Monday, October 12, 2020
- Monday, October 12, 2020
- Elder of Ziyon
Study Finds Majority Support for Ties With Israel in Saudi Arabia, UAE, Jordan and Egypt
A study published in the United Arab Emirates over the weekend shows growing support for establishing ties with Israel in some Arab countries.
The poll, conducted by US-based Zogby Analytics, found majority support in four Arab states for normalizing relations with Israel and that the driving force behind this shift is a desire to stabilize the political and military situation in the Middle East.
According to Sky News Arabia, the poll included 3,600 Arab respondents living in Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Jordan, Egypt and the Palestinian Authority, and was supervised by James Zogby, founder and president of the Arab-American Institute.
Sky News Arabia was the only media outlet reporting on the results of the survey.
According to the survey, 59 percent of Jordanians and Saudis, along with 58 percent of Egyptians and 56 percent of the residents of the UAE support normalization agreements between Israel and the Arab world, citing primarily regional stability and economic prosperity. In sharp contrast, the poll said that 61 percent of Palestinians opposed normalization.
A recent study by Israel’s Strategic Affairs Ministry, however, found that overall, Arab social media users were less enthused about the Abraham Accords than the UAE poll might suggest. The ministry’s data suggests that a whopping 90 percent of all Arabic social media discourse on the recent rapprochement between Israel, the UAE and Bahrain is negative.
The report shows that between August and September, 95 percent of Arabic social media posts commenting on the issue slammed the UAE, with 45 percent of the posts calling the agreement a “betrayal.”
Other allegations against the UAE focused on the ban on signing agreements with the “Zionists” (27 percent), Abu Dhabi’s “hypocrisy” and its “capitulation” to the United States (5 percent).
But not all was negative: 61 percent of the posts favoring the deal cited security benefits, 33 percent noted economic potential and 6 percent said the accords simply made an existing situation official.
Australia halves UNRWA funding
The Australian Government has quietly halved its contribution to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA).
The cut to UNRWA funding was not formally announced by the Morrison Government, but was listed in the 2020-21 Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade budget papers. In 2020-21, Australia will contribute $10 million to UNRWA, down from $20 million in 2019-20.
It is important to note that despite budgetary pressures due to COVID-19, the Australian Government has not made significant reductions to its contributions to other global humanitarian organisations, including UN agencies.
Support for the UN High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) has remained the same, support for the World Health Organisation and UN Children’s Fund is constant, but there was a drop in support for the World Food Programme. UNRWA is the only organisation of its type whose funding was halved by the Australian Government in this Budget.
This decision marks the end of a period when Australia, beginning under then-foreign minister Bob Carr, became one of UNRWA’s most significant funders. In 2012. Carr announced a five-year $90 million funding deal for UNRWA. This was topped up with an additional $4.5 million in 2013. By 2017, Australia was UNRWA’s 12th largest donor.
The Coalition Government extended UNRWA funding, contributing, on average, $20 million a year until 2019-20.
However, there have been calls for the Australian Government, including from the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC) to carefully consider whether supporting UNRWA is truly in Australia’s national interest or whether Australia should be making its funding contingent on reforms to UNRWA. It should be noted that the United States withdrew its funding of UNRWA in 2018 due to concerns over its effectiveness and neutrality.
- Monday, October 12, 2020
- Elder of Ziyon
Building on the historic Abraham Accords, DFC and other delegation members visited Israel to explore opportunities to translate that agreement into tangible initiatives to improve the lives of people across the region. In particular, DFC is pursuing projects with countries such as Israel and the United Arab Emirates that will enhance regional trade, create jobs, increase energy security and reliable access to electricity, and support agriculture and sustainable access to water in the region.
- Monday, October 12, 2020
- Elder of Ziyon
- #PayForSlay, olive oil
- Monday, October 12, 2020
- Elder of Ziyon
Today I attended a lecture given by Brown University professor Ariella Azoulay who had been invited to talk to a Cornell class in the school of architecture. This lecture was afactual, ahistorical and steeped in antisemitic narratives to the extent that all photographs showing Jews or Israelis she had erased the image of the people (see below) because "I can't bear to look at them". Deeply disturbing and profoundly depressing.
Sunday, October 11, 2020
The makings of a true peace
It’s a new Middle East and anyone who has been following the news or more importantly, social media, is discovering an entirely new language with respect to Israel-Arab relations, one characterized by warmth, curiosity and excitement sparked by the recent peace deals signed between Israel and the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.
