Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Wednesday, September 16, 2020

When Israel tried to give permanent homes to Palestinians in "refugee" camps

From the Christian Science Monitor, May 26, 1992:

Numerous efforts have been made to resettle [Palestinian] refugees, but all have failed. In 1950, long before the territories came under Israeli control, UNRWA suggested moving 150,000 of them to Libya, but Egypt objected. In 1951, UNRWA vetoed a plan to move 50,000 Palestinian refugees from the Gaza Strip to Northern Sinai when Egypt refused permission to use the Nile waters to irrigate proposed agricultural settlements. In 1952, Syria rejected UNRWA's initiative to resettle 85,000 refugees in camps in that country. In 1959, UNRWA reported that of the $250 million fund for rehabilitation created in 1950 to provide homes and jobs for the refugees outside of the camps, only $7 million had been spent.

In the early 1970s, Israel initiated what it called the "build your own home" program. A half a dunam of land outside the camps (equal to about an eighth of an acre) was given to Palestinians who then financed the purchase of building materials and, usually with friends, erected a home. Israel provided the infrastructure: sewers, schools, etc. More than 11,000 camp dwellers were resettled into 10 different neighborhoods before the PLO, using intimidation tactics, ended the program.

Israeli authorities say that if people were able to stand up to the PLO and if it had the funds to invest in the infrastructure, within eight years every camp resident could own a single-dwelling home in a clean and uncongested neighborhood.

I have written about this Israeli initiative beforehand but didn't know the actual numbers of Palestinians who took advantage of moving out of UNRWA camps before the PLO started threatening them.

The UN General Assembly also passed resolutions condemning Israel for giving Palestinians free land and infrastructure as an opportunity to improve their lives.

If it wasn't for PLO threats, by 2000 there could have been no more UNRWA camps in the territories and every resident could have owned their own home and land - for free.

This one episode shows that Israel cares about the well-being of Palestinians more than the PLO ever did. On the contrary, the PLO is invested in keeping its own people in misery .

The "pro-Palestinian" groups who are protesting Israeli normalization with other Arab countries follow that tradition of preferring that Palestinian "refugees" stay without homes they can call their own - so they can blame their situation on 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.

09/16 Links Pt1: Michael Oren: An achievement that will be taught in the diplomacy books; The UAE-Israel accord is a win for every Muslim; Italian MP nominates Netanyahu for Nobel Prize

From Ian:

Michael Oren: An achievement that will be taught in the diplomacy books

The peace agreements between Israel, the UAE and Bahrain are an economic, diplomatic and strategic breakthrough.

On the economic front, it is a connection between the most innovative country in the world, Israel, and two of the wealthiest countries in the world; an encounter that may be transformative not only for the Middle East, but for the whole world. Even before the agreement was signed, Israeli and Arab businessmen hurried to sign deals of cooperation and mutual investments. On the diplomatic front, this is an agreement that refutes all the theses concerning the peace process that have existed for 30, 50, even 70 years. Even in the early 1950s the Americans and British suggested a format that was based on the principle of land for peace, which included the demand from Israel to give Egypt almost all of the Negev. The belief that Israel must buy peace with the Arabs continued fervently after the 1967 Six-Day War as part of the peace accords with Egypt and Jordan. Israel had to give up many territories, and here – as opposed to that, the current deals were achieved without giving up one millimeter of land.

Another belief was that the Israeli-Arab conflict was central and fundamental in the Middle East, and that its origin is in the conflict with the Palestinians. By that same belief, the core of the conflict surrounds the settlements in Judea and Samaria and east Jerusalem. Yet here, the present deal was achieved with no advance whatsoever with the Palestinians, and without removing Israeli settlements in Judea and Samaria, without even a settlement freeze. Finally, for many years there was a belief that the Palestinians, because of their weakness, need incentives to enter negotiations, even after they left the table. So they received billions, an embassy in Washington and recognition from most countries of the world. This time, as opposed to the past, the Palestinians left, they ran away from the talks, and they were punished. Therefore, beyond the economic and diplomatic achievements, the peace agreements have a significant strategic importance.

The Arab governments over the past years dealt with insufferable dangers from Iran and Erdogan's Turkey, who support Hamas and Islamists. At the same time, as the US began a process of removing itself from the region and supporting those Arab countries, the Bahrainis and Saudis had no choice but to turn to Israel, the only superpower in the Middle East that doesn't threaten them, in fact quite the opposite, is willing to help them defend themselves.

These peace deals will allow us and the moderate Arab states to forge an open front against the Iranian-Syrian axis, and against Turkish aggression.

Abraham Accords: Full text

Caroline Glick: A tale of 2 White House signing ceremonies

Attending the White House signing ceremony on Tuesday of the Abraham Accords – which normalize relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain – was both moving and jarring. Standing at the South Lawn, just meters from the Rose Garden where the Oslo Accord were signed 27 years ago on September 13, 1993, the comparison between the two agreements was inescapable.

