Posts
20 hours ago
Monday, 3 August 2009
Israel Matzav: Obama and Mitchell to appeal directly to Israelis
Obama and Mitchell to appeal directly to Israelis
According to a report in Monday's New York Times, the Obama administration plans to bypass the Israeli political leadership and appeal directly to Israelis through media appearances on Israeli television and the like (Hat Tip: Memeorandum). No, of course the Times didn't put it that way, but that's what the substance of the report means. Israel Matzav: Obama and Mitchell to appeal directly to IsraelisIn coming weeks, senior administration officials said, the White House will begin a public-relations campaign in Israel and Arab countries to better explain Mr. Obama’s plans for a comprehensive peace agreement involving Israel, the Palestinians and the Arab world.
Read All at :
Israel Matzav: Every word in Cairo speech was deliberate
Every word in Cairo speech was deliberate
The weekend edition of the Los Angeles Times includes a lengthy report on the preparations for President Obama's speech in Cairo in June. The report talks about the deliberateness with which each word of the speech was prepared and the involvement of the President himself in the preparation. It's worth reading the whole thing (Hat Tip: Memeorandum), but I want to focus on what it says about Israel. Reda All at :
Israel Matzav: Every word in Cairo speech was deliberate
Israel Matzav: Israel allowing hundreds of Fatah terrorists to attend conference
Israel allowing hundreds of Fatah terrorists to attend conference
Apparently fearful of being blamed for the failure of the Fatah conference that's taking place in Bethlehem on Tuesday, the Netanyahu government has agreed to admit hundreds of terrorists to Judea and Samaria to attend the conference. Once admitted, some of the terrorists don't plan on leaving. Israel Matzav: Israel allowing hundreds of Fatah terrorists to attend conferenceAmong those who have been granted entry is Khalid Abu Isba, one of the terrorists who carried out the infamous Coastal Road Massacre.
In the Coastal Road Massacre of 1978, 12 terrorists infiltrated Israel from Lebanon, murdered an American photographer and hijacked two buses. A total of 38 Israeli civilians were murdered in the attack, 13 of them children, and another 71 were wounded.Read All at :
Israel Matzav: Times of London: Iran ready to rock and roll, waiting for Khameni signal
Times of London: Iran ready to rock and roll, waiting for Khameni signal
The Times of London reports in Monday's edition (NOT under the byline of Uzi Mahnaimi) that Iran is ready to build a nuclear bomb and that all that is required is an order from Ayatollah Ali Khameni. Israel Matzav: Times of London: Iran ready to rock and roll, waiting for Khameni signalThe sources said that Iran completed a research programme to create weaponised uranium in the summer of 2003 and that it could feasibly make a bomb within a year of an order from its Supreme Leader.
A US National Intelligence Estimate two years ago concluded that Iran had ended its nuclear arms research programme in 2003 because of the threat from the American invasion of Iraq. But intelligence sources have told The Times that Tehran had halted the research because it had achieved its aim — to find a way of detonating a warhead that could be launched on its long-range Shehab-3 missiles.Read All at :
Israel Matzav: Why the Arabs can't accept a Jewish state
Why the Arabs can't accept a Jewish state
Prime Minister Netanyahu has demanded that the Arabs accept Israel as a Jewish state. That's a demand that the Arabs are incapable of accepting - ever. Mordechai Kedar explains why. Israel Matzav: Why the Arabs can't accept a Jewish stateThus, according to Islam, the State of Israel is not legitimate. From a religious point of view, Judaism is void. The Jewish nation is an invention of the Zionist movement. The land called "Israel" is considered Islamic Waqf land, consecrated for Muslims.
Netanyahu's insistence on recognition of the state as a Jewish nation-state contradicts the Islamic faith, and questions the very essence of Islam, whose relevance is based on the invalidity of Judaism (and Christianity as well).READ All at :
Israel Matzav: Americans becoming more skeptical about Iran?
Americans becoming more skeptical about Iran?
Could it be that the Obama administration is finally awakening to the reality that 'engagement' is not going to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon? That's what Amos Harel argues in Haaretz. The Iranian issue dominated this week's visits by U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and National Security Adviser James Jones. At first, the Americans had hoped to open a dialogue with Iran in September and conduct a review of this policy toward the end of the year. However, Iran has so far refused to even agree on beginning a dialogue, which might accelerate the schedule: The reassessment will be conducted earlier than planned, and thus sanctions might also be able to commence sooner. The U.S. is well aware that Iran is progressing, and that by mid-2010, it may pass another critical milestone, that of being able to detonate a nuclear device for the first time
Read All at :
Israel Matzav: Americans becoming more skeptical about Iran?
Israel Matzav: Why Obama can't convince Israelis
Why Obama can't convince Israelis
Jonathan Tobin nails it in explaining why Israelis just aren't going to do what President Obama wants them to do (Hat Tip: American Power). Israel Matzav: Why Obama can't convince IsraelisIn response, the N.Y. Times endorses the Israeli Left’s appeal for Obama to speak directly to the Israeli people by going over the head of their democratically elected government to convince them that he is in a better position to know what is good for Israel.