The people have spoken, and they love each other. It happened so instantly that it has caused some skeptics to raise eyebrows and question the authenticity of this rapprochement, but anyone who is in touch with the “other side” knows that this outspoken sympathy is genuine.
Terms like “warm peace” and “normalization” are often used but only for lack of better description. Truth be told, the peace between Israel and the UAE isn’t just warm—it’s sizzling hot.
“It’s like we’re dating,” said Jerusalem Deputy Mayor Fleur Hassan-Nahoum, while Chief Rabbi of the UAE Yehuda Sarna believes “Israeli tourists won’t want to leave.”
Emiratis are reacting similarly. Dubai-based businessman Thani AlShirawi, who co-founded the Israel-UAE Business Forum with Hassan Nahoum, says he is “on cloud nine.” Emirati author Omar al-Busaidy, who attended the White House signing ceremony on Sept. 15, said he hasn’t stopped smiling and “you can feel the energy everywhere.”
If anything, the Abraham Accords is a people’s peace. For many Israelis—especially at a time when they face a second coronavirus-triggered lockdown that is compounded by political uncertainty and nationwide protests—this peace is a gift to be enjoyed by generations to come, one the impact of which will be felt long after the COVID and political crises have gone.
Less than a month after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and UAE Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah Bin Zayed Al Nahyan joined U.S. President Donald Trump at the White House for the signing ceremony, dozens of partnerships have been formed between the Jewish state and the Arabian Gulf power, and the list grows daily.
UAE envoy to Britain: ‘The idea Arabs and Israel must be at war is nonsense’
The United Arab Emirates ambassador has urged British Jews to visit the country as he expressed his wish to be an ally in the fight against antisemitism in the UK and decried hate in parts of the Arab media.
Mansoor Abulhoul made the comments in his first interview with the Jewish media after his country and Israel signed the historic Abraham Accords to normalise relations.
The envoy, who studied at Leeds University and whose British mother moved to the UAE in 1968, said the region had suffered from decades of “indoctrination stemming from the Arab nationalist movement” and been “held back” by a fear of engaging with others. “The narrative that the Arabs should be in endless war with the Israelis is absolute nonsense and the Abraham Accords proves that” he insisted.
“To have a dialogue you have to be at the table and we very much see the Abraham accords as a new pathway to peace. For us to ignore a major power engine we’re denying the region strengths and bonds from which we can build peace. We’re both very dynamic economies and its difficult not to be able to work together.”
He strongly disagrees with any suggestion that the deal doesn’t progress the issue of peace with the Palestinians, whose leadership have accused the UAE of betrayal.
“Where we had looming annexation – which would have sent peace into overdrive reverse gear – that’s been removed. It’s important the Palestinians use this time to come in and engage.”
It is up to the Israelis and Palestinians to decide what sort of solution they finally come to. But the UAE will do all it can to urge both sides to break the impasse. We will be able to help precisely because we can now communicate directly with Israel.”
Great interview by @ReinsteinJosh with MK @CotlerWunsh, one of #Israel's most eloquent and passionate spokespeople, but also an indefatigable champion for Olim community in the Knesset.
— Arsen Ostrovsky (@Ostrov_A) October 10, 2020
Both Michal and Josh are outstanding role models!https://t.co/0M707LAyLU
What binds the radical US Left is hating both Israel and the USA
Note that the ammunition being used to separate the heretofore special bond between the U.S. and Israel is based on the lie that Israel is a usurper and an “illegal occupier” of another’s land!
To understand the calumny, read for yourselves what is enshrined in international law, as well as in historical fact. The preeminent expert in this legal arena is Howard Grief (deceased, June 2013). All the facts are contained within Legal Rights and Title of Sovereignty of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel and Palestine under International Law
For all intents and purposes, the Democratic Party’s current incarnation (as it moved left-ward, incrementally, over a period of years) is ideologically imbued with those who would like to see Israel’s destruction. America’s, too. Even though the Democrat Party of yesteryear, tradition-wise, has always been supportive of Israel, this no longer seems to be the case.
The party's radical, Marxist/communist element hates Israel for the same reasons they hate America. This tragic truth is plain for all to see, but only if one’s eyes are wide open enough to absorb the seismic upheavals taking place all over America. Akin to the outcome of a civil war, the upcoming 2020 election will determine the absolute fate of the nation. This is so on both the domestic and foreign fronts.