That ceremony was an act of political theater unsurpassed in the history of Israel. Yasser Arafat, chairman of the PLO, and architect of modern terrorism, grinned ear to ear as he received the royal treatment on the White House Lawn.

Seeking peace, Israel's then-Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin promised the PLO land, money and weaponry, which Arafat used to build a terror state on the outskirts of Jerusalem. Arafat in turn promised to end terrorism, accept Israel's right to exist and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. Arafat was lying.

I wanted to believe in the fake peace of 1993. But the grim facts made it impossible. For the past 27 years, first as a member of Israel's negotiating team during my service in the IDF and then as a writer and a lecturer, like thousands of other Israelis and friends of Israel in the US and around the world, I devoted myself to exposing the lies and warning about the danger of empowering those who seek Israel's destruction. I wrote hundreds of articles, briefed hundreds of politicians and community leaders in the US and worldwide. I wrote a book.

And as I sat in the garden at the White House today, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, US President Donald Trump, UAE Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Mahyan and Bahrain Foreign Minister Abdullatif Al Zayani standing in the portico before me, the names of the victims of that previous peace agreement rushed through my head. David Biri, Nachson Waxman, Kochava Biton, Ohad Bachrach, Ori Shachor, the Lapids, the Ungars, the Fogels, the Schijveschuurders, Madhat Yusuf, Shalhevet Pas and on and on and on.

I have been demonized as an "extremist" a "far right-winger," an "enemy of peace," and a "fascist" by members of the so-called "peace camp." Think tanks and professionals with ties to the EU – the co-sponsor of the fake peace process – were afraid to invite me to speak, cite my articles or to review my book.

The UAE-Israel accord is a win for every Muslim

For almost twenty years, Muslims across the world have been on the defensive. Muslim identity has been largely under attack. The terrorist incidents of September 11, 2001 on New York and Washington DC cast – in many a popular imagination – every Muslim as suspect in some way. In almost every continent, a dark cloud hung over us. The security checks at airports are only a manifestation of that deep distrust.

Osama bin Laden and a range of extremist organisations hijacked the Palestinian cause: they created nothing but more loss, terrorism and humiliation for the noble Palestinian people. Now, with the visionary accord between the UAE and Israel, three new horizons open: reinstating Muslim dignity, reviving a two-state solution opportunity and creating regional economic prosperity.

I am a British Muslim. In my teens, I helped raise money in London for Hamas. My peers and I believed suicide bombers were martyrs heading for paradise. We were wrong.

The Greek philosopher Heraclitus 2,500 years ago taught that there is only one constant in life: change. Life flows ever onwards. After 9/11, I recognised the blunder of my beliefs. I changed. In my twenties, I lived in Damascus next to a Palestinian refugee camp in Syria. In my thirties, I lived in New York and Washington where I advised the US government. I saw the suspicion of Muslims in the eyes of American officials. It always boiled down to something unspoken: show us peace in Islam; stop talking about it.

And that is exactly what the Abraham Accord is doing: showing peace between peoples, not only preaching it. The accord represents an important opportunity to further reject “Islamophobic” accusations of terrorism and anti-Semitism. We can say: “We believe in one God. Peace is possible. A new way of co-existence is achievable. We are not pawns for the mullahs of Iran or the Muslim Brotherhood. Look at the UAE.”

More than 70 countries have applauded the agreement with Israel and today, the UAE enjoys unprecedented support on both sides of the US political divide. The Pope’s visit to the Emirates in 2019 won the hearts of 2 billion Christians to the prospect of a pluralist, peaceful Middle East.

The Palestine Scholars Association in the Gaza Strip issued a statement that says that normalization with Israel is a "religious and humanitarian crime, national betrayal, a stab in Arabism and complete bias towards the enemy."

This came during a meeting today at its headquarters in Gaza, with the title: “Normalization in concept, destiny and legal rule,” with the participation of scholars, legal judges, university professors, and the International Union of Muslim Scholars, Palestine Branch.

The head of the Palestine Scholars Association, Marwan Abu Ras, added in the statement, "This is beyond the issue of recognition and relationships, but rather it is complete loyalty to the enemies of God and blatant hostility to Muslims, a conspiracy against sacred things and a violation of sanctities, and the promotion of cultures and the glorification of Jewish beliefs and Talmudic hysteria."

He continued: "Thus, the ruling is greater than being merely forbidden and a great sin. Rather, it is affection for the enemies of God, and denial and hostility to the believers."

"In summary, God Almighty has judged those who support the unbelievers over the believers that he has severed his relationship with God."

This doesn't sound political at all.

(archive photo above)

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 Center for Public Affairs and News1 by Yoni Ben Menachem:

In all countries of the world it is known that the heads of advisors of world leaders have great political power by virtue of their proximity to leaders and their work with them around the clock. This is also what is happening in the PA, so far Intisar Abu Amara, the head of the PA chairman Mahmoud Abbas' office, has managed to remain anonymous and successfully slip under the media radar until Suha Arafat came forward and revealed her exploits in an interview with Egyptian television.

