspecific and unimaginative guidelines. It is much longer. It contains much more thoughtful detail. It brings new elements to the discussion, taking advantage of the new world of technology that we live in. It recognizes the realities on the ground in the Middle East have changed – and changed in very powerful and important ways. It embraces the reality that things can be done today that were previously unthinkable. This plan will be different from all previous ones. The critical question is whether the response will be any different.

There are things in the plan that every party will like, and there are things in the plan that every party will not like. That is certainly true for the Israelis and the Palestinians, but it is also true for every country in the world that has taken an interest in this subject. Every country or party will therefore have an important choice to make. They can focus on the parts of the plan they dislike. For irresponsible parties, that would be the easiest thing to do. Just reject the plan because it does not satisfy all of your demands. Then we would return back to the failed status quo of the last 50 years with no prospects for change. Israel would continue to grow and prosper. The Palestinian people would continue to suffer. And innocent people on both sides would continue to be killed.

The other choice is to focus on the parts of the plan that you do like and encourage negotiations to move forward. And I assure you there is a lot for both sides to like.

Ultimately, as always, the final decisions can only be made by the parties themselves. Israelis and Palestinians will decide their own futures. They will decide what sacrifices they are willing to make. And they will need leaders with real vision to do it.

But my friends at the United Nations – in particular my Arab and European brothers and sisters – will also play a very important part. You will face the same choice. The choice between a hopeful future that sheds the tired, old, and unrealistic demands of the past or a darker future that sticks with the proven failed talking points of the past. The world will be watching. More importantly, the Palestinians and the Israelis will be watching. Their response will be effected by your response.

To my Arab friends, I have heard privately from many of you. You’ve said that you know a solution is urgently needed. But your governments have not been willing to talk to your constituencies about what is realistic or to the Palestinian leadership about the harm they’re doing to their very own people. By taking the easy way, you are really saying that the Palestinian people are not a priority for you. Because if they were, you would all be in a room helping bring both sides to the table.

As for the American people, we have demonstrated time and again our commitment to peace in the Middle East. We will continue to offer our hand in friendship to the Palestinian people, whom we have financially supported by far more than any other country has done. The Palestinians have everything to gain by engaging in peace negotiations. But whatever it is that others decide, the world must know that America will remain steadfast in our support of Israel, its people, and its security. That is an unshakeable bond between our two peoples. And it is that bond – more than anything else – that makes peace possible.

My hope is that as soon as – I am soon to be an outside observer who has invested so much time on this issue – that we will not still be having the same conversation, the same old speeches, in years to come.

Thank you.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

12/18 Links Pt2: A Terror Liability for the Times; Why Ha'aretz columnist Gideon Levy should be fired

From Ian:

A Terror Liability for the Times

If Nasser was a Times staff photographer, the proscriptions on public statements and conduct of a political nature would prevent him from posting incitement to murder on social media, particularly if it directly involved a conflict or issue in which the staff person was professionally engaged. There are so many big, fat red lines crossed in that and this scenario.

If I approach these circumstances in the manner proposed by the Times and regard Nasser’s Instagram post in the most charitable light, it is downright impossible to imagine a remedy other than immediate termination for cause.

Photographers, writers, and editors: all must be above the taint of bias and partiality. Nasser is not. He very openly supports Hamas. Most relevant, though, is that he incites the murder of civilians on his social media account. And he works on a regular basis in the region for the Times, Time Magazine, Xinhua, and others

His conduct is flagrantly out of bounds. Yet, strangely, the Times has gone silent. Two follow-up questions I sent in response to the Times’ dismissal of my initial concern went unanswered.

I doubt that ignoring a legitimate query of this nature is conduct that would be condoned by the Times’ patriarch, Adolph Ochs, who invoked in the trusty handbook to guard fearlessly the Old Grey Lady’s impartiality.

“For more than a century, men and women of The Times have jealously guarded the paper’s integrity,” Ochs wrote. “Whatever else we contribute, our first duty is to make sure the integrity of the Times is not blemished during our stewardship.”

I suggest that someone triage this blemish before it blossoms into full-blown acne.

