Sunday, 21 March 2010

Love of the Land: Hey Barack, Joe, Tony, BBC! Want Middle East peace? Just. Stay. Home.

Hey Barack, Joe, Tony, BBC! Want Middle East peace? Just. Stay. Home.


Stephanie Gutmann
Telegraph.co.uk
19 March '10

Are you sick of seeing reports of clashes between rock-throwing Palestinians and tear gas canister tossing-IDF soldiers in Jerusalem and the West Bank plastered across the front page of your newspaper? What about the monotonous daily headlines detailing talks that are on (Oh rapture!) or postponed (All is lost!) between this Palestinian leader of the day and that flavour-of-the month Israeli poobah?

Are you wondering what relevance this has to your life?

I hope you are wondering, because the cause of peace in the area would be helped a lot if you ignored these articles. It would be particularly helpful if busybody leaders — the Barack Obamas, Joe Bidens, Javier Solanas, and Tony Blairs — of the world did the same. And the most helpful thing of all would be if the platoons and brigades of news media camped out in Jerusalem went back to London and Amsterdam and Mexico City and Beijing and New York.

Because, no, don’t believe the hype. Israel/Palestine is not a regional conflict that has huge relevance for the fate of the planet — any more than border disputes over Kashmir or Tibet or Hong Kong. Iranian nuclearisation actually does have relevance for the planet – but people who believe, as a British columnist recently put it, that “a peace deal in the territories would remove a significant casus belli for Tehran” are bonkers.

No, all those restive Sunnis, Shias and Persians are not sitting around chewing their nails over the terms of a “final status agreement” between Israelis and Palestinians. People who have bought into the linkage concept (as Middle East writers abbreviate it) are allowing themselves to become stenographers for regional dictators who use the plight of the Palestinians to deflect blame from sins against their own populations.

(Read full article)


Love of the Land: Hey Barack, Joe, Tony, BBC! Want Middle East peace? Just. Stay. Home.

RubinReports: Other Than Apartments in Jerusalem, What Else is Going on in the Middle East?

Other Than Apartments in Jerusalem, What Else is Going on in the Middle East?

By Barry Rubin

While the Obama Administration is fiddling over the construction of apartments in Jerusalem, the Middle East is burning. Yet these other issues don’t attract the attention—and certainly not the action—required.

1. Iran is now allied with al-Qaida: General David Petraeus, head of the U.S. Central Command, revealed a bombshell story that has been ignored: Iran is helping al-Qaida attack Americans.

Iran, he said in military-speak, provides "a key facilitation hub, where facilitators connect al Qaida's senior leadership to regional affiliates." Translation: Tehran is letting al-Qaida leaders travel freely back and forth to Pakistan and Afghanistan, using its territory as a safe haven, while permitting them to hold meetings to plan terrorist attacks for attacking U.S. targets and killing Americans. While nominally Iran sometimes takes these people into custody, that seems, Petraeus says, a fiction to fool foreigners.

Oh, and Petraeus added that Iran also helps the Taliban fight America in Afghanistan. Regarding Iraq, the general explains, "The Qods Force [an elite Iranian military group within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps] also maintains its lethal support to Shia Iraqi militia groups, providing them with weapons, funding and training,"

So, Petraeus pointed out that Iran is helping al-Qaida against the United States and also, at times, Shia groups intended to be Iran’s proxies for spreading its influence in Iraq. In effect, the Tehran regime is at war with the United States. Yet this point is not being highlighted, nor does it stir rage in the hearts of White House officials or strenuous attempts to counter this threat.

Meanwhile, Iran isn’t just building apartments but nuclear weapons’ facilities.

2. Lebanon being further integrated into Iran-Syria alliance

In an interview with al-Jazira television, Walid Jumblatt, formerly the roaring lion of the opposition, turns into a mouse and apologizes to Syrian dictator Bashar al-Asad:

"I said, at a moment of anger, what is improper and illogical against President Bashar Assad.” And now he is begging for an invitation to Damascus where he can kiss the ring of the man whose father (Hafiz al-Asad) murdered his father (Kemal Jumblatt).

One cannot blame Walid Jumblatt nor Sa’d al-Hariri, leader of the March 14 coalition, whose father was murdered by Bashar himself and has already gone to Damascus to beg forgiveness.

But Jumblatt, leader of the main Druze community in Lebanon, was a man who not long ago denied comparing Bashar al-Asad to a dog by saying that to do so would be an insult to canines. Jumblatt was also the man who bragged about being a friend of the United States during his rebellious phase. No more.

Meanwhile, Hizballah, which enjoys veto power in Lebanon’s government, isn’t just building apartments, its building fortifications and importing record amounts of weapons.

3. It is now clear that Russia and China won’t support sanctions on Iran. The administration’s plan is in major trouble and there’s no way out, except to do the most minimal possible sanctions and claim victory.

Russia openly defies the Obama Administration by insisting it will finish a nuclear plant for Iran, just when Secretary of State Hilary Clinton is visiting! This was a real slap in the face, much bigger strategically than the apartments’ issue. But there will be no strong reaction from Washington.

According to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev: “We believe that [engagement with Iran is] not over yet, that we can still reach an agreement."

So Russia still isn’t ready to support sanctions and isn’t building apartments in Iran but rather a nuclear reactor.

Same thing with China, whose Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang put it this way: "We believe there is still room for diplomatic efforts and the parties concerned should intensify those efforts."

China isn’t building apartments in Iran but developing oilfields and building a huge oil refinery, plus reportedly supplying weapons.

4. Despite U.S. concessions aimed to reduce Syria’s alliance with Iran, their bond is getting stronger, as witnessed by Asad’s invitation to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Damascus and their signing of new cooperation agreements. During the press conference, Asad literally laughed at U.S. policy.

5. Increasing signs of Turkey’s close cooperation with the Iran-Syria axis. Both Ahmadinejad and the official Syrian government newspaper now call Turkey an ally of Syria and Iran.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan sounds the same way, insisting that Iran has no intention of developing nuclear weapons, that Ahmadinejad is a “friend,” and that the United States has no right to try to stop Iran from getting such weapons any way.

The Turkish government isn’t building just apartments but an alliance with Tehran and an increasingly Islamist regime at home.