Since the interview that took place on August 28, Intisar Abu Amara has become the talk of the day in the West Bank, and more details are slowly being revealed about her activities at the top of the PA alongside Mahmoud Abbas and his family, an activity that does not add respect to PA residents.

Senior Fatah officials say that Intisar Abu Amara is the PA's "deep state" symbol. She operates in great secrecy and promotes the agenda of Mahmoud Abbas and his two sons.

Fatah officials confirm the remarks of Suha Arafat, who in an interview with Egyptian television said that "Intisar Abu Amara controls Mahmoud Abbas and she is the one who actually controls Palestine. Her hand is in everything. She appoints and dismisses ambassadors, for example the ambassador Afif Safia. Even the Palestinian security forces fear her."

Fatah officials say that the secret of Intisar Abu Amara's power is the full support that Mahmoud Abbas gives her especially on sensitive issues. She is his confidante and in addition she has full control over appointments in the PA and the public coffers, all in the name of Abbas.

According to them, Amara is involved in every issue big and small, including important political issues and decisions. For example, Mahmoud Abbas' decision to boycott the Trump administration following the declaration of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel was hers.

A senior Fatah official sadly told me: "Behind every weak leader of ours is a strong woman. In the case of Mahmoud Abbas, the woman is Intisar Abu Amara."

Yasser Jadallah, who worked in the office of PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas as director of the defense department, quarreled with Mahmoud Abbas and fled to Brussels, he knows Intisar Abu Amara well.

On May 20, 2020, Jadallah posted a video on his Facebook page in which he made serious accusations about Amala and Mahmoud Salameh, the chief financial officer of the chairman's office.

In the video, Yasser Jadallah claimed that the two, Intisar Abu Ramallah and Mahmoud Salameh, helped Mahmoud Abbas to embezzle aid funds from Palestinians coming from the European Union and that they transferred the funds to secret accounts under false names that eventually reached the PA chairman's children and grandchildren.

Senior Fatah officials say that Amina, Mahmoud Abbas' wife, is very worried about the influence of Intisar Abu Amala on her husband and that she forbids her from entering their home.

Intisar Abu Amara is a Fatah activist from the Gaza Strip, born in 1958, married with two daughters.

She progressed rapidly from the position of secretary to the position of head of the PA chairman's bureau.

In 2015 she was appointed Deputy Chief of Staff of the PA Chairman, in 2018 she was already officially appointed Head of the Bureau.

On January 1, 2018, she received the rank of chief, a year later she received the status of Minister of the PA.

Political activist Fadi Salamin posted a video of Dr. Majed Abu Sharar on his Facebook page on August 29, calling on Intisar Abu Amara to resign, warning her that no one would protect her when the time came and that “knives would get stuck in her back when she fell ”. According to him, PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas enacted a law on March 19 this year that allows broad powers for Intisar Abu Amara.

The law also stipulates that the PA chairman's office will have an independent budget set by Intisar Abu Amara separate from the PA budget.

Sharar further claimed that the funds raised by the Waqfat Iz Foundation, which the PA set up with the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic to help the residents of the territories, reached the office of Intisar Abu Amara and were swallowed up in a "black hole" and that no one knows what happened to them, to the tune of tens of millions of shekels.

Much of this report seems to be based on this article in Roayah News.

Since Suha Arafat's revelation, some independent Palestinian media have been following up. One site claims that Amara has been leading a smear campaign to replace the Palestinian ambassador to Cyprus with her (unqualified) daughter.

Meanwhile, government media has been energetically defending Amara.

This is a big story for over two weeks that has been ignored in Western 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.

People just don't get it:

nine sentences. We recognize...encourage...believe...seek...seek...pursue...warmly welcome...are encouraged. warm words, little in the way of commitments. pic.twitter.com/P9joz9pkD2
— Laura Rozen (@lrozen) September 15, 2020

The so-called Abraham Accords is not a contract. It is not even a deal.

It is closer to a love affair.

What has Israel wanted more than anything else since 1948?

To be accepted as a permanent part of the Middle East by the Arab world. More than that, it has wanted Arabs (and the world) to accept that Jews have equal rights to live in the Middle East as sovereigns.

What have the UAE and Bahrain and other Gulf states wanted more than anything else?

To be accepted by the world, especially the Western world, as equals. All that investment in skyscrapers and universities and tolerance initiatives are meant to show the West that Arabs and Muslims are not backwards people but are modern and forward-thinking.

Ed Husain writes it perfectly:

In my thirties, I lived in New York and Washington where I advised the US government. I saw the suspicion of Muslims in the eyes of American officials. It always boiled down to something unspoken: show us peace in Islam; stop talking about it.