Top US Jewish Civil Rights Group Slams Times for Publication of Endorsement of Antisemitic Book

A top US Jewish civil rights group has criticized The New York Times Book Review after the publication of an interview this weekend with Alice Walker, in which the Pulitzer Prize-winning author of The Color Purple recommended a book written by a prominent antisemite.

“We’re deeply disappointed that The New York Times Book Review would print author Alice Walker’s unqualified endorsement of a book by notorious British antisemitic conspiracy theorist David Icke,” Anti-Defamation League (ADL) CEO Jonathan Greenblatt stated on Monday. “His book ‘And the Truth Shall Set you Free,’ calls Judaism an ‘incredibly racist’ religion which preaches ‘racial superiority,’ claims that a ‘Jewish clique’ fomented World War I and World War II as well as the Russian Revolution, and draws heavily on the ‘Protocols of the Elders of Zion’ for inspiration. He even casts doubt on the Holocaust and condemns the Nuremberg Trials.”

Icke, Greenblatt concluded, had “a long history of scapegoating Jews and Times readers should be aware of this before considering his work.”

And the Truth Shall Set you Free was one of four books recommended by Walker at the start of the interview.

“In Icke’s books there is the whole of existence, on this planet and several others, to think about,” Walker said. “A curious person’s dream come true.”

Walker has a long history of anti-Israel activism, including a 2009 visit to the Gaza Strip and her 2011 participation in a flotilla seeking break the blockade of the Hamas-ruled coastal enclave.

In 2017, she wrote a poem on her personal blog about the “poison” of The Talmud, a centuries-old text on Jewish religious law and tradition.

Hen Mazzig: On Linda Sarsour, Islamic Missionary, and Jewish Fundraisers: The Whole Story

So by November 27th it was still clear to Sarsour and CelebrateMercy that the $86,000 (B) will be kept by Tarek El-Messidi’s missionary organization, CelebrateMercy (“its aim is to teach the life and character of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon”), for “projects that help foster Muslim-Jewish collaboration & solidarity.”

One can only wonder how they wanted to spend the money. While The Forward is busy digging up dirt on Jewish charities (as the editor proudly stated), they fail to document the fact that CelebrateMercy is a missionary charity with the goal of promoting the religion and even converting people to Islam, as well as hosting events with speakers such as Omar Suleiman, who openly call for an intifada or violent uprising against Israel. Maybe the character of this organisation, and its official and unofficial missions should raise a red flag and question El-Messidi, who wants to administer more than $80,000 of donations for a Jewish cause, and then decides to use it for so-called “Muslim-Jewish projects.”In response to requests for transparency, Sarsour lashed out on social media at what she called “right wing Zionists and the alt-right”. In the same sentence, Sarsour claimed she was “using her brand” to help Jews. This hypocrisy and demonization are unacceptable.

Funnily enough, the Rabbi of ToL is a strong Zionist, the type that Sarsour calls to dehumanize and shut down.

On November 28th, Allison Kaplan Sommer, reported for Haaretz that the aforementioned were false in her article titled, “Muslim Fundraisers Falsely Accused of Not Handing Over Money to Jewish Victims of Pittsburgh Shooting”. Yet at the same time that her article was published, ironically enough, CM announced that they have “transferred the additional funds raised ($84,534) to the Islamic Center of Pittsburgh for them to deliver to the Tree of Life synagogue. As stated above in Update #6, these additional funds (beyond the $155,000 raised for the victims) will be spent on projects that help foster Jewish-Muslim solidarity, collaboration, and dialogue.”

Some may point out that CM updated the fundraising page to say that any donation over $150k will go to interfaith projects, but this update was far on the bottom of a fundraising page titled, “Muslims Unite for Pittsburgh Synagogue Support Shooting Victims with Short-Term Needs (Funeral Expenses, Medical Bills, Etc),” along with the Pittsburgh synagogue logo. Many voiced outrage online for this grossly misleading fundraiser.

Moreover, CelebrateMercy continued to promote the fundraiser, even after reaching $215,000 and passing the $150,000 mark, as a fundraiser for the victims of Tree of Life shooting.