Read All at :
Israel Matzav: The 'marriage counselor'
The 'marriage counselor'
In Sunday's New York Times, the inimitable Thomas Friedman tries to play 'marriage counselor' between the Obama administration and Israelis. Here's his bottom line (Hat Tip: David F). Bottom line: Israelis need to understand this is not the Bush administration anymore, where they had the run of the White House; they have a real problem with America on settlements. Mr. Obama needs to understand that on Arab-Israel affairs, the less you say and the more you do, the better off you are. Every word in this conflict has its own history. Get the deal done — a settlement moratorium for some normalization — and that breakthrough will do the talking.
Read All at :
Israel Matzav: The 'marriage counselor'
Israel Matzav: Why Israel is nervous
Why Israel is nervous
In the weekend edition of the Wall Street Journal, former Bush administration diplomat Elliott Abrams gives a summary of US - Israel relations over the years and discusses what's different between tensions in relations with previous administrations and those in the Age of Obama. The entire article is a must-read. Here's his bottom line (Hat Tip: Hot Air). Read All at :
Israel Matzav: Why Israel is nervous
Israel Matzav: Carter's buddy Fadlallah losing patience with Obama
Carter's buddy Fadlallah losing patience with Obama
Hezbullah Sheikh Mohamed Hossein Fadlallah, who met with former US President Jimmy Carter in June, criticized the Obama administration in a sermon on Friday for failing to improve relations with the Arab world. Fadlallah also 'accused' Obama of sliding back into Bush administration policies. Read All at :
Israel Matzav: Carter's buddy Fadlallah losing patience with Obama
Israel Matzav: Fatah conference to call for talks with Iran, condone violence
Fatah conference to call for talks with Iran, condone violence
Fatah's conference, which will be held on Tuesday in Bethlehem, will reaffirm the terror group's rejection of Israel as a Jewish state, and will condone violence against Israelis. Fatah should not recognize Israel as a Jewish state and needs to start a strategic dialogue with Iran, according to a proposed draft of an updated political platform to be discussed at its general conference this week.
Read All at :
Israel Matzav: Fatah conference to call for talks with Iran, condone violence
On Being Subtle (Or Not)
On Being Subtle (Or Not)
Jeffrey Goldberg is an intelligent and knowledgable fellow. For that matter, so is Thomas Friedman. So when Goldberg starts his week by approvingly linking to a Tom Friedman column which he describes as "important", you follow the link to see what's so inspiring. Or anyway, I did.
Not inspiring. Not even particularly intelligent. Sorry guys.
Friedman would have us Israelis recognize that "the party's over", and that story of the settlements is up, and Obama's historic position is that he's going to enforce that. This is the Obama who, we were assured throughout the campaign, is intelligent, subtle, and comfortable with complex thought processes. Well if so, how come he and his supporters can't get their head around the reality that we're rather good at complexity, too?
A majority of us Israelis would walk away from the settlements in a heartbeat if there was anywhere to walk too. As recently as 2006 we elected Ehud Olmert on a specific platform to disband most of the settlements even without peace with the Palestinians, recognizing how the Palestinians have managed to turn the settlements into their most potent weapon against us. Moreoever, a majority of the settlers themselves would accept leaving some settlements if that would bring peace. (Starting with Avigdor Lieberman).
But not Modi'in Illit, not Beitar, and not, I repeat, NOT Jerusalem. As President Bill Clinton recognized in his diktat of December 24th 2000. As the Palestinian negotiators themselves have recognized, repeatedly (though they may have been fibbing, since said recognition was part of not reaching overall agreement).
Obama's credibility and support in Israel is plumetting because of that distinction. Not becasue he's being mean to our prime minster about Nokdim or Itamar. The more I hear (well, read) important American Jewish pundits such as these two talkng the way they do, the more I'm convinced one part of the present dynamic is the distance between American Jews and Israelis. We're really not seeing the same reality at the moment.
Though, to be fair, as Mark Landler tells us after having talked to George Mitchell, there may be whole parts of the story we don't see right now. That could change things. Perhaps.
Update: Barry Rubin argues against a settlement freeze. He, also, is hardly one to fit the Friedman-Goldberg template of obstinate Israelis.
Not inspiring. Not even particularly intelligent. Sorry guys.
Friedman would have us Israelis recognize that "the party's over", and that story of the settlements is up, and Obama's historic position is that he's going to enforce that. This is the Obama who, we were assured throughout the campaign, is intelligent, subtle, and comfortable with complex thought processes. Well if so, how come he and his supporters can't get their head around the reality that we're rather good at complexity, too?
A majority of us Israelis would walk away from the settlements in a heartbeat if there was anywhere to walk too. As recently as 2006 we elected Ehud Olmert on a specific platform to disband most of the settlements even without peace with the Palestinians, recognizing how the Palestinians have managed to turn the settlements into their most potent weapon against us. Moreoever, a majority of the settlers themselves would accept leaving some settlements if that would bring peace. (Starting with Avigdor Lieberman).