And that is exactly what the Abraham Accord is doing: showing peace between peoples, not only preaching it. The accord represents an important opportunity to further reject “Islamophobic” accusations of terrorism and anti-Semitism. We can say: “We believe in one God. Peace is possible. A new way of co-existence is achievable. We are not pawns for the mullahs of Iran or the Muslim Brotherhood. Look at the UAE.”

The UAE and Bahrain can give Israel what it so desperately wants - acceptance of Jews and the Jewish state as equals. And Israel can give the Gulf states what they so desperately want - acceptance from a nation that is the envy of the West in innovation, science, medicine and high tech.

Most couples aren't so perfectly matched.

The possibilities are endless. Imagine Ramadan miniseries dramas being filmed in Israel and hundreds of millions of Muslims seeing what the nation is really like. Imagine other Arab states seeing a successful UAE and wanting to emulate it. Already I am seeing the op-eds of Arab newspapers that are showing interest in Jewish history in the region, and tentative talk from such traditionally antisemitic countries as Iraq and Lebanon as to the possibility of recognizing Israel.

The only people who are against this agreement are the people who are against Jews being treated as equals.

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.

Donate to EoZ! (Rosh Hashanah 5781)

The Jewish year is almost over, and you are getting lots of appeals for donations for some very good causes.

And our enemies are also raising money to incite hate against the Jewish state.

They have major donors. They have large budgets.

We only have the truth.

But I'm old fashioned enough to believe that the truth wins in the end.

EoZ continues to do well, with this website attracting thousands of hits a day and some tweets going viral. Many articles of mine were reprinted in other media, and even translated into other languages.

As always, my rule is that every article should be accurate and tell you information you didn't know before, no matter how well read you are on Israel news.

The site is also influential, as many popular writers and pundits follow EoZ.

In addition, I continue to make posters and cartoons that get spread far and wide. I also started a series of video interviews with interesting and notable experts that I hope to resume after the holidays.

My regular columnists (Judean Rose, Vic Rosenthal, Daled Amos, PreOccupied Territory) add new dimensions to the blog, and Ian continues to do an amazing job collecting the links to every single important article published elsewhere. EoZ is really a one stop shop for all Israel news.

All of this takes a great deal of time and money.

Please donate to EoZ so we can continue to provide the very best in news and analysis.

To donate with PayPal you can click here or you can subscribe and donate monthly with this form.

If you prefer, you can also become a patron with Patreon here.

You can also send me an Amazon gift card to my email elder@elderofziyon.com .

I appreciate you being a part of this site, and I wish you and your family a wonderful New Year, one filled with health and happiness.

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.

09/15 Links Pt2: How Israel Keeps Saving the World; Say their names: The forgotten American victims of Palestinian terror; While Israel Burns, the Media Fiddles

From Ian:

How Israel Keeps Saving the World

The implication, it seemed, was that Israel had opened a new chapter in its efforts to prevent Iran’s acquisition of a nuclear weapon. Some observers speculated about Iran’s possible retaliation—including against the U.S.—while others expressed alarm. Indeed, ever since an Iranian opposition group laid bare Iran’s secret nuclear program in 2002, much of the world has seemed as anxious about what Israel might do to prevent an Iranian nuclear breakout as about Iran’s quest for the bomb. Israel’s latest apparent tactic was “audacious and risky,” wrote a Washington Post columnist. It amounted to “a dangerous gamble,” warned the head of the Rand Corporation’s Middle East program.

Perhaps so: Audacious and risky tactics, dangerous gambles, have been hallmarks of Israel’s self-defense, which has enabled it to survive in the face of endless threats that few other nations have had to face. It has emerged as the strongest and most stable country in the Middle East, a reality that is recognized universally by unbiased observers. What is less often acknowledged is that actions taken in Israel’s self-defense have also redounded to the benefit of America and, indeed, of the world.

Israel has refused to sign the nuclear nonproliferation treaty and is widely believed to possess a nuclear arsenal, an inference it has steadfastly refused to confirm or deny and for which it has often been criticized. Nonetheless, it has been responsible for some of the world’s most important measures of what is called “counterproliferation.”

THE FIRST was the destruction of Iraq’s nuclear reactor at Osirak in 1981. As early as 1974, Saddam Hussein, who was not yet president of Iraq but was already the power behind the throne, was named, or named himself, to head a three-member Strategic Development Committee charged with generating weapons of mass destruction.

That year, France agreed to sell Iraq a light-water “research reactor” together with uranium fuel, after turning down a request for a graphite reactor deemed more conducive to weapons manufacture. Italy provided equipment for recovering plutonium from the reactor’s fuel. According to Iraqi scientist Khidhir Hamza, who worked on the program, and David Albright, a former International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspector of Iraq’s nuclear programs, “Iraqi teams calculated that the Osirak reactor could conservatively produce about 5 kilograms to 7 kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium per year,” and possibly more, enough for a bomb.