So let's leave it to Ahmadinejad to summarize how things seem to Iran, Syria, Hamas, Hizballah, and lots of Arabs both pro- and anti-American:

The Americans, Ahmadinejad said, “not only have failed to gain any power, but also are forced to leave the region. They are leaving their reputation, image, and power behind in order to escape.…The [American] government has no influence [to stop].…the expansion of Iran-Syria ties, Syria-Turkey ties, and Iran-Turkey ties--God willing, Iraq too will join the circle...."

Iran is also building not just apartments and not even just nuclear facilities and not even just revolutions abrod. It's also building an empire or, to put things more modestly, a very large sphere of influence.

In short, the regional situation is terrible. None of this really has much to do with Arab-Israeli or Israeli-Palestinian issues; none of this is going to change because U.S. policy is seen as being tough on Israel. What the Arabs want to see is whether U.S. policy is going to be tough on Iran and its allies.

The Obama Administration policy isn't making the radicals more moderate but rather--by feeding their arrogance and belief in American weakness--making them more aggressive. Every day the regional situation is becoming more dangerous, but the highest-level and highest-priority U.S. efforts seem to be largely over getting indirect Israel-Palestinian talks which everyone involved knows will produce nothing.

Something is seriously wrong here. Of course this isn't the first time such things have happened in battling aggressive dictatorships, both in the case of Germany and of the USSR. Still, one can only echo the words of George Orwell, written in his diary in early 1941:

"The most depressing thing in this war is not the disasters we are bound to suffer at this stage, but the knowledge that we are being led by weaklings....It is as though your life depended on a game of chess, and you had to sit watching it, seeing the most idiotic moves being made and being powerless to prevent them."


RubinReports: Other Than Apartments in Jerusalem, What Else is Going on in the Middle East?

Israel Matzav: Victor Davis Hanson on Obama's new alliance system

Victor Davis Hanson on Obama's new alliance system

Victor Davis Hanson has an interesting theory that draws a connection between President Obama's attempts to socialize America and his abandonment of the United States' traditional alliances.

Thus, the flip side to nationalizing health care, banks, and student loans at home is to look sympathetically at those who long ago did the same abroad. Seen in that light, the growing rejection of Britain or Israel is the logical symbolic bookend to the Obama administration's multicultural, statist agenda here at home. Another answer is that, like academics who rarely venture out from the university lounge, the members of this administration think our enemies and rivals listen to reason and logic and were deemed difficult only because of a sort of anti-Enlightenment denseness in past administrations, and especially the Bush administration.

Whatever the cause, the effect is now clear: there is no such thing any more as allies and rivals, much less friends and enemies. That Manicheanism is part of our Neanderthal past. We won’t judge anyone abroad on what he does or says — unless he represents forces of traditional privilege and is sympathetic with traditions within the United States that we are desperately trying to shed.

The problem is obvious. The thuggish regimes that we court, given the value systems that have made them what they are, will interpret all this as either disingenuousness or the decadence of those who don’t even believe in themselves. And so the pressures on us to engage in ever more appeasement will only magnify. Because America now apologizes for everything, and China and Russia for nothing, soon the impression will be fixed abroad that America has a lot to atone for and its authoritarian rivals nothing to answer for. Pressures for constant concessions and reparations will mount on democratic us, and lessen on autocratic others.

I think that explanation works for every ally except for Israel. First, because there is an unmistakable element of anti-Semitism in the Obama administration and among his advisers that cannot be attributed to socialism. And second, because Britain also has nationalized health care, Israel has many nationalized companies such as the Electric Company and the Ports Authority (and yes, our health care) that operate on what can only be described as a quasi-socialist basis to this day.

There's more to it than just socialized medicine in America and the free market among its putative allies.


Israel Matzav: Victor Davis Hanson on Obama's new alliance system

Israel Matzav: Oren: 'No one can force peace on us'

Oren: 'No one can force peace on us'

Israel's ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, told PBS on Saturday that no one can force Israel and the 'Palestinians' to make peace. He compared it with trying to force someone to fall in love - it cannot be done.

"No. I think peace has to be made between two people sitting opposite a table. America can help facilitate that interaction. But at the end of the day, no one can force parties in any conflict in the world to make peace. It's like forcing somebody to fall in love. We have to sit down and thresh it out between us."

Oren added: "If we arrive at points where we can't agree, we can't close the gap between us, then we - both the Israelis and the Palestinians as well - are willing to look at various bridging formulas."

"But America is not in a position where it's going to come in and impose a plan. I don't think that's to anybody's benefit. And I'm sure parties on all sides of this conflict understand that."

Well, the parties on all sides may understand it, but that might not stop the US from trying to impose a 'solution' anyway. The two sides will never love or trust each other, but that's okay in Obama's book if he's willing to station US troops permanently along the green line. North and South Korea don't love each other, but they'll been on their respective sides of the line for nearly 60 years. If Obama wants to try to impose that sort of arrangement on Israel and the 'Palestinians' there is very little that can stop him.

What could go wrong?

Israel Matzav: Oren: 'No one can force peace on us'

Israel Matzav: Iran slaps Obama again

Iran slaps Obama again

Like last year, President Obumbler sent a Nowruz (New Year's) message to Iran. And like last year, the Ahmadinejad regime responded by slapping Obama in the face. London's Daily Telegraph reports that a wide variety of Iranian weapons have been seized in Afghanistan (Hat Tip: Power Line).

Border officials have reported that a wide range of material made in Iran – including mortars, plastic explosives, propaganda materials and mobile phones – is ending up in insurgents' hands.

Rahmutallah Safi, the head of Border Police in Herat, an Afghan city on its western border with Iran, said seized material was marked with Persian writing, Channel 4 News reported last night.

"In this place you can see, we have discovered five mines," he said. "All the international monitors have seen it. You yourselves can check to see which country has made it. You can see the [Persian] marks on the weapons and the type and show it to the world."

A Taliban commander admitted that the insurgents had grown more dependent on Iran as Pakistan stepped up operations against the group on its territory.

"Day by day the Iranian border becomes more important for us," he said. "Especially now in Pakistan there are many problems for the Taliban and many of the Taliban have been imprisoned and also they arrest any Taliban who comes out of the[religious schools].