In addition to conservative leaning Americans - those who believe in the Constitution and all that it represents and upholds - the next biggest losers to a Biden win will be those who seek to safeguard the "sacred and special" friendship between America and Israel. This includes not only American Jews who seek to ensure the safety of Israel from within the diaspora, but millions of Christians in America who not only pray for Israel's safety, but support the Jewish homeland in a myriad of ways, seen and unseen.
The upcoming 2020 choice for President of the United States couldn't be any clearer, starker, or more monumental.
Friday, October 09, 2020
- Friday, October 09, 2020
- Elder of Ziyon
President Reuven Rivlin: The people of Israel will defeat coronavirus
On Friday, everything starts fresh. Will we also be able to? Yes, yes, my dear ladies and gentlemen, completely anew. On the morning of Simchat Torah, we will read the 54th and final weekly Torah portion, V'Zot HaBerachah ("and this is the blessing"), immediately after which we will read the beginning of the Torah -- Bereshit ("Genesis").
We must also take the deepest of breaths, inhale the new air, and try starting fresh. To shake off the fatigue of the recent period, the lockdown, and rally together in the common cause of fighting the pandemic. We are well aware that our existence, as a nation and culture, also hinges on the deep-rooted ties to our traditions, historical heritage, the path of our forefathers, and the vision of the prophets.
The Simchat Torah holiday is a reminder that the bond between the people of Israel and the Torah -- the simple yet profound, honest joy of a people's connection to their most fundamental values – cannot be broken. This year, we cannot rejoice with the Torah as in years past. Instead of dancing in our crowded, happy circles, with our children on our shoulders, we will have to pray in limited gatherings in accordance with the directives meant to save our lives. It is very sad, but to ensure that next year we can return to dancing with our loved ones and Torah scrolls, I know we have no other choice.
If we don't fight together, shoulder to shoulder, in the battle for the public's wellbeing, we will fail. We must celebrate the holiday in adherence to the safety protocols, in the spirit of mutual guarantee for our fellow man, in solemn prayer that this scourge will be driven from our land.
Defining Antisemitism as a Jewish Problem Is a Lose-Lose Proposition
Radical groups — the radical left, the radical right, radical Muslims, and the radical African-Americans who champion Louis Farrakhan — are spearheading efforts to erode the core principles that make our country exceptional. The Islamo-leftist alliance, in particular, is gaining momentum. While many Jewish and other civil rights organizations singularly focus on far-right white nationalists as the main generators of extremism, the Islamo-leftist alliance parades in public as a social justice cause while infiltrating and undermining our communities and institutions. Collectively, these radical groups reject the Judeo-Christian values that have supported the foundation of our country and protected all minority communities in America, including Jews.Who First Said Anti-Zionism Isn’t Antisemitism?
Proponents of the Islamo-leftist alliance seek to undermine the structures and institutions that keep our country open, democratic, and healthy, including the family unit, businesses, communities, religious institutions, impartial media, law enforcement, the military, and the courts. Increasing antisemitic attacks and the public display of hatred are trial runs for what is to come from these radical movements. For years, Jews have been at the receiving end of this hatred. If we are truly ready to overcome it, we must stop playing the victim and start fighting this head-on together with other Americans.
We will lose as Jews and as Americans if we continue accepting our prescribed role as the sacrificial canary in the coal mine, hoping that others may recognize the danger after it has already consumed us whole. Instead, we need to be eagles looking to the horizon, detecting threats far before they grievously harm us and our country. There are practical actions we must take to go on the offensive against antisemitism. They include (1) investigating and exposing the radical movements that fuel the spread of this hatred by identifying their networks, money trails, and agendas; (2) increasing knowledge-sharing capabilities that inform the American people about the threats and empower them to act; (3) holding the media accountable to the standards of a fair and free press; and (4) supporting legislation that curbs the influence of the hate movements in our institutions.
Presenting antisemitism as a Jewish problem has been a lose-lose proposition because it has not spurred anyone to take meaningful action against it. Rather than griping about the problem, it is now time for all Americans to fight against this hatred and racism and for Jews to stand at the forefront of this fight. Our history and increasingly dangerous reality show that the inalienable rights afforded by the Constitution cannot be taken for granted. We need to fight for our safety and security today so that tomorrow we and future generations can continue living freely and proudly. We must fly into the future as brave eagles and free America from the dangers of antisemitism and the extremism it represents.
Roosevelt noted the Arabs underestimated the Jews and overestimated their own capabilities. “They thought they could do a job on Israel in a very short time with comparatively little effort, and they told their peoples that too, which was about the worst mistake of all.”