This known potentiality led to its being attacked—by Iran. That was in 1980 at the outset of the war between Iraq and Iran. The Iranians damaged some of the facilities at Osirak but not the reactor. In protest, an Iraqi government newspaper addressed the Iranians rhetorically:
We ask Khomeini and his gang, “Who would derive benefit from damaging the Iraqi nuclear reactor, Iran or the Zionist entity?” It does not stand to reason that this reactor would constitute a danger to Iran, because Iraq sees the Iranian people with a brotherly regard. It is the Zionist entity which is afraid of the Iraqi nuclear reactor … because it constitutes a great danger to Israel.

And so it seemed, too, to Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin. The following year, as Iraq was preparing to feed fuel into the reactor, making it “hot,” meaning that its destruction would have released radioactivity into the air that might have killed thousands, Begin ordered it destroyed.

Marking ‘dawn of new Middle East,’ Israel signs historic deals with UAE, Bahrain

Cementing a regional geopolitical shift few would have thought possible little more than a month ago, Israel on Tuesday signed landmark normalization deals with two Arab nations at a White House ceremony, with leaders hailing a “new dawn” for peace in the Middle East.

Hundreds of people amassed on the sun-washed South Lawn to witness the signing of agreements between Israel and the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. The bilateral agreements, dubbed the Abraham Accords, formalize the normalization of the Jewish state’s already-thawing relations with the two Arab nations, in line with their common opposition to Iran and its aggression in the region.

“We’re here this afternoon to change the course of history,” US President Donald Trump said from a balcony overlooking the South Lawn. “After decades of division and conflict, we mark the dawn of a new Middle East.”

The agreements do not address the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict. While the UAE, Bahrain and other Arab countries support the Palestinians, the Trump administration has persuaded the two countries not to let that conflict keep them from having normal relations with Israel.

Addressing the crowd before signing the agreements, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu lauded the achievement as “a pivot of history.” He said the new peace momentum could end the Arab-Israeli conflict “once and for all.”

UAE Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan thanked Netanyahu for “halting the annexation of the Palestinian territories which reinforces our shared will to achieve a better future for generations to come.”

Abu Dhabi has cited stopping annexation as the impetus for agreeing to normalize ties with Israel, though Jerusalem insists that it has only temporarily suspended its plans to extend sovereignty to swaths of the West Bank sought by Palestinians for a state of their own.

The agreements were only the third and fourth peace accords in the Jewish state’s 72-year history.

Full text: Netanyahu’s address at signing of Israel-UAE-Bahrain peace accords

Full text: UAE foreign minister’s speech at the Abraham Accords signing ceremony

FLASHBACK: Experts say moving U.S. embassy to Jerusalem kills Middle East peace

Palestinian leaders want to ban some Muslims from praying at Al Aqsa

When the UAE announced it would normalize relations with Israel:

The Mufti of Jerusalem and the Palestinian Territories, Sheikh Muhammad Hussein, announced today that it is forbidden for Emiratis to pray in the Al-Aqsa Mosque, according to a fatwa he issued in 2012 against anyone who prints with and reconciles with Israel.

He told the German news agency (DPA) that he had issued a fatwa in 2012 “permitting visits to Jerusalem and Al-Aqsa within certain criteria, not including normalization.”

He added, “Since this (Emirati-Israeli) agreement bears the signs of normalization so visiting Jerusalem is not allowed and forbidden.

A major Islamic scholar st Al Azhar rejected the ban:

A grand scholar at Al Azhar Al Sharif, Egypt's renowned Islamic institution, has rejected a fatwa by Al Quds Mufti where he forbids the Emirati people from praying in Al-Aqsa Mosque following the UAE-Israeli peace accord.

"As a specialist in Islamic Fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) I can't find any religious justification for declaring as haram (forbidden) the worship of any Muslim people in any mosque all over the world based on a political stance taken by these people's leadership. I reject any religious fatwa that is not based on Shari'a - compliant rules," Dr Abbas Shuman, a member of Al Azhar's Committee of Senior Scholars.

"To the best of my knowledge, our Islamic history has not witnessed any fatwa by the righteous forefathers and their descendants banning any Muslim from praying in any mosque around the world," he concluded.

The Mufti is appointed by the PA president Mahmoud Abbas, meaning that the PLO/PA are the ones banning Muslims from worshiping at Al Aqsa.

In fact, this isn't the first time, according to reports from 2017:

Al-Aqsa guards expelled yesterday a Bahraini delegation from the mosque’s holy site, local sources reported.

The sources added that the move came as the Bahraini delegation was reported to have visited the Jewish state to “normalise and strengthen ties with Israel” and to deliver “message of peace and brotherhood to Israel.”

Israel sometimes bans some Muslims from the site if they are a danger to public safety and security. The Palestinian leadership bans some Muslims from the site if they don't like the politics of the country they are from.

This is one reason why the Arab world is sick and tired of the Palestinians - they claim ownership over a holy site and politicize it. They claim that they want Muslim and Arab unity but they are willing to ostracize any Muslims they disagree with.