"The mujahideen themselves bring the weapons and money in although we do also use professional smugglers to bring in our shipments."

And on Sunday, the Times of London reports that the Iranians are training the Taliban in the use of roadside bombs.

TALIBAN commanders have revealed that hundreds of insurgents have been trained in Iran to kill Nato forces in Afghanistan.

The commanders said they had learnt to mount complex ambushes and lay improvised explosive devices (IEDs), which have been responsible for most of the deaths of British troops in Helmand province.

The accounts of two commanders, in interviews with The Sunday Times, are the first descriptions of training of the Taliban in Iran.

According to the commanders, Iranian officials paid them to attend three-month courses during the winter.

They were smuggled across the border to the city of Zahidan, in southeast Iran, an hour’s drive from training camps in the desert.

...

During their second month they were shown how to plant IEDs in sequence so that the rescuers of soldiers wounded in one blast would be caught in further explosions.

The Obama administration will undoubtedly decide that Iran is supporting the Taliban so that the Afghan government will stop building 'settlements' in Israel.

What could go wrong?


Israel Matzav: Iran slaps Obama again

Israel Matzav: Putin lectures Clinton on camera, Obami have no comment

Putin lectures Clinton on camera, Obami have no comment

Hillary Clinton got her comeuppance in Moscow on Friday.

ABC's Alexander Marquardt reports: When reporters traveling with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Moscow were informed that a last-minute meeting with Russia's Prime Minister Valdimir Putin had been added to the schedule, they were told they would only get to see a few seconds of handshakes before being ushered out.

Instead, with cameras rolling, they watched Putin spend six minutes rattling off a number of complaints he has with the United States.

Trade with the US has slowed during the financial crisis, he complained, Russian companies have been slapped with US sanctions and Russia is having trouble joining the World Trade Organization.

He also singled out the 1974 Jackson-Vanik amendment, as he has in the past, as evidence that the US is not fully encouraging business with Russia. (The amendment restricts trade with countries that limit emigration, as the USSR did with Jews.)

...

Reporters were surprised at the length of Putin’s list of issues and the fact that he did it in front of the Russian and American press corps, a pool reporter noted.

The meeting was held at Putin’s government-owned country estate just a few hours after Russia’s foreign minister declared that Russia and the US have “managed to perform a true reset of relations.”

The other most contentious moment of Clinton’s trip was also thanks to Putin after he announced yesterday that a nuclear power plant Russia is building in Iran will be completed in the next few months.

Why did Putin humiliate Clinton (you mean he didn't make her sit on a lower stool for the gathered media)? Jennifer Rubin explains.

In short, the Russians have now shown us what resetting the U.S.-Russian relationship means. Putin has figured out that there is no risk — so long as you aren’t a small democratic ally of the U.S. — of incurring the wrath of the Obami. No condemnations or even frowns will be forthcoming. This is, you see, what comes from throwing ourselves at our adversaries’ feet and scorning our allies. Adversaries learn to take advantage of us while friends learn not to trust us.

And where does that leave our Iran policy? No prospect of international sanctions. The U.S. sanctions bill is languishing in Congress. The mullahs feel neither isolated nor besieged. It is not they whom the Obami are pressuring this week. We eagerly await Hillary’s Monday speech to AIPAC when she can explain the wizardry at work here. We’ll be all ears.

Netanyahu can't allow this bunch of Bozo's to bully him. Israel is likely to have to act on Iran with or without US support and before Bushehr goes on line and Iran gets the S-300.

What could go wrong?

Israel Matzav: Putin lectures Clinton on camera, Obami have no comment

Israel Matzav: Tom Campbell on Obama's handling of Israel

Tom Campbell on Obama's handling of Israel

On Saturday night, I brought you Carly Fiorina's and Chuck Devore's reactions to President Obama's excoriation of Israel last week. I was missing the third Republican candidate for the Senate nomination from California, Tom Campbell. Here's Campbell's reaction (Hat Tip: Jennifer Rubin). The whole tape is worth watching, but note what he says about the last week's events from about 5:20 to 6:10 of this video.

Let's go to the videotape.



Note that Campbell seems far less conversant in the details of what happened while Biden was here than either of his opponents. Note also that he apparently backs Obama's approach. Not good news.

By the way, Campbell's campaign has been on this blog a lot more than the other two. If you put something in the comments, you can be pretty sure they'll see it (and I will let through anything they write in response).

Israel Matzav: Tom Campbell on Obama's handling of Israel

Israel Matzav: Good news: TSA to fight 'discrimination' against Muslims

Good news: TSA to fight 'discrimination' against Muslims

The Obama administration has appointed Nawar Shora, legal director of the Arab-American Anti-Defamation Committee (ADC), to serve as a senior adviser for the TSA's office of civil rights and civil liberties. TSA - for those of you who aren't frequent travelers - are the people who are supposed to protect airline passengers within and departing from the United States. Paul Mirengoff reports that the ADC has a number of positions on protecting the US from attack that might be advocated by Nawar Shora.

For example, it has been a fierce critic of the Patriot Act since day one. And ADC failed Scott's "Al Arian test" when it claimed that the indictment of Professor Sami Al Arian was "a political witch-hunt, a vendetta, and a kind of very, very ugly post-9/11 McCarthyism." Al Arian eventually pleaded guilty to conspiracy to help the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a specially designated terrorist organization.

The Washington Post, in what I would describe as a celebratory article, is very clear about what Shora's role will be at TSA. It states (under his picture in an article appearing today) that Shora "is used to fighting for the civil rights of Muslims and Arabs, but now he will do so as a federal government official." Shora is equally clear, saying "it is about time I cross over to the government and start working within the system."

But TSA is not a civil rights organization; it is (or should be) an organization dedicated to promoting safety and thwarting terrorism. Shora's appointment is more evidence that TSA is not sufficiently dedicated to that purpose. Shora's mission in life is not promoting safety and thwarting terrorism; it is promoting the interests of Arab-Americans by, for example, making sure they are treated the same way other Americans are.

I have advocated many times on this blog that other countries adopt Israel's security system in which personal interviews are used to ferret out potential terrorists. Instead, American travelers will continue to be subjected to useless, demeaning searches that ignore the elephant in the room: The fact that all airline terrorism in the last thirty years has been committed by Muslims.