Fighting was still going on when he spoke, so he concluded by arguing that the only way to bring peace to Palestine was for the United States “to declare that any further fighting or any further infringement of a truce or an armistice in Palestine would result in a firm embargo by the United States on any kind of shipments, including specifically dollars, to whichever side started the violation.” Though he said this should apply to both sides, his chief concern was what the Arabists saw as Israeli aggression.
During the Q&A, Roosevelt argued the press had a pro-Zionist bias because newspapers were dependent on advertising from department stores, which “are in the hands of people who may not be Zionists themselves, but they are subject to very strong pressure from the Zionists.” He added that some publishers were susceptible to “a kind of friendly insistence that they not allow anything to appear in their papers which could encourage antisemitism.”
Ironically, he followed up this antisemitic trope about Jewish control of the media with the conclusion that “one of the most dangerous elements in this situation … has been the way in which the Zionists have identified antisemitism with anti-Zionism.” Roosevelt argued, “Sooner or later there is bound to develop in this country strong anti-Zionism. There is no strong reason why that should mean antisemitism, but the Zionists are making it all the more likely by their insistence that if you are an anti-Zionist you are an antisemitist.”
According to Roosevelt, not only is it unreasonable to suggest that anti-Zionism is antisemitism, but doing so provokes antisemitism.
Roosevelt may not have been the first to make the argument, but he certainly was not the last. Today, a universal dodge employed by antisemites is their insistence that they have nothing against Jews, only the state of the Jews, and that seeking the destruction of that state — anti-Zionism — is not antisemitism.
- Friday, October 09, 2020
- Elder of Ziyon
According to the founding father of Zionism Theodore Herzl, “the area of the Jewish State stretches from the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates.”The recent episode of ‘Middle East Peace Process’ is a proposal of Greater Israel by the Trump administration to resolve the Israel-Palestine conflict formally unveiled in White House on 28 January 2020.The Greater Israel strategy is not strictly a Zionist Plan for the Middle East, but is an integral part of US foreign policy. The strategic objective is extending American hegemony beside fracturing and balkanising the complete Middle East region. The plan operates on essential premise that to survive Israel must become an imperial regional power, and must effect the division of the Arab world into numerous small states. Small, here will depend on the ethnic or sectarian composition of each state. The Zionist hope is that sectarian-based Arab states become Israel’s satellites and, ironically, its source of moral legitimation. This is not a new idea, nor does it surface for the first time in Zionist strategic thinking.
Hatred against Israel and the refusal to recognise or establish diplomatic relations with Israel is no new phenomenon to Muslim countries in Asia. This abomination is based on feelings of Islamic solidarity with Arab countries and a sense of religious belonging to the global Islamic community. The main factors preventing Pakistan from recognising and establishing diplomatic relations with Israel are solidarity with Muslim countries in general, Saudi Arab in particular, and fear of an adverse response by influential religious groups and militants from within Pakistan.The key question is why should Pakistan restrain ties with Israel on the basis of the Israel-Arab conflict while many Arab countries have established suitable relationship with Israel?Pakistan and Israel do not have a specific hostility or conflict area. What people don’t understand is that we are losing out against India by not maintaining ties with Israel. If Pakistan carries good diplomatic relations with Israel, it can help winning unfailing support from many developed countries of the world, with which Israel has the strongest lobbying powers. We are so wrapped up in what is good for everyone else; that we are losing sight of what is good for us as a nation. Nonetheless, it is time to be practical and relook genuinely, what Pakistan is losing out by not establishing appropriate diplomatic relations with Israel?
Every day I find myself saying....WOW.
- Friday, October 09, 2020
- Elder of Ziyon
Zionism is about being pioneers in the land
Yet there are two critical facts that the late Elhanan Oren, one of the finest historians of Zionist settlement, emphasizes have to be added to the account. The first is that spirit, ruach, preceded official intellect in the creation of these settlements. It was socialist Zionist youth who called to conquer the land, to attack new territory through constructive civilian settlement, rather than make due with passive defense for existing settlements. This was particularly true along the coast (Tel-Aviv) against the Arab challenge, before Zionist officialdom realized the intrinsic geo-strategic importance of these settlements rooted in spirit.