A Saudi op-ed gives 12 reasons why Arabs shouldn't have ties to Israel

Lots of stuff in this article by Sadah Yahya Fadel in Okaz, the most popular newspaper in Saudi Arabia.

The reality of the Zionist entity, and the nature of its policies, goals and aspirations, are known not only to political observers, but also to ordinary Arabs. Seventy years after this cancerous entity was found in the heart of the Arab nation, the majority of Arab peoples have become aware of the reality of this state, which has created only resentment, anger and absolute hatred of its aggressive expansionist policies. Only a small number of the cynics see Israel as a "respectable" state. It seems that the accusers did not become so only by the availability of one or more of the four qualities famous in them, namely: either benefiting from Israel, in one way or another, or corrupt feelings and feelings of humanity, or ignorant of the nature and truth and history of the Zionist entity, or hypocrites who flatter the supporters of Israel, and supporters of its aggression, especially America, as «the way to the heart of America passes through Israel».

A normal person, especially the Arab, can not accept Israel, as it is now. This acceptance means nothing more than blindness and self-betrayal. The acceptance of Israel, as it stands now, and the lack of pressure to force it to fulfill the requirements of peace, which achieves the minimum legitimate rights of the Palestinians, means normalization which is stupid and disgusting. And this humiliating normalization has repercussions and terrible negative consequences, and is terrifying for the Arabs. Here is a summary of the most important:

(1) The failure of the Palestinian people, and the depth of the injustice inflicted on them. And thus contribute to the aggravation of this great Arab and human tragedy.

(2) The connection of Sephardic Jews, Jews of the East, to Palestine, does not justify their raping of Palestine. The connection of the Ashkenazi Jews, the Jews of the West, to the region is almost nonexistent, not to mention that they have little to do with the land of Palestine. And what came in some of the heavenly books about this connection was singled out by the Jews of that time only. Let us go back to some of the works of the objective historians, to take these facts very well, and do not rest on the Zionist stories in this regard. The most prominent of these facts is the late Dr. Abdulwahab Mohammed Al-Messiri (October 1938 - 2008). He is a prominent political thinker and sociologist and is one of the world's leading historians specializing in the study of the world Zionist movement. He is the author of the Encyclopedia of the Jews, Judaism and Zionism, one of the greatest Arab encyclopedic works of the twentieth century. He has also published dozens of articles and researches on Israel and the Zionist movement, characterized by objectivity and the fact that he is a solid scientific scholar. The Government of Israel prohibits the circulation of his writings and research. [Fairly sure that is not true....-EoZ]

(3) The establishment of an independent Palestinian state to stop the Zionist dreams is a stumbling block in the way of Israeli expansionist policies. The only way to satisfy this evil of Israel is its possible disappearance or containment within the 1967 borders.

(4) The Zionist movement not only targets Palestine, but all Arabs and Muslims. It seeks to establish «Greater Israel» (from the Nile to the Euphrates) on the remains of the Arab nation ...! Does Israel possess such a huge arsenal of conventional and strategic weapons to confront the Palestinians?

(5) This cancerous entity is considered (or should be considered) the greatest enemy of the Arab and Islamic nation. There is no one in the world who is more hostile to Arabism than Israel. How do the Arabs believe in their side and open the Arab doors to it?

(6) Most of what is happening in the Arab region is unrest and even crimes, which Israel - and its institutions - contribute to obtaining. This entity enjoys the tragedies of the Arabs and seeks, around the clock, to increase their wounds.

(7) Despite what is rumored about Israel's vast technological and industrial progress, most of what is said is pure bullshit. This racist state is still living on America's huge gifts and subsidies. True, there is something of outstanding scientific progress. But most of what we can hope for from Israel can be obtained from other countries, perhaps at a lower cost and better conditions.

(8) Israel rejects peace, as it is universally agreed, and does not accept peaceful "coexistence" . It wants to be the ultimate peremptory force in the region, after the division and dismemberment of the surrounding Arab entities.

(9) The city of Jerusalem is a sacred symbol especially for Arabs and Muslims, being the first of the two Qibla and the third of the two Holy Mosques. Israel is striking this symbolism, and insists that Jerusalem be considered the "eternal capital" of Israel. How can Arabs and Muslims overlook Jerusalem?