Coincidentally, or perhaps not, El Al Israel Airlines (which does its own security abroad as well) has been voted best in airline security by World Traveler Magazine readers for the third year running (since the award category was created) (Hat Tip: Israellycool via Twitter). But don't expect that kind of security to be implemented in the US anytime soon. It's far more important to pretend that we don't know the terrorists' origins.

What could go wrong?


Israel Matzav: Good news: TSA to fight 'discrimination' against Muslims

Israel Matzav: What should Netanyahu do?

What should Netanyahu do?

Caroline Glick lists several bad things that President Obama is trying to accomplish by bullying Israel. Here's what she says the Prime Minister should do about it.

One front in the war Obama has started is at home. Netanyahu must ensure that he maintains popular domestic support for his government to scuttle Obama's plan to overthrow his government. So far, in large part due to Obama's unprecedented nastiness, Netanyahu's domestic support has held steady. A poll conducted for IMRA news service this week by Maagar Mohot shows that fully 75 percent of Israeli Jews believe Obama's behavior towards Israel is unjustified. As for Netanyahu, 71 percent of Israeli Jews believe his refusal to accept Obama's demand to ban Jewish building in Jerusalem proves he is a strong leader. Similarly, a Shvakim Panorama poll for Israel Radio shows public support for Kadima has dropped by more than 30 percent since last year's elections.

The other front in Obama's war is the American public. By blaming Israel for the state of the Middle East and launching personal barbs against Netanyahu, Obama seeks to drive down popular American support for Israel. In building a strategy to counter Obama's moves, Netanyahu has to keep two issues in mind.

First, no foreign leader can win a popularity contest against a sitting US president. Therefore, Netanyahu must continue to avoid any personal attacks on Obama. He must limit his counter-offensive to a defense of Israel's interests and his government's policies.

Second, Netanyahu must remember that Obama's hostility towards Israel is not shared by the majority of Americans. Netanyahu's goal must be to strengthen and increase the majority of Americans who support Israel. To this end, Netanyahu must go to Washington next week and speak at the annual AIPAC conference as planned despite the administration's threat to boycott him.

While in Washington, Netanyahu should meet with every Congressman and Senator who wishes to meet with him as well as every administration member who seeks him out. Moreover, he should give interviews to as many television networks, newspapers and major radio programs as possible in order to bring his message directly to the American people.

Obama has made clear that he is not Israel's ally. And for the remainder of his term, he will do everything he can to downgrade US relations with Israel while maintaining his constant genuflection to the likes of Iran, Syria, the Palestinians and Turkey.

But like Israel, the US is a free country. And as long as popular support for Israel holds steady, Obama's options will be limited. Netanyahu's task is to maintain that support in the face of administration hostility, as he implements policies towards Iran and the Arabs alike that are necessary to ensure Israel's long-term survival and prosperity.



Israel Matzav: What should Netanyahu do?

Israel Matzav: Caspian Makan visits Israel

Caspian Makan visits Israel

If the name in the title to this post isn't familiar to all of you, I'm sure the picture is. Caspian Makan was the fiance of Neda Soltan, who was murdered by Iranian security forces last June. After being tortured by the Ahmadinejad regime, Makan escaped Iran and was granted asylum in Canada. He's visiting Israel now.

“I have come here out of the brotherhood of nations,” Makan told Channel 2.

“Neda was just a voice that yearned for freedom. In the name of this cause she joined the protesters and this is why she was murdered by agents of the regime,” Makan said.

“I was arrested six days after Neda’s murder, because I exposed crimes committed by the regime,” a weary-looking Makan said.

In trembling voice, Makan said there was hope for change in Iran. “The Iranian people is aware of the rights its being denied. Today the Iranian people is steadfast to achieve victory and to overthrow the current regime.”

Makan said he hoped for an Iran “where no man comes against his fellow man, with no more executions, no more war, no more murder.”

Asked what he would tell Neda if he knew she could hear him, Makan said “I will continue along her path. Her path was the path of freedom, not just for Iranians but for the whole world.

“Love for mankind was part of [Neda’s] being,” Makan said.

Makan was brought here by Channel 2. He will meet with President Shimon Peres while he is here. I hope that the Iranian 'greens' support his trip here.


Israel Matzav: Caspian Makan visits Israel

Israel Matzav: What did Bibi give?

What did Bibi give?

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu heads for Washington on Sunday night, where he will speak at the AIPAC conference and meet with US Defense Secretary Robert Gates, with President Obama, and possibly with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The unanswerd question is what those meetings will cost Israel.

On Friday, long after the Sabbath started here in Israel, Politico's Laura Rozen reported that Prime Minister Netanyahu had sent a 'written document' to Clinton, which was meant as a summary of a 40-minute phone call (yes, another one) that they had on Thursday.

The written statement was a follow-up to the call and reflected Netanyahu's understanding of what the U.S. wanted to see from him, the diplomat said. It had some language on confidence-building measures Netanyahu was proposing, although details on its contents were not explained.

The administration didn't immediately respond to queries about the alleged Netanyahu document and exactly what steps Netanyahu has agreed to.

Also on Friday, the JPost reported that Netanyahu would agree to make 'gestures' to the good terrorists from Fatah, but 'not in Jerusalem.' The gestures reportedly include the release of 'Fatah prisoners.' (Please don't tell me we're giving up Marwan Barghouti for this nonsense).

On Sunday morning, Haaretz claims that Netanyahu has bowed to US demands ahead of his trip to Washington.

For the first time since Operation Cast Lead, Israel has agreed to ease the blockade on the Gaza Strip. Netanyahu has also agreed to discuss all core issues during the proximity talks, with the condition of reaching final conclusions only in direct talks with the PA.

Netanyahu responded to Washington's demands during his telephone call with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Thursday night. Clinton said on Friday that Netanyahu's response "was useful and productive, and we're continuing our discussions with him and his government".

The prime minister refused to revoke a decision to build 1,600 Jewish homes in Ramat Shlomo in east Jerusalem - the cause of a diplomatic row errupted during a visit to Israel by U.S. Vice President Joe Biden two weeks ago - or freeze construction beyond the Green Line in the city. He did, promise a better oversight system to prevent such embarrassing incidents ion the future, however.