The second point he makes is the argument that took place in Zionist officialdom. The argument was between the “rationalists,” Arthur Ruppin, the expert on German colonization who brought his expertise to bear in promoting Zionist settlement; Eliezer Kaplan, the movement’s leading economic mind who argued to stick to the existing coastal blocks; and the “visionaries,” Moshe Shertok (later prime minister Sharett), Joseph Weitz in the settlement department in the Jewish Agency, and others who called for far-flung settlement to deny the British Peel Commission – which was deliberating Palestine’s future – the option of further partitioning the Land of Israel.
Who was right? Israel’s War of Independence proved the importance of these settlements in staving off the enemy, either Palestinians or even more critically, the Arab states that attacked the fledgling state. Shertok knew when he made the decision to support the “visionary” plan (in the absence of David Ben-Gurion who was in the United States at the time) that the incorporation of these areas would further aggravate the demographic problem. It was a situation in which Jews were less than one-third of the population in the Holy Land. However, Shertock, later known as a “dove,” chose spirit over matter. In the end, spirit combined with matter prevailed.
How much more so should our leaders and warriors value spirit over bureaucratic thinking when the resources of the State of Israel, demographically and economically, are so much greater, and the foe is still adamant about conquering the Land of Israel from “the river to the sea?”
Alas, Reshef and his colleagues, have lost the spirit on which they were nurtured. The Palestinian Authority’s strategic settlement plan from 2011 is a challenge that Israel and Zionism never faced before. That and the more traditional means of burning what Zionists by planted by Hamas launching incendiary devices from Gaza, proves that Homa umigdal is as relevant today as it was in the 1930s, or more so.
David Singer: Rabin’s words and AOC
The approaching 25th anniversary of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin’s assassination on 4 November 1995 has seen leading left-wing Democratic Party Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) cancelling her planned attendance at a memorial event organised by leftist Americans for Peace Now on 20 October.
Ocasio-Cortez withdrew after journalist Alex Kane tweeted and AOC replied:
AOC Pulls Out of Event for Murdered Israeli Prime Minister Rabin, the First to Recognize Palestinian Nationalism | CNSNews
Alex Kane is telling the truth, but not the whole truth.. Rabin did say to "break their bones" during a violent and murderous Arab uprising in Gaza, but that was because he did not allow the use of guns during that period of attacks against Israelis and instead, gave the soldiers truncheons with which to try to keep the peace. Israeli mothers were less than happy at that decision.
Rabin was indeed a liberal peacemaker and AOC’s decision is to be deplored.
Summary of thread from 🇪🇺 @EUpalestinians: Blank check for hate, rejectionism, terror, and corruption. 40+ years of political & bureaucratic failure, billions wasted, nothing learned. @JosepBorrellF @eu_eeas @vonderleyen @EUinIsrael https://t.co/MpMppA09qn
— Prof Gerald M Steinberg (@GeraldNGOM) October 9, 2020
Caroline Glick: A magic carpet ride over the anti-Netanyahu protests
Mendelblit's contempt for the public was on prominent display last month in remarks he made at a Rosh Hashanah toast to his subordinates.
Referring to himself as the "guardian of democracy," Mendelblit spent most of his speech attacking his critics who view his decision to indict Netanyahu on bribery and breach of trust charges for his alleged efforts to win positive coverage from news outlets, as legally and normatively defective. Diminishing studied criticism as mere background noise, Mendelblit said derisively, "the windows [of this building] are sealed off from the noises outside."
Mendelblit expressed pure contempt for Israel's elected leaders whose criticism of his actions he attacked as anti-democratic, and worse. He referred to Public Security Minister Amir Ohana's criticism of his behavior as "a terror attack against democracy."
But then at the end of his remarks he turned to the anti-Netanyahu protests organized by Haskel and his comrades. Referring to them, Mendelblit waxed poetically about the "foundational right to protest" in a democracy.
In recent weeks Mendelblit's subordinates have instructed the police not to charge Haskel and his fellow Netanyahu haters for breaking the laws in the course of their protests, lest their democratic right to protest is trampled.
The glaring contradiction in Mendelblit's remarks – his seething dismissal of "noises from outside" made by those who oppose his deeply controversial efforts to criminalize otherwise lawful political behavior to oust Netanyahu from power on the one hand, and his self-righteous defense of the "foundational right to protest" in speaking about Haskel and his band of Netanyahu haters on the other – is disturbingly similar to the tale revealed by Haskel's videos.