The Palestinians are burning their bridges very quickly.

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.

Who opposes Israeli normalization with the Arab world?

Iran, Turkey, Hezbollah, Hamas, the PLO, Mondoweiss, CodePink and the entire BDS crowd, IfNotNow, Jewish Voice for Peace, Students for Justice in Palestine, CAIR, and many other groups.

Who supports it?

Besides most Western nations we have Egypt, India, Oman, Saudi Arabia, and some dovish groups like Peace Now and J-Street.

How can you tell whether a group will oppose any treaties between Israel and Arab nations?

It is very simple. The groups or nations that want to see Israel destroyed are the ones who oppose these agreements.

It is a very consistent pattern.

And it works in reverse: if you see someone opposing the accords, the only reason is because normalization does not advance the destruction of Israel.

Everything else they say is spin, trying to justify their position after the fact in ways that don't sound quite as genocidal as "Death to Israel." But the goal of these op-eds are, in the end, indistinguishable from the goal of Iran.

This comes in very handy, for example when trying to distinguish between a virulent critic of Israel and an antisemite who wants to see the Jewish state destroyed. Just ask them if they support or oppose peace between Israel and Arab states.

Clarity is something we rarely see in the Middle East, and these agreements bring us more clarity than anything else has in years.

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.

09/15 Links Pt1: The tender photo that just might signal start of true change in Arab-Israel ties; Mark Regev: "We will not be prisoners of the past"

From Ian:

The tender photo that just might signal start of true change in Arab-Israel ties

On Monday afternoon, a day before the Israel-UAE-Bahrain peacemaking ceremony at the White House, US President Donald Trump’s adviser Avi Berkowitz posted a quite beautiful photograph on Twitter. It shows Jared Kushner, the president’s senior adviser and son-in-law, handing a Torah scroll to His Majesty King Hamad bin Isa bin Salman al-Khalifa of Bahrain, to be used in a synagogue in the kingdom.

The moment is tender and moving — with the gazes of both men focused on the velvet-covered scroll rather than each other, respectful of it. It is a picture of transition and of trust — an American Jewish official entrusting an Arab monarch with the Jewish people’s most sacred text, for his safekeeping, to convey to a Jewish community free to practice its religion in his country.

Kushner has called the process of peacemaking we are now witnessing between Israel and, so far, the UAE and Bahrain, “the beginning of the end of the Israel-Arab conflict.” If that proves to be the case, this photograph may come to symbolize it.

There is no end of realpolitik in the new alignments. Israel has gradually impressed upon the neighborhood that it has millennia of roots here, that it is not going anywhere, that it is no pushover, and that it is well capable of defending itself. Its emerging new partners share a common concern about the Iranian regime’s rapaciousness and aggression, and recognize that Israel can be a critical ally against Tehran. The deals also open opportunities for warmer ties with Israel’s dependable US ally, and likely arms sales as a direct consequence. Also, decades of the Palestinians’ intransigence have reduced sympathy for their cause in at least parts of the Arab world — or at least reduced the readiness of parts of the Arab world to subjugate their own perceived interests to those of the Palestinians.

Still, Israel’s new partners did not abandon the Palestinians. A central element of the UAE deal was Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s agreement to indefinitely suspend his plan to unilaterally annex up to 30 percent of the West Bank — the Biblical Judea and Samaria — including all the settlements. Trump had indicated early in his presidency that he was no particular supporter of settlement expansion; Kushner made explicit last week the concern that Israel, via the settlement enterprise, “would have eaten up all the land in the West Bank” if the administration hadn’t put out its January peace vision. And Netanyahu, laudably and politically problematically, chose the historic opportunity of a wider circle of peace for Israel over a unilateral push for wider Israeli sovereignty.

The moment Jared Kushner gave His Majesty King Hamad bin Isa bin Salman al-Khalifa of the Kingdom of Bahrain a Torah scroll for a Synagogue in Bahrain pic.twitter.com/RvPif5x51I
— Avi Berkowitz (@aviberkow45) September 14, 2020

Exclusive: We will not be prisoners of the past, says Israeli PM's aide

Jews in the Middle East were better off than their counterparts in the Christian Europe for many years, and by leaving behind the hostilities of the past, the UAE and Israel are showing the world how historical animosities can be overcome and partnerships built for future, Mark Regev, Senior Advisor to Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, told Khaleej Times in an exclusive interview.

"For many years, Jews in the Muslim Middle East were treated much better than the Jews in the Christian Europe. There were traditions of religious tolerance in Islam at a time when it was not present in Christian Europe. We are all the children of Abraham. The conflict between us in the last decades were an aberration," said Regev over telephone on Monday from Washington D.C, where the UAE and Israel will sign the historical Abraham Accord on Tuesday, September 15.

The US-brokered peace deal, which Trump announced on August 13, will see both the countries establishing diplomatic relations, and Israel agreeing to halt its controversial annexation in the occupied West Bank.