Senior officials in Jerusalem said that the prime minister's gestures enabling the UN to transport construction materials to Gaza to rebuild sewerage systems, a flour mill and 150 apartments in Khan Yunis.

Netanyahu also agreed to release hundreds of Fatah-affiliated prisoners as a gesture to PA President Mahmoud Abbas, a move which the defense establishment believes could prompt the release of captured IDF soldier Gilad Shalit.

I'm suspicious of reports based on 'senior officials' and the like, but this sounds plausible. I'm sorry to see Bibi caving at all. The opening of the Gaza blockade is limited, but these things tend to be a slippery slope. The release of 'hundreds' of 'Fatah prisoners' is bad news especially since we now hold very few of them who do not have blood on their hands. And given that Hamas holds Gilad Shalit, I fail to see why the 'defense establishment' (not the IDF - more likely refers to Ehud Barak) believes that the release of 'Fatah prisoners' will bring about Shalit's release.

But at least the anti-Semites in Washington are agreeing to receive Netanyahu.

What could go wrong?


Israel Matzav: What did Bibi give?

Israel Matzav: Obama's Middle East double standard

Obama's Middle East double standard

House Minority Whip Eric Cantor rips the Obama administration for its double standards in the Middle East.

Two telling incidents took place during Vice President Biden’s visit to the Middle East last week — one triggered by the Israeli government, the other by the Palestinian Authority.

The first – the announcement of an Israeli housing project in Jerusalem – has sparked widespread and bitter condemnation in Washington. The second – a Palestinian Authority-sponsored ceremony glorifying a notorious terrorist – has inexplicably escaped with nary a word from the White House.

The conflicting Obama administration responses are no accident. They reveal the perverse way in which the White House intends to serve as the “honest broker” in the Mideast conflict.

Read the whole thing.

I would love to get an Israel-supporting Congressional delegation to Ramat Shlomo. If you see the location, you'd be even more astounded that President Obama made such a big deal out of it.


Israel Matzav: Obama's Middle East double standard

Israel Matzav: Senators to Obama: Resolve crisis amicably and in a manner that befits longstanding strategic allies

Senators to Obama: Resolve crisis amicably and in a manner that befits longstanding strategic allies

Senators Barabara Boxer (D-Cal.) and Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) have drafted a letter to Secretary of State Clinton urging her to resolve differences with Israel “amicably and in a manner that befits longstanding strategic allies.” Thousands of participants in this week's AIPAC convention (all of whom have someone else to clean for Pesach) will urge other Senators to sign the letter this week.

The letter, written by Barbara Boxer (D-California) and Johnny Isakson (R-Georgia) and addressed to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, along with its House companion will be centerpieces of Israel advocates’ lobbying as part of the AIPAC annual conference.

The conference, which begins Sunday and is expected to attract an unprecedented 7,500 attendees, comes as the US and Israel have been embroiled in their most serious crisis in years.

...

AIPAC activists will take to Capitol Hill on Tuesday to meet with individual legislators at the tail end of the conference and are also expected to press for swift passage of Iran sanctions and to back continued aid to Israel.

But the recent tensions have heightened the profile of the letters to be circulated among members backing the US-Israel relationship and looking to move forward on the peace process. The Senate letter also calls on Clinton to “reaffirm the unbreakable bonds between the United States and Israel.”

You can find the Senate letter here. A similar letter is also being advanced by the House.

Ben Smith has been through AIPAC's lobbying packet (which is online this year - last year I had to ask someone to send it to me) and reports that AIPAC is also going to be lobbying for 'crippling sanctions' against Iran.

The Iran "action" items:

• Urge members of the House and Senate to call on their leadership to conclude as soon as possible a conference agreement on the House’s Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act and the Senate’s Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act.
• Urge members of the House and Senate to sign letters to President Obama urging him to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran by imposing immediate and crippling sanctions.

And one of the letter sponsors on Iran in the House is - get this - Jesse Jackson Jr.


Israel Matzav: Senators to Obama: Resolve crisis amicably and in a manner that befits longstanding strategic allies

Israel Matzav: How do you say "Inspector Tamim" in Hungarian?

How do you say "Inspector Tamim" in Hungarian?

Remember the little blurb I ran on Friday about two Israeli Air Force planes being seen in the skies over Budapest? Well, a funny thing happened that very same day - Wednesday - in Budapest.

Israeli spy planes flew uninvited and unannounced over Budapest the same day a Syrian man was shot to death in his car, Hungarian media reported yesterday.

Read it all (yes, there's more to it than him being a Syrian).

Israel Matzav: How do you say "Inspector Tamim" in Hungarian?

Love of the Land: How Obama Is Turning America against Israel

How Obama Is Turning America against Israel


Ed Lasky
American Thinker
19 March '10

At best, Barack Obama committed the latest big mistake in his conduct of foreign policy last week. At worst, the president carried out a deliberate operation intended to weaken the U.S.-Israel relationship and turn the public against the Jewish State.

An announcement was made by a ministry of the Israeli government during Vice President Joe Biden's visit to Israel that building permits were to be issued for a neighborhood in Jerusalem. The area concerned was expressly excluded from the moratorium on building that Prime Minster Netanyahu had offered to encourage the Palestinians to come to peace talks. The area is already filled with Israelis, and it was always considered an area that Israel would keep in any peace deal with the Palestinians. Indeed, the Palestinians never pushed to include this area in any previous dealings. The area is strategically important for the Israelis, being located on a higher elevation ideal for snipers to kill Israelis traveling on key highways.

Nevertheless, the announcement during Biden's visit was a diplomatic faux pas. Joe Biden made his displeasure clear while there, standing up Netanyahu for dinner (he was late by ninety minutes) and verbally lashing out.

Netanyahu and the Israeli government apologized profusely. That was not enough. When Biden returned home, the president (Mr. Cool) was "livid" and met with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to work out word by word what the American response would be.

(Read full article)


Love of the Land: How Obama Is Turning America against Israel

Love of the Land: A revolutionary proposal

A revolutionary proposal


Melanie Phillips
The Spectator
19 March '10

Commenting on the Obama/Israel crisis, Ed Lasky concludes that the US President is deliberately trying to turn America against Israel – and he is succeeding.