Haskel rejected the foundation of Zionism by demanding the gratitude of the children of Ethiopian Jewry while glorifying the contribution he made to one of its greatest triumphs – the airlift of Ethiopian Jewry to Israel. Mendelblit revealed his contempt for democracy by rejecting the legitimacy of elected leaders while upholding the right of anti-Netanyahu protesters to break the laws in the name of "democracy."
Haskel's anti-Zionist outbursts and Mendelblit's anti-democratic speech show that Israel is not in the throes of an ideological battle between two competing ideological camps. Instead, a large majority of Israelis joined in their dedication to Zionism and democratic norms is being assaulted by an aggressive, hateful and arrogant minority whose leaders cynically exploit Zionist concepts and the language of democracy to undermine both to advance their naked, nihilistic bid for power.
- Friday, October 09, 2020
- Elder of Ziyon
- analysis, Daled Amos
The European position is to defend the two-state solution. I hope this continues to be the EU position.
The Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Egypt, France, Germany and Jordan, met in Amman today to continue their coordination and consultation on means to advance the Middle East Peace Process towards a just, comprehensive and lasting peace. The meeting was attended by the EU Special Representative for the Middle East Peace Process.
The Ministers declared:...We stress that the resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict on the basis of the two-state solution, that ensures the emergence of an independent and viable Palestinian state on the basis of June 4, 1967 lines, living side by side a secure and recognized Israel, is the path to achieving comprehensive, enduring peace and regional security.
The envoy indicated that France prefers a two-state solution, but that doesn’t mean they can’t accept something else, adding that his country will accept any solution agreed upon by the Palestinians and the Israelis.
The Palestinians must take into account their weak position on the international and Arab arenas, stressed Danon...They warned that Palestinians could lose everything now.A French diplomatic in Paris confirmed that what was once the personal opinion of Danon was now becoming official French foreign policy:
“French diplomacy is having a hard time putting all its weight on the two-state solution, as it becomes unrealistic on the ground,” the diplomat pointed out. “What the ambassador said is self-evident. That it is important to resume negotiations as soon as possible. The Palestinians have never been so weak. They could lose everything.” [emphasis added]
Why is France now suddenly seeing the light?
It might be because of Frances's diplomatic relations with the Gulf states
France, one of the five veto-wielding members of the U.N. Security Council, has close ties with Gulf Arab states, in particular Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, and rarely publicly criticizes internal political issues. [emphasis added]
And that includes Bahrain in addition to the UAE.
The UAE is also a major client for French weapons.
It would be in France's interests to support the UAE and Bahrain, not only in terms of the new agreements with Israel, but also to support the new potential for different options for peace.
So it is not just a matter of some countries wanting to ally themselves with Israel in order to get into Washington's good graces -- now there are advantages of allying with the Gulf states too. And if support for the Abraham Accords is the price to pay to reap the benefits of better relations and agreements with rich Arab states, it may not be just the smaller developing countries that see an opportunity.
Which is just one more way that Abbas's kleptocracy is left out in the cold.
- Friday, October 09, 2020
- Elder of Ziyon
As a peace activist, it is strange to do anything other than support any kind of peace treaty. But, this normalization agreement — what the Israeli government is trying to sell as a peace deal — forces us to remind ourselves what we actually mean by peace. An agreement in which the main profiters are arms industries and economic elites, and the losers are the people, is not a peace accord. It is a war agreement — of governments against the people.Why is Vardi against the agreement? Because, he says, it only profits arms dealers, and everyone else loses:
With this win-win-win for the arms industries, who loses out from it all? Given that the UAE is already using Israeli technologies to prevent dissent and opposition among their own citizens, and considering Abu Dhabi’s role in the war on Yemen, the real losers of this “normalization” are apparent: the people.In Jerusalem, the local loss is also apparent: firstly, Palestinians, who have just watched countries that have historically claimed to support their rights and independence sign a normalization agreement with their occupier.Secondly, Israelis, who are now in a second full COVID-19 lockdown amid a devastating economic recession, are having to watch their prime minister spend his time and energy on normalization agreements that have no effect on their daily life, and that profit only the upper echelons of Israeli society.
- Friday, October 09, 2020
- Elder of Ziyon
While the President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, is supposed to issue a decree setting the date for the general Palestinian elections according to a timetable not exceeding six months, based on recent understandings between Hamas and Fatah, pressure from Arab countries is increasing to stop this path, in addition to field pressures exerted by the Israeli occupation in the occupied West Bank. Al-Akhbar learned that the Arab rejection of the recent understandings concluded in Turkey delayed Abbas’s issuance of the presidential decree in the elections, especially since some of the objections came in the form of warnings that “Hamas” would drag Abu Mazen into the bosom of Turkey and Qatar away from the “Arab consensus”.