The UAE is the first GCC nation to normalise relations with Israel, and the third Arab country to do so after Egypt and Jordan.

Speaking about the scars of the decades-long hostilities between Arabs and Jews in the region, Regev said people cannot forever remain imprisoned in the past.

"No one can forget the past. In my country, of course, there are many memories from the Arab-Israeli wars. But there is a difference between knowing the past and being aware of the past and being imprisoned by it."

The official said both Israel and the UAE are countries that "embrace the future".

Colin Rubenstein: Deals between Israel, UAE and Bahrain shatter old barriers

The Palestinian leadership’s very strong response to the UAE and Bahraini moves – and the anger this has generated in Persian Gulf states – only underscores how the traditional Palestinian approach of all or nothing has become a major obstacle to peace for the region. It is the reason the Palestinians turned down repeated Israeli offers of statehood that met almost all Palestinian aspirations, in 2000, 2001 and 2008.

Meanwhile, the UAE and Bahraini decisions to normalise relations with Israel almost certainly occurred with the blessing of Riyadh. Saudi Arabia may not quickly follow suit, but it is nonetheless very much a part of the new Middle East alignment.

The UAE and Bahrain normalisation deals with Israel are therefore the tip of a much wider regional iceberg of changing strategic thinking that signals a far-reaching re-alignment.

At a time when the US is committed to drawing down its troops from the region, Western-aligned Arab states are recognising the value of partnering more openly with Israel in their common goal of thwarting Iran’s expansionism and deterring aggression.

There is every reason to hope these deals will empower the Western-leaning Sunni Arab grouping through more open ties with Israel, boosting stability, expanding co-operation on defence and intelligence affairs, trade, investment and joint technological development, and the potential for increased cross-cultural dialogue. Meanwhile, it should weaken the rejectionist forces determined to destabilise the region, especially Tehran and its Hezbollah proxy in Lebanon; the Assad regime; Turkey’s Islamist ruler Recep Tayyip Erdogan; Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.

These normalisation agreements are a hugely positive watershed development. Australia, where Foreign Minister Marise Payne and opposition foreign affairs spokeswoman Penny Wong have welcomed both deals, should now lend its diplomatic weight to helping encourage other Western-leaning Arab and Muslim allies to follow suit.

Arsen Ostrovsky: Palestinians Never Miss an Opportunity to Miss an Opportunity

The United States was not prepared to sit idly by while the Palestinian leadership held ransom Israel's normalization with Arab and Gulf countries, thereby also holding back real progress and hope of a better future for everyone else in the region.

As Jared Kushner noted, President Trump has sought to "align the different countries in the region around their common interests, as opposed to focusing on historic grievances."

One of those common interests was Iran. Contrary to the conventional wisdom of the United Nations and the European Union, the United States also understood that it was not Israel, but rather the Islamic Republic of Iran, that was the main destabilizing force in the Middle East—and the one that could also unite Israel with the Arab and Gulf countries which Iran also threatens.

Therefore, the U.S. turned the entire conventional wisdom upside-down and proved all the naysayers and so-called "experts," who said peace in the Middle East must first go through Ramallah, wrong.

What we are witnessing today is nothing short of a full paradigm shift in the geopolitics of the region—not only normalization between Israel and Arab countries, but recognition of the importance of laying the foundations for a warm, durable peace, from the bottom up and not from the top down.

The only question remains: Will the Palestinian leadership follow the courageous lead of the UAE and Bahrain, look to the future and make peace with Israel—or continue to miss the opportunities before them, thereby consigning their own people to further misery?

Commentary Magazine Podcast: A New World Order

The realignment of geopolitics in the Middle East has many fathers, and Donald Trump was only one of them. What the thaw in Sunni states’ relations with Israel means for America moving forward. Also, for all the talk of the president’s “white grievance” politics, he’s performing better among minority voters in polls than he did in 2016 while white voters are fleeing his coalition.

With the UAE, and now Bahrain, recognizing Israel -- what would happen to this momentum if Biden were to become president?

In a recent article, Jonathan Schanzer -- of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies -- asks Would Joe Biden be willing or able to take advantage of the progress made with the Israel-UAE deal? At issue is whether Biden would be in a position to take advantage of the willingness of some Arab states to establish peaceful ties with Israel.

On the one hand, there is "the unorthodox approach of focusing on Arab states on the periphery of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict (rather than on the Palestinians)" -- going against the established precedent of relying on Arab states to bring the Palestinian Arabs to the negotiating table, the Trump administration is bypassing the Palestinians and bringing the Arab states themselves to normalize relations with Israel.

This is a new approach that Biden would be free to continue.

(Unless, of course, the Arab states are wary of the man who, as vice-president, vigorously supported Obama's strengthening of Iran, creating the instability and fear in the region that gave the impetus to Trump's policy in the first place.)