I have written in today’s Jewish Chronicle that it is time for Israel to stop going along with the diplomatic lies told for so long by Britain, America and the west about the Arab war against Israel. Lies that have twisted so many people’s minds into the belief that Israel is the historic usurper and aggressor in the Middle East, whereas in fact the Jews and the Jews alone are the rightful heirs to the land, in historical, legal and moral terms, and a monstrous injustice has been and is still being done to them.

It is these lies, and the consequent appeasement of the Arabs who promulgate them and the rewarding of Arab aggression, which has caused the Middle East impasse to remain an unending conflict. And it is these lies and the new distortions supplied by Obama which now pose the greatest single danger to Israel’s security and existence by eroding public support – not just in Britain, which is already lost, as is to a lesser extent ‘old’ Europe, but among the people who are the staunchest supporters of Israel: the great mass of middle America.

Disastrously, Israel has gone along with these lies -- for a variety of reasons. First, Israel observes the rules of diplomacy which almost invariably involve compromise. Now compromise is in general a good thing; but in a war of extermination, if the victim compromises with its attackers it strengthens them and makes its defeat more likely. In no other conflict in the history of the planet has a country which is the victim of an eight-decade belligerency aimed at wiping it off the map been expected to make concessions to its attackers. In no other conflict has such a victimised people been bullied by onlookers into doing so. Yet the first pressure is what Britain, America and Europe have been applying for decades, and the second is what Obama is now applying, with the EU falling in behind him: bullying the prospective victim of extermination into submitting to measures which increase the risk of such an eventuality, and in the process almost forcing the Palestinians from their habitual pose of sullen obstructionism and sporadic terrorism into another spate of outright war.

(Read full article)


Love of the Land: A revolutionary proposal

Love of the Land: I'm Protecting Israel

I'm Protecting Israel


Paula R. Stern
A Soldier's Mother
20 March '10

I called Shmulik to find out when he was coming home. It's silly to call a soldier during the first three months of training - they can't answer (aren't even supposed to have the phone in their pockets). This is when they teach them, shape them, guide them, create them into the soldier they will be.

Of course, he didn't answer - I'm not even sure I can say I was disappointed. The nice thing was that he called me back later and I asked him what he was doing and he answered, "I'm protecting Israel." It was the laugh in his voice that warned me he wasn't serious.

"Against what?" I asked - images of them walking around base filled my mind, but it's too early.

"Against plants," he said and we both laughed. Apparently, this is one of the details Elie didn't tell me about but when new recruits enter the base, the first thing they do...is clean up the base.

(Read full story)


Love of the Land: I'm Protecting Israel

Love of the Land: Double-Standards Watch

Double-Standards Watch


Noah Pollak
Contentions/Commentary
19 March '10

For a few months, a “human rights activist” named Mohammad Othman was held by Israel in something called administrative detention, which allows suspects to be held for a short period of time without a trial, but with judicial oversight. Othman’s detention earned this rebuke from Human Rights Watch, titled with a stern demand: “End Arbitrary Detention.” Of course, many nations, both democratic and undemocratic, practice administrative detention. And why the presumption that it was “arbitrary”? Never mind. The statement reads:

Israeli authorities have detained Othman without charge for more than two months on what appear to be politically motivated grounds. … Othman has no criminal record and, to the knowledge of Human Rights Watch, has never advocated or participated in violence. …

“The only reasonable conclusion is that Othman is being punished for his peaceful advocacy,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. [Emphasis added to weasel-phrasing]


Is that really the only reasonable conclusion? I would actually characterize this as a fantasy conclusion, or at least one of many possible conclusions. If the Shin Bet or IDF were interested in punishing people for “peaceful advocacy” in Israel and the West Bank, there would be tens of thousands of activists in detention. But there aren’t.

(Read full post)


Love of the Land: Double-Standards Watch

Love of the Land: Obama’s War Against Israel

Obama’s War Against Israel


Joel B. Pollak
Frontpagemag.com
19 March '10

There’s a joke making the rounds in my suburban Chicago neighborhood about the clash between the Obama administration and the Netanyahu government: Why did Vice-President Joe Biden get angry when Israel embarrassed him by announcing new construction in Jerusalem’s Ramat Shlomo neighborhood? Because it’s usually Biden’s job to embarrass himself.

The joke has carried on far too long. The tension between the two governments is being stoked by President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in a deliberate attempt to weaken the coalition of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. If Israel had committed a real foul, the Obama administration could have used a quiet threat of public condemnation to force Israeli concessions, and the Netanyahu government would have little choice but to comply.

Instead, the Obama administration has turned a public relations snafu into a public test of Israeli sovereignty, leaving the Netanyahu government little choice but to resist. The neighborhood where 1600 homes were to be built is not a remote outpost. It is mere meters from the Green Line, in a part of East Jerusalem that is actually west of the Old City. It is likely to remain part of Israel in any future Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement.

The timing of the administration’s attack is unfortunate, for two reasons. One is that Iran continues to move towards becoming a nuclear power. Each day the U.S. and Israel spend on the Ramat Shlomo question is a day wasted, a day that ought to have been spent dealing with our common enemy.

(Read full article)


Love of the Land: Obama’s War Against Israel

Love of the Land: What's Wrong With This Headline?

What's Wrong With This Headline?


Honest Reporting/Backspin
18 March '10

Reporter Donald Macintyre visited Ramat Shlomo. See if you can spot the error in The Independent's headline:

Indy

Ramat Shlomo's not a town. It's one of Jerusalem's many neighborhoods, no different than other communities like Ramat Eshkol, Givat Shaul, Rehavia, or Emek Refaim.

This Google map should be sufficient to disprove the notion that Ramat Shlomo's a "town." I circled the neighborhood in red. I only regret that you can't see more of municipal Jerusalem to better appreciate the sense of scale. (Click on the map to see it more clearly.)

Ramat_shlomo1



Love of the Land: What's Wrong With This Headline?