Likewise, Egyptian and Jordanian pressures in particular, and behind them the Gulf, caused the postponement of the meeting of secretaries-general scheduled for the third of this month, during which the election decree was supposed to be issued after presenting the understandings to the rest of the factions. Sources reported that during the visit of the Fatah delegation to Cairo last week (after the Istanbul understandings), the movement was informed that the Egyptians were not satisfied with the way the agreement was announced in Turkey. However, “Fatah” defended by saying that the agreement took place in the Palestinian consulate in Istanbul without Turkish sponsorship or mediation, and that the Palestinians understood through bilateral meetings and achieved a “major breakthrough” in the reconciliation file, in addition to that “the current Palestinian strategy is based on the policy of bilateral meetings.” However, the sources add, this justification did not satisfy the Egyptians, who oppose the implementation of the agreement and even the elections.Amman is pressuring Hamas through Ahlam Al-Tamimi’s file to deport the husband of the freed prisonerThe Egyptian objection was that Palestinian reconciliation in this way, far from Cairo’s sponsorship, represents a diminution of the latter’s effort after many attempts at reconciliation between the two movements for 14 years. In addition, the current time is not suitable for elections, especially with the absence of international and American support for their conduct, which makes them « A leap not calculated from Abbas ». Complementing this position, the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, expressed “discontent” with the Turkey meeting, because some parties saw in these meetings a message to certain Arab parties, which was the response of the Secretary of the Executive Committee of the Liberation Organization, Saeb Erekat, demanding Aboul Gheit to resign from his post against the backdrop of his support of the Arab agreements with Israel and his promotion of the “deal of the century”, noting that a few days ago, the authority announced its abandonment of the presidency of the current session of the League after it failed to obtain any form of it that condemns the recent agreements with the occupation.
Meanwhile, “Fatah” sources revealed that Jordan has expressed, through communication channels with Abbas, its annoyance with the agreement and its signing in Turkey, stressing that it does not support holding the Palestinian elections for fear that “Hamas” will obtain a large share of the positions, in addition to the complications, Especially in the West Bank and Jerusalem, and what it knows of the Israeli intention to prevent the elections, which will open the door for confrontation in the West Bank. At the same time, Hamas sources reported, in an interview with Al-Akhbar, that an indirect Jordanian message reached Hamas to reject the reconciliation agreement, by putting pressure on the freed prisoner belonging to the movement and wanted by the United States, Ahlam Al-Tamimi, to leave the kingdom, through deportation of her freed prisoner husband, Nizar Al-Tamimi, and informing him of the need to leave within days, in preparation for her deportation and delivery to the US administration.
Hamas is concerned about the impact of this on Abbas’s decision, which in turn informed him that it looks with suspicion at his delay in implementing consensuses, including permitting popular resistance in the West Bank and stopping the pursuit of Hamas members, as well as his delay in lifting sanctions on the Gaza Strip, and stopping the distinction between the West Bank and the Strip,
Very convoluted! But in the end, the Palestinians can't do much without upsetting some of their remaining friends, and that is why nothing will be done.
Thursday, October 08, 2020
A lesson in Israeli public relations
In 1993, in the Oslo Accords, Arafat was given a foothold in Judea and Samaria and Gaza, along with control over the residents of these areas. The autonomy envisioned by Menachem Begin, meanwhile, did not include Arafat’s Palestinian Liberation Organization, although it did crack open the door for exactly that. Bandar has a score to settle with Arafat—one might say a bloody one.Daniel Pipes: Is the Israel Victory Project still needed?
In the years he served as Saudi Arabia’s ambassador in Washington, he was one of the more influential figures in the United States and on certain issues pertaining to the Middle East, the energy industry and terror; he was even stronger than then-U.S. President George W. Bush. Bandar was the one who strong-armed Bush and his secretary of state, Colin Powell, to publicly declare U.S. recognition of the Palestinian right to an independent state of their own.
The Bush administration at the time went even further than the Clinton roadmap. It was Bandar who pressured Bush to allow many Saudi individuals, including those tied with Osama bin Laden and the Sept. 11 attacks, to board planes and flee the United States. For comparison’s sake, to this day one poor Jew, former spy Jonathan Pollard, cannot even leave the state of New York let alone fly to Israel.