(10) Arab states should not be asked what the Palestinians, Egyptians, and Jordanians have done by establishing relations with Israel. These people were forced by the fact that they were in direct confrontation with the Zionist enemy, to establish (very cold) relations with this entity. And everyone knows what they suffer from these limited and frequent relations with the Zionists who deal with them, and at the threat of arms. There is no need for Arab countries outside the front to confront such relations, which harm them more than they benefit, in addition to harming the cause of the mother. There are dozens of Arab agreements and commitments that prohibit the establishment of any Arab state with Israel.

(11) There is growing international and international sympathy within the UN, Asia, Africa and Latin America, with the Palestinian cause, and a strong call to support this issue Until the final solution. It is not appropriate for Arabs to push relations with Israel and contribute to the liquidation of this issue, while non-Arabs sympathize with the Palestinian people.

(12) The Palestinian class is torn apart by a temporary situation. And is expected to achieve the minimum legitimate rights of the Palestinian people will automatically unite - the Palestinian front.

On the basis of the above, it appears that the person who puts his hand in the hands of Israel in the situation that it is now, betrays himself, and his country and community and nation, loses his world, and is shamed in the Hereafter.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

On December 10, an Egyptian writer and translator named Fatima Naoot wrote an op-ed in Al Masry Al Youm, after attending an official Chanukah party in Cairo, about how much Jews contributed to Egyptian culture, how loyal they were to Egypt and how much of a shame it is that they were forcibly expelled from that country under Nasser.

The furious reaction to her article has not abated for over a week. People are insulting her by calling her Fatima Yehudah. They are calling her Zionist even though she isn't. They are making fun of her for saying that she received an award from the UN (apparently from a UN Arts initiative.)

I see dozens of articles denouncing Fatima Naoot.

The critics are saying either that the Jews left voluntarily from Egypt - or that they were spies for Israel. But they all insist that they are not antisemitic, oh no.

The more honest ones tacitly recognize that what she said is true - but they are angry that she said it out loud. Because if Egyptians admit that it ethnically cleansed essentially all of its Jews, then it has to pay reparations.

A writer for The Seventh Day says:

I do know that the accusation of forced displacement is very dangerous for your country. Germany, for example, paid Israel 83 billion German marks for such allegations. Israel itself did not dare to accuse Egypt of this accusation, why did you volunteer it?

Another writer for the same paper, after comparing Naoot to the Muslim Brotherhood, writes:

We do not know whether Professor Fatima Naoot knows that because of her article, the fire of hell opens up on Egypt, and it harms its national security. The Jewish lobby is active and influential in the world and is empowered by its power, influence and money. The United States Congress, the European Parliament, and the British Parliament can now demand huge compensation and the return of their stolen property in Egypt .. !!

That writer goes off the deep end right afterwards:

Did they know that Egypt on the front of the Knesset is depicted Greater Israel from the Nile to the Euphrates...?

Essam El-Erian (Muslim Brotherhood leader who said he would welcome Egypt's Jews to return) and Fatima Naout's statement both came in December, Al-Arian's statement at the end of December 2012 and Naout's article at the end of December 2018, and this brings up the question: Why December?

The answer is that Jews celebrate at the end of November each year the anniversary of their departure from Egypt, what they claim to be persecution and political harassment, the seizure of their property, the prayers, the tragedies, the sorrow and the expulsion of them from Egypt, Under the slogans of freedom, nobility, moral values, and ask Fatima Naout and her followers: If politics recognizes moral values and nobility, and what about the crimes of the Jews in Palestine, Egypt, Lebanon and Syria ?!

Nah, nothing antisemitic about this.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

12/18 Links Pt1: UN appeals to the world to fund the PA’s “Pay for Slay” policy; Dore Gold: Mahmoud Abbas Contradicts the Palestinian Narrative on Refugees

From Ian:

Col Kemp: Submission to the inquiry on Gaza border violence

Submission by Colonel Richard Kemp on behalf of the High Level Military Group to The UN Commission of Inquiry on the 2018 violence at the Gaza border. December 2018 Full Report PDF

Haley: Arabs must prove Palestinians are a priority, support Trump's plan

The Arab nations must prove that the Palestinians are a priority by supporting Trump’s peace plan when it is unveiled, US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley told the United Nations Security Council on Monday.