Love of the Land: All the News Unfit to Print

All the News Unfit to Print


Andrea Levin
CAMERA Media Analysis
18 March '10

What the New York Times chooses to cover in the Arab-Israeli conflict – and what it excludes – is a story in itself. The paper's silence, as of this writing, about an event that has rocked the Israeli media and public and triggered calls for government action once more raises serious questions about the paper's news judgment. After all, the Times reports on no other foreign nation as minutely as it does Israel, whether about negotiations, housing permits in Jerusalem, Israeli gravel-use in the West Bank or a Tel Aviv polygamist.

The story being ignored is the Im Tirtzu campaign to expose the New Israel Fund's connection to the defamatory Goldstone Report via its funding of groups that spurred the creation of and then contributed harsh commentary about Israel to the UN document. Originally founded as a student organization to counter anti-Zionist activity on campus, Im Tirtzu publicized revelations about the NIF-Goldstone ties in provocative ads across the country. The campaign began in January and has already prompted moves in the Knesset to intensify oversight of foreign political entities financing groups in Israel.

According to polls, the Israeli public by a significant margin opposes politically-based foreign funding of activity in Israel.

So why the silent treatment by the Times?

For starters, many of the very same NIF-supported NGO's under fire for allegedly helping fuel the Goldstone calumnies against Israel are also preferred news sources of the Times, quoted regularly as reliable critics of Israeli society. B'Tselem and Yesh Din, for instance, are favorites, together cited at least 25 times in the last two years, typically charging the Israel Defense Forces or other official bodies with misconduct, and sometimes prompting entire stories focused on the NGO charges.

(Read full critique)


Love of the Land: All the News Unfit to Print

Love of the Land: Why Obama’s dumping Israel

Why Obama’s dumping Israel


Fresnozionism.org
19 March '10

President Obama says that he has an ‘unbreakable’ commitment to Israel’s security and that his goal is an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Here is how he is going about it, in the words of Caroline Glick:

Obama’s new demands follow the months of American pressure that eventually coerced Netanyahu into announcing both his support for a Palestinian state and a 10-month ban on Jewish construction in Judea and Samaria. No previous Israeli government had ever been asked to make the latter concession.

Netanyahu was led to believe that in return for these concessions Obama would begin behaving like the credible mediator his predecessors were. But instead of acting like his predecessors, Obama has behaved like the Palestinians. Rather than reward Netanyahu for taking a risk for peace, Obama has, in the model of Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas, pocketed Netanyahu’s concessions and escalated his demands. This is not the behavior of a mediator. This is the behavior of an adversary.


(Read full post)



Love of the Land: Why Obama’s dumping Israel

Elder of Ziyon: Libya upset over imports of Israeli goods

Elder of Ziyon: Libya upset over imports of Israeli goods

Elder of Ziyon: Video of Abbas and his "adopted" kid

Elder of Ziyon: Video of Abbas and his "adopted" kid

Elder of Ziyon: Followup - did Dubai expel any spies?

Elder of Ziyon: Followup - did Dubai expel any spies?

Elder of Ziyon: Hamas denies sending message to Egypt via fake congressman

Elder of Ziyon: Hamas denies sending message to Egypt via fake congressman

Elder of Ziyon: Obama to the left of Carter?

Elder of Ziyon: Obama to the left of Carter?

Remember the Goldstone Report?

Remember the Goldstone Report?

Professor Richard Landes,who blogs at The Augean Stables, has carefully read the Goldstone Report. The first part of his findings is here, the second here. I've only had the time to skim over it, and recognize that rational discussion of the report hardly has any value in any case, but if you're interested in an intelligent reading of this famous anti-Israeli screed, you'll find Landes' comments valuable.
Originally posted by Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations

Illegal Settlements

Illegal Settlements

Veteran reader David Sigeti wonders if I'd like to comment on this article, in which former US ambassador to Israel Daniel Kurtzer writes about the illegality of the West Bank settlements. Kurtzer's thesis is that much of the settlement activity is illegal - and has been throughout - even by the standards of Israel's legal system.

It's an interesting read, mostly for the quick and truncated glimpse it gives us behind the scenes of the American-Israeli relationship; on one level, the American ambassador has routine access to top-level Israeli officials to a degree unmatched by most regular Israeli citizens. (There's also an amusing anecdote, when Kurtzer and some Israelis are trying to agree on where the settlements end, and Kurtzer has relevant secret American intelligence data he's not able to share with the Israelis: because it came from satellites? From Palestinian farmers? From American moles in Israel's officialdom? He doesn't say, alas).

The most interesting thing I come away from the article with is how fiendishly complex the matter really is, with almost no ability to reach agreements about the simplest facts of almost any part of the story. What is the legal case? Who owns which land? How does anyone know? When is a legal document "right", if at all, ever? If an attorney states a legal position, how do you decide if it's law, or politics, or both, or neither?

For a number of years I've been idly telling myself that once Israel leaves the West Bank, I'd like to write a book about the settlement project and Israeli society. The book can't be a book of history until after the story is over, of course, which is one reason I never started working on it; Kurtzer's article indicates that long before writing about the project and Israeli society, it will first be necessary to figure out what the project was. The simple facts. Because something like 90% of what people think they know to be facts, are actually little more than ideologically-driven hearsay.

Take the fundamental question: who owns the land. I don't know the answer, which in any case would differ according to whichever plot of it you're standing on. I do know, however, that contrary to everything the media ever tells you, most of the West Bank is barren hill-sides or dessert, and has been forever. It's not fertile farmland, not olive groves nor vineyards, and certainly not towns and villages. Thorny hillsides, dry and dusty ravines. Before you determine who owns pieces of it, you're going to have to figure out how they may have come to claim that ownership.