Bandar did not become pro-Zionist overnight, but when it came to his narrative regarding the Six-Day War, he noted that it didn’t start due to wanton Israeli “aggression,” rather then-Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser’s decision to close the Straits of Tiran.
This moment in time, with the Saudis attacking the Palestinians, exposes the fact that peace with the UAE and Bahrain is essentially peace with the ancient birthmother of Arab nationalism. It was Bandar’s ancestors who rode, swords drawn, with Lawrence of Arabia to liberate most of the Middle East from the Turks during World War I.
Beyond this, the Saudi stance alongside Israel mostly indicates the Arabs’ reduced standing as a global power. They were at their apex in the 1970s and 1980s. From Israel’s vantage point, strategic patience and durability paid off. It appears that true victories aren’t achieved via lightning strikes but through dedicated commitment to a long-term process.
In the outside-in approach, Arab states partially assume Israel’s role to impose defeat on the Palestinian Authority and Hamas. Note the elements of what Khaled Abu Toameh terms their “divorce process:” the emerging warm peace between Abu Dhabi, Manama and Jerusalem; the imam of the Great Mosque in Mecca (who has been banned from Western countries for his crude antisemitism) talking about Muhammad’s friendly relations with Jews; the Arab League unprecedentedly turning down a Palestinian initiative and the Arab states reducing their financial support to the Palestinians by 85%.Tom Gross: Conversations with friends about their lives: Times of Israel editor David Horovitz
Does this mean Israel Victory has been superseded? No. Sunni Arab states unfortunately make up only a portion of the Palestinians’ vast and multifaceted support system. Exceptional public relations prowess, combined with antisemitism, transmogrified the tiny, weak and relatively prosperous Palestinian population into the world’s most prominent human rights issue, one which benefits from immeasurably more solicitude than the far more wretched Syrians or Yemenis.
That support system starts with Iran and Turkey, the only countries – in US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s description – to have “vehemently denounced” the recent agreements. Indeed, those two regimes have largely replaced the Arab states (whose last major war with Israel was in 1973) as the Palestinians’ regional stalwarts.
Second, because the foreign policies of Russia and China globally oppose the US, Jerusalem’s tight alliance with Washington makes them both significant Palestinian supporters.
Third, Israel’s Left despises Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, pooh-poohs the recent accords and touchingly believes that Palestinians will be content with a Palestine adjoining Israel.
David talks with Tom Gross about his upbringing, about editing the Times of Israel (and before that the Jerusalem Post), about interviewing Paul McCartney and others, about the difficulties of striving for fair and independent journalism in an era of fakery and misrepresentation, and about life in Israel and beyond.
Peter Beinart, the New York Times and the Coming Campaign to Eliminate Israel
The goal of this campaign is clear: to normalize and mainstream the idea of eliminating a nation. It is to convince a decisive majority of Americans that it would be a good thing, the moral thing, for a nation of eight million people to disappear. The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was once called a “warrant for genocide.” Now, a new warrant is being written.
And it is clear that this campaign will push Jews to the forefront. It is no coincidence that Beinart and Rhodes are Jewish, and that they collaborated in firing the first shot. This indicates that the campaign will be directed at Jews as well. It will seek to convince us to abandon Zionism. To persuade us, in other words, that we do not deserve to live.
There is a very good reason for this.
In the 1970s, former Israeli Air Force chief Benny Peled had a remarkable insight. He said in an interview, “Our enemies had to examine the ingredients of our strength, and they of course discovered the thing that we’ve been shouting at full volume: that our strength is our spirit.”
“And they decided to attack that,” he said. “The Jewish people’s strongest weapon.”
The new campaign to eliminate Israel and Zionism is nothing but that: an attempt to shatter the Jewish spirit. And it has to be this way. Because those advocating elimination are not stupid. They know quite well that Israel is strong and getting stronger, and it is doing so very quickly. They cannot eliminate it in the flesh, but they can, or at least they can try, to eliminate it in spirit.
But the ironic thing is that, whatever their fantasies might be, they cannot win. I do not say this out of hubris or chauvinism. It is a matter of historical record. The Jewish spirit, if it can be called that, has withstood assaults far more horrendous than anything Beinart, Rhodes or the Times could come up with. If we have survived what we have already survived, we can certainly survive them.
The ominous question, however, is how much damage they can do in the meantime. If the historical record teaches us anything, unfortunately, it is that the damage could be quite substantial. We should not look away from what is coming, and we should ready ourselves to face it.