The stakes for the Palestinian Arab leadership are high:

At minimum, they will need to give up the dream of the demise of Israel as a state in which the Jewish people enjoy sovereignty and self-determination. More practically, this means the Palestinians would have to compromise on core issues like borders, Jerusalem, and Palestinians claiming refugee status.

And if Trump in fact should win in November, some version of his Deal of the Century is very possible.

On the other hand, if Biden were to win, his options could be limited.

First, Schanzer points out, there are the progressives supporting the Iran deal, who consider Saudi Arabia, the UAE and their allies deserving of US sanctions. Reestablishing the Iran deal would undercut the ability of a Biden administration to act as a broker with those states.

Then there are the progressive Democrats supporting BDS against Israel, and would likewise make a policy de-emphasizing Palestinian Arab demands more difficult.

Interestingly, prior to Trump becoming president, the Obama administration also worked on engaging foreign countries and improving relations.

But they did not think in terms of alliances -- it focused on Iran, not only to slow down its nuclear program, but also for the influence Iran could have in the region.

As described in Foreign Policy back in 2015:

If an Iran deal helps forestall development of a nuclear weapon, that has to be seen as a benefit. If it has produced a partner in helping to contain Sunni extremism, that will also be seen as a net good. If it forms the foundation for a new U.S. regional policy that is based on enlightened management of the balance of power between key regional actors to maintain stability and contain threats, that is to the net good...If [Obama] can make that happen through careful, strategic management of U.S. relations in the region and follow through on all the steps required to make this work, it’ll be quite an accomplishment.

Aside from betting on a global supporter of terrorism to get the job done, Obama was relying on the influence of a single, albeit influential state not shy about extending that influence, to hold things together. This was an extension of Obama's policy of engaging other countries one-on-one -- to "extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist,” even to governments “who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent.”

Like Myanmar, which Obama rewarded with restored diplomatic relations in 2012, following its political and economic changes and reforms, and cease-fire with rebels.

And Cuba, where Obama restored full diplomatic relations in 2014 and opened a US embassy for the first time in over 50 years, vowing to “cut loose the shackles of the past.”

The accomplishments are not insignificant, regardless of how one views Cuba and Iran. But it is a different approach from the policy of the Trump administration, which is focusing on alliances and regional peace as opposed to engaging individual countries and re-establishing relations.

And what about Biden?

As vice president, he has not been in a position to directly conduct foreign policy, though he has claimed to have influenced foreign leaders.

In 2018, Biden bragged about getting the Ukrainian government to fire a corrupt state prosecutor, by threatening to hold back loan guarantees:

I said, nah, I’m not going to—or, we’re not going to give you the billion dollars. They said, you have no authority. You’re not the president. The president said—I said, call him. (Laughter.) I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money. Well, son of a b*****. (Laughter.) He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time.

Holding back aid in order to strongarm foreign governments appears to be a favorite tactic of Joe Biden.

In a well-known incident in1982, when Prime Minister Menachem Begin appeared before the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Biden went beyond voicing opposition to the Israeli settlements and suggested that he would propose cutting financial aid to Israel. Unlike the Ukrainian leader, Begin was not impressed:

Don't threaten us with slashing aid. Do you think that because the US lends us money it is entitled to impose on us what we must do? We are grateful for the assistance we have received, but we are not to be threatened. I am a proud Jew. Three thousand years of culture are behind me, and you will not frighten me with threats. Take note: we do not want a single soldier of yours to die for us.

In this case, instead of bragging, Biden has "hotly denied" the incident, but it is confirmed by both the New York Times and Time Magazine.

In another incident, Biden killed 2 birds with one stone -- again bullying Ukraine, this time in order to undermine Israel by ensuring a unanimous vote for UN Resolution 2334, with the US being the lone abstention.

So much for supporting allies.

Schanzer suggests that a Biden administration could both continue the Trump policy of encouraging Arab states to recognize Israel while also leveraging those states to encourage the Palestinian Arab leadership to come back to the negotiating table.

But would Abbas see that as the last opportunity for peace on favorable terms, or as an opening to again scuttle talks and maintain the status quo?

In the meantime, let's see how many more Arab states will recognize Israel before the November elections.

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.

Will the "State of Palestine" take back the awards it gave the leaders of the UAE and Bahrain?

The purported "State of Palestine" has an elaborate set of awards and honors that it gives to people it wants to impress. Here is a subset of these awards:

These awards are given out liberally to any head of state that Mahmoud Abbas happens to meet.

Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi, received the "Legion of Merit of Jerusalem" from Abbas in October 2008.

In 2010, Abbas awarded the Order of the Star of Palestine to the President of the United Arab Emirates, Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan.

In 2017, Abbas awarded Bahraini Prime Minister Prince Khalifa bin Salman Al Khalifa the "Grand Collar of the Order of the State of Palestine".

Will Abbas now withdraw these honors because these countries "stabbed Palestine in the back"?

It seems like Abbas has no choice in the matter, if he wants to be consistent in his position that those countries are to be treated like pariahs.

(h/t Irene)

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.