She spoke at the UN’s monthly meeting on the Middle East, which often focuses on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Throughout her two years as ambassador, Haley attempted to divert the conversation onto other regional issues such as Syria and Iran.

Tuesday’s monthly meeting was her last, before she leaves office at the end of December. Haley took the opportunity to speak about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the Trump Peace plan and the UN’s “biased obsession” with Israel.

Israel has always wanted peace with its neighbors and demonstrated that it wants peace, “but it does not want to make peace at any price and it shouldn’t.”

The Palestinians also do not need to accept a peace deal at any price, she said.

“Both sides would benefit greatly from a peace agreement, but the Palestinians would benefit more and the Israelis would risk more.”

It is with this backdrop in mind, that the Trump Administration has crafted its plan for peace between Israel and the Palestinians, she said.

Haley explained that she had read the peace plan, which brings new elements to the discussion. It takes advantage of new technology and recognizes that realities on the ground have changed, she said.

Dore Gold: Video: Mahmoud Abbas Contradicts the Palestinian Narrative on Refugees

It has been axiomatic for theÂ Palestinian narrative that as a result of the first Arab-Israeli war in 1948, the Palestinian Arab refugees were forcibly expelled by Israeli forces from their towns and villages.

Despite the fact that the 1948 war was caused by the invasion by five Arab armies into the nascent State of Israel, the emerging Palestinian narrative put the blame squarely upon the Israeli side.

That is why the recent words of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, at the PLO Consultative Council on December 9, 2018, are so significant.

Looking back historically, Abbas declared: "Everyone started to speak in our name, in our absence. Therefore we could do nothing. And you recall, if you remember, that in 1948, when the 'Nakba,' or catastrophe, took place, we weren't a party to it. We were taken out, and we were told, 'after a week we will return you.'"

Moreover, in March 1976, Abbas told Falastin El-Thawra, published in Beirut, that the Arab armies forced the Palestinians to emigrate and to leave their homeland.

Of course there were cases in which Palestinians left as a by-product of the war.Â But as Israel historian Benny Morris argued in Ha'aretz on July 29, 2017, Israel had no "expulsion policy" in 1948.

Israel and New Media: Challenges and Opportunities (Daled Amos)

by Daled Amos

One of the last speakers to address the Jewish New Media Summit 2 weeks ago was Emmanuel Nahshon, spokesperson for the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. He spoke on the topic of "Israel and the Media: Challenges and Opportunities."

Emmanuel Nahshon, spokesman for the Ministry for Foreign Affairs
Image cropped from video

The New Media

Nahshon noted that there are between 250 and 300 foreign journalists posted in Israel on a permanent basis, even while the nature of media in the 21st century is changing. "Classical" media is in a battle with social media, and losing its importance.

This change impacts on how the Foreign Ministry now does business. As Nahshon puts it:

“Talking to journalists is one thing, but conducting public diplomacy on social media is something totally different”

In this new environment, there is a change in the way that Israel is being perceived. Though we tend to think that the image of Israel in the world is not necessarily positive, Nahshon believes that actually, the reality is a little bit different -- it depends on where and how you look.

Israel's New Image

He noted that in major parts of the world, Israel is actually perceived in a positive way. The key is that there are people who look at Israel not only through the prism of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict but in a larger way. This is especially true in areas such as Latin America, Africa, India, China, and Eastern Europe.

The Foreign Ministry conducts public opinion polls regularly, asking people in those areas what comes to mind when they hear the name Israel, and they usually give positive responses, such as:

o Water management
o  Desalinization
o  Agriculture
o  Security
o  High tech
o  Medicine
o  Literature and art

Nahshon's point, about changing the prism through which people see Israel, from one of conflict to one of Israel's achievements, was suggested 10 years ago.