But not Modi'in Illit, not Beitar, and not, I repeat, NOT Jerusalem. As President Bill Clinton recognized in his diktat of December 24th 2000. As the Palestinian negotiators themselves have recognized, repeatedly (though they may have been fibbing, since said recognition was part of not reaching overall agreement).
Obama's credibility and support in Israel is plumetting because of that distinction. Not becasue he's being mean to our prime minster about Nokdim or Itamar. The more I hear (well, read) important American Jewish pundits such as these two talkng the way they do, the more I'm convinced one part of the present dynamic is the distance between American Jews and Israelis. We're really not seeing the same reality at the moment.
Though, to be fair, as Mark Landler tells us after having talked to George Mitchell, there may be whole parts of the story we don't see right now. That could change things. Perhaps.
Update: Barry Rubin argues against a settlement freeze. He, also, is hardly one to fit the Friedman-Goldberg template of obstinate Israelis.
taken from Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations
Cease Fire of 2008
Cease Fire of 2008
As one of my readers commented not long ago (I think it was Rashkov), the standard anti-Israel narrative about the ramp-up to Israel's invasion of Gaza earlier this year is that the Israelis broke a six month cease-fire with Hamas: the whole justification for the invasion, which was to put an end to rocket fire at Israeli civilians, was bogus.
A second, only slightly more subtle version, tells that the cease fire began in June 2008, and was broken by Israel in October (I think), when Israel suddenly killed six Hamas men; after that the Palestinians resumed fire, a bit, and the cease fire sort of unraveled.
Either way it's Israel's fault, of course.
At the moment I'm plowing through Israel's report on the Gaza Operation (I'm about half way through). It's fascinating, and I'm learning all sorts of useful things. I'm also following some of the footnotes and links. One link lead me to this document, which is full of of statistics about Palestinian rocket and mortar attacks against Israeli civilians.
Indeed, for about three months there was a bilateral cease fire. The six dead Hamas men were preparing an assault on IDF forces, and thereafter there were ever more rockets and mortars - hundreds, all in all. So the first story is simply a lie. Then, on December 19th 2008 Hamas announced, officially and openly, that the cease fire was annullled; from then until Israel attacked they indiscriminately shot 66 rockets and 63 mortar shells at Israel.
Apparently that particular anti-Israel story is counter factual.
A second, only slightly more subtle version, tells that the cease fire began in June 2008, and was broken by Israel in October (I think), when Israel suddenly killed six Hamas men; after that the Palestinians resumed fire, a bit, and the cease fire sort of unraveled.
Either way it's Israel's fault, of course.
At the moment I'm plowing through Israel's report on the Gaza Operation (I'm about half way through). It's fascinating, and I'm learning all sorts of useful things. I'm also following some of the footnotes and links. One link lead me to this document, which is full of of statistics about Palestinian rocket and mortar attacks against Israeli civilians.
Indeed, for about three months there was a bilateral cease fire. The six dead Hamas men were preparing an assault on IDF forces, and thereafter there were ever more rockets and mortars - hundreds, all in all. So the first story is simply a lie. Then, on December 19th 2008 Hamas announced, officially and openly, that the cease fire was annullled; from then until Israel attacked they indiscriminately shot 66 rockets and 63 mortar shells at Israel.
Apparently that particular anti-Israel story is counter factual.
taken from Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations
Shot Across the Bow (or Wing)
Shot Across the Bow (or Wing)
Maybe I'm just too cynical for my own good, but I refuse to take this story at face value. Not that it can't be true, mind you: Israel needs to purchase replacements for its aging Skyhawk trainer-bombers, so it's looking in various directions including at a South Korean plane. That part I certainly hope is true. What isn't credible to me is that anyone takes such a scenario seriously.
Such a transaction must be worth a billion $, or three, and many years of followup purchases. Since 1968 Israel has purchased all its aircraft from the US. Why, earlier this decade when El Al needed to purchase a few civilian jetliners and had landed a fine offer from Airbus, the pressure from the American government was so intense that the deal fell through and the planes were purchased, as they always are, from Boeing. El Al is a private airline; the Israeli Air Force (IAF) is a government agency, all that more susepctible to political pressure.
What's the chance that the appearance of this story in Haaretz at this particular moment reflects a purely commercial deliberation? Pinkt jetzt, as they say in French? No connection whatsoever with the mutual dissatisfaction between the Netanyahu-Obama offices?
I think not.
Such a transaction must be worth a billion $, or three, and many years of followup purchases. Since 1968 Israel has purchased all its aircraft from the US. Why, earlier this decade when El Al needed to purchase a few civilian jetliners and had landed a fine offer from Airbus, the pressure from the American government was so intense that the deal fell through and the planes were purchased, as they always are, from Boeing. El Al is a private airline; the Israeli Air Force (IAF) is a government agency, all that more susepctible to political pressure.
What's the chance that the appearance of this story in Haaretz at this particular moment reflects a purely commercial deliberation? Pinkt jetzt, as they say in French? No connection whatsoever with the mutual dissatisfaction between the Netanyahu-Obama offices?
I think not.
taken fromYaacov Lozowick's Ruminations
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