In 2008, an article in The Canadian Jewish News described a new effort in "branding" Israel, outlined by Ido Aharoni:

Aharoni said the ministry has conducted market research over the past few years that showed “Israel is viewed solely through the narrow prism of the Arab-Israeli conflict… Israel’s personality is 90 per cent dominated by conflict-related images and some religious connotations,” he said. “Those of us who know the brand intimately are disturbed by the divergence of brand and the perception.”

...aspects of Israel are worthy of promotion, including its culture and arts; its accomplishments on environmental matters such as water desalination, solar energy and clean technology; its high-tech successes and achievements in higher education; and its involvement in international aid, he added. [emphasis added]

Apparently, the branding effort has been a success.

The Remaining Challenge

According to Nahshon, the biggest challenge facing Israel is in Western Europe and some of the media outlets in the North American continent. Just because Israel has a relatively positive image in Africa and Latin America does not mean it can ignore the negative media in those areas, where Israel is viewed mostly in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This view of Israel persists there, despite the best efforts to explain that Israel is more than just that conflict, and that conflict is not at the heart of the existence of Israel.

The reason some do see the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict as the heart of what Israel is about is because the foreign media assigned to Israel tends to report mostly on the issue of the conflict. They see the issues surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as the ones the editor will want to publish and that the public will want to see.

There remains a lot of work to be done to change that perception. Changing this perception of the media is something that Matti Friedman addressed when he spoke at the Summit.

He said it couldn't be done.

Nahshon says he explains to foreign journalists that there is more to see in Israel - not in an effort to hide the conflict, but to show there is more to Israel.

But the journalists are not interested. There seems to be a very rigid mind-set among journalists that the context has to be the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and that solving it will bring peace. As if the responsibility for tensions is on Israel’s shoulders, and if only Israel would do x or y, things would be wonderful.

On the contrary, solving the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis will do nothing more than solve the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis.

Israel's Success in the Arab World

In parallel to its efforts in other parts of the world, the Foreign Ministry is working with social media in the Arab world and keeping track of the perceptions of Israel in the Arab world and in Iran.

In the last few years, this perception is becoming increasingly positive.

The Foreign Ministry does polls in the Arab world via international companies and there is a changing perception whose beginnings can be traced back to the Arab spring.

This change in perception can also be tied to the advent of smartphones, which Nahshon describes as a big instrument for change because they enable the free flow of information.

As he puts it: if you are a young Arab person “no one can tell you lies about Israel anymore because you can check it personally."

(This may be a bit too optimistic, seeing how there is nothing to stop the free flow of lies -- as we regularly see on Facebook and Twitter.)

Israel's Foreign Ministry invests a lot of time, effort and energy on developing contacts with the Arab world via social media and has millions of followers on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. The idea is to reach young people, without telling them what to think or what to do.

According to Nahshon:

“We have abandoned any concept of propaganda...a long time ago”

Instead, the goal is to present the Israeli reality in all of its complexity, but also all of its beauty. He says the results are extremely convincing and extremely positive and that people are happy to receive Israeli videos and posts on Facebook. They understand that Israel is not only not the problem in the Middle East, but Israel is part of the solution.

This change in perception is the basis of the recent major diplomatic developments:

o Netanyahu visiting Oman
o Gradual normalization with the Gulf states
o Possible changes we may see with Saudi Arabia

When the president of Chad visited Israel, he did not visit because he suddenly became a Zionist. Rather, he understands that Israel is able to provide the means to help his own country, with expertise in the area of agriculture, water management, and security.

That is why Arab countries want closer ties with Israel.

But also, the Arab Street is no longer brainwashed against Israel -- because, going back to his earlier point, the Arab leaders understand that brainwashing is no longer a viable option: they can no longer tell their people lies, because they can see the truth for themselves.

According to Nahshon, we are just at the beginning of a revolution, a major change.

Nahshon certainly paints an optimistic picture, even while admitting the problems that remain. Judging by developments in the relationship between Israel and the Gulf states, it is hard to deny that there is something to what he says.

Yet it is hard not to see social media as a two-edged sword. If it can be used as a tool to enhance Israel's image in the world, it can be -- and has been -- used as a weapon to damage that image as well.

The New Media still presents challenges as well as opportunities.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.