Back to Kurtzer's thesis, however: I expect he's roughly right. Much of the settlement project happened in murky gray zones on the edge of legality, some of it on the outside parts of it. This is not the reason the settlements need eventually to be disbanded, most of them: that's a matter of politics. As regular readers will recognize, I'm of the opinion that in matters of international relations politics, power relations and national interests generally trump legality. When they don't, it's often because the power brokers managed to have the law written to fit their purposes. Sorry if that makes me sound like a cynic.
Originally posted by Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations

Obama Punished Israel by Diverting Anti-Iran Bunker Bombs - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Obama Punished Israel by Diverting Anti-Iran Bunker Bombs - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Netanyahu Draws the Line: We Build in Jerusalem as in Tel Aviv - Politics & Gov't - Israel News - Israel National News

Netanyahu Draws the Line: We Build in Jerusalem as in Tel Aviv - Politics & Gov't - Israel News - Israel National News

PM Netanyahu to Meet Obama in Washington - Politics & Gov't - Israel News - Israel National News

PM Netanyahu to Meet Obama in Washington - Politics & Gov't - Israel News - Israel National News

Mitchell Heads for Israel with More Pressure Tactics - Politics & Gov't - Israel News - Israel National News

Mitchell Heads for Israel with More Pressure Tactics - Politics & Gov't - Israel News - Israel National News

Four Kassam Rockets From Hamas/Gaza; No One Hurt - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Four Kassam Rockets From Hamas/Gaza; No One Hurt - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Gush Etzion Residents Protest 'Obama Intifada' - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News#replies

Gush Etzion Residents Protest 'Obama Intifada' - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News#replies

Love of the Land: Cheering Their Failed Israel Policy

Cheering Their Failed Israel Policy


Jennifer Rubin
Contentions/Commentary
20 March '10

The Washington Post headline — “Experts question whether U.S. has a real Israel strategy or ‘talking points’” – suggests the disarray in the Obami’s approach and the general consternation that has greeted their bully-boyism directed at the Jewish state. Indeed, the Post can find no one but George Mitchell’s lackey Martin Indyk (more on him later) who agrees with Hillary Clinton’s obnoxious claim that the staged hissy fit with Israel is “paying off.” (And if it were bearing fruit, then we are back to amateur hour when Hillary announces as much, and on the Israel-hating BBC, of all places). Elliott Abrams dryly notes: “It has made life harder and has made negotiations harder for the Israelis and the Palestinians.” Certainly taunting one side in public has that effect.

We are now in a fencing match. Hillary demands some concessions; Bibi tries to serve up some small gesture or soothing platitude so Hillary and company can climb down off the roof on which they have perched themselves to impress their Palestinian friends. But all we have to show for this is Palestinian stone-throwing, a dead Thai worker, a strained but not yet broken relationship with Israel, and further reason for Palestinians to do what they do best — play victim and demand unilateral concessions.

But nothing is more telling than the comments of Indyk, an adviser to Mitchell, who presumably channels the Obami’s thinking:

Martin S. Indyk, vice president for foreign studies at the Brookings Institution and an adviser to Mitchell, said the administration in the past 10 days has made the Israeli government “supersensitive” to the issue of Jerusalem. He praised the administration for not revealing its demands and said U.S. officials adroitly turned down the heat as quickly as they turned it up.

“I think they handled it quite well,” he said.


(Read full post)


Love of the Land: Cheering Their Failed Israel Policy

Israel Matzav: Who's the biggest Israel hater in the Obama White House?

Who's the biggest Israel hater in the Obama White House?

It seems that in the Obama White House, the boss may not be the biggest Israel hater. That title may well belong to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (Hat Tip: Shy Guy).

In his book American Evita, Christopher Anderson writes.

At a time when elements of the American Left embraced the Palestinian cause and condemned Israel, Hillary was telling friends that she was "sympathetic" to the terrorist organization and admired its flamboyant leader, Yasser Arafat. When Arafat made his famous appearance before the UN General Assembly in November 1974 wearing his revolutionary uniform and his holster on his hip, Bill "was outraged like everybody else," said a Yale Law School classmate. But not Hillary, who tried to convince Bill that Arafat was a "freedom fighter" trying to free his people from their Israeli "oppressors." (1)

Of course Hillary's feelings about the PLO and Israel are only one aspect of her character, often a person's true nature is more closely revealed in a more intimate setting. In an early showcase of Hillary's diplomatic skills Christopher Anderson relates an experience that she and her future husband had during a trip to Arkansas in 1973.

It was during this trip to his home state that Bill took Hillary to meet a politically well connected friend. When they drove up to the house, Bill and Hillary noticed that a menorah-the seven branched Hebrew candelabrum (not to be confused with the more common and subtler mezuzah)-has been affixed to the front door.

"My daddy was half Jewish," explained Bill's friend. "One day when he came to visit , my daddy placed the menorah on my door because he wanted me to be proud that we were part Jewish. And I wasn't about to say no to my daddy."

To his astonishment, as soon as Hillary saw the menorah, she refused to get out of the car. "Bill walked up to me and said that she was hot and tired, but later he explained the real reason." According to the friend and another eyewitness, Bill said, "I'm sorry, but Hillary's really tight with the people in the PLO in New York. They're friends of hers, and she just doesn't feel right about the menorah." (2)

Read the whole thing. After that second story, anyone want to try to convince me that she 'only' hates Israel and not Jews?

For those who don't recall the picture, that's Hillary kissing Suha Arafat just after Mrs. Arafat claimed that Israel was poisoning the water in Gaza. Hillary later claimed that she didn't understand what Suha said. Sure....


Israel Matzav: Who's the biggest Israel hater in the Obama White House?

Israel Matzav: Carter's joy

Carter's joy

Heh.

Hat Tip: Allahpundit via Twitter

Israel Matzav: Carter's joy

Israel Matzav: Overnight music video

Overnight music video

It's now Motzei Shabbos (after the Sabbath) in most of the Jewish world (except in Australia where it's Sunday afternoon), and here's Avraham Fried at a kumsitz with the Neginah Orchestra singing Eliyahu HaNavi (Elijah the Prophet).

Let's go to the videotape.


Israel Matzav: Overnight music video

Israel Matzav: Does Obama have a foreign policy or talking points?

Does Obama have a foreign policy or talking points?

The Washington Post's Glenn Kessler surveys 'experts' who are wondering whether the Obama administration has a strategy in the Middle East or just talking points (Hat Tip: Memeorandum). But first, I want to give myself a pat on the back.

On Friday morning, I wrote:

One would think that someone in the Obama administration would have thought of this already and tried to build up a relationship with Yitzchak Molcho or Mike Herzog, who are Netanyahu's equivalent of Dov Weisglass. Harel goes on to suggest that the problem is with George Mitchell who views himself as an errand boy to carry bridging proposals and suggests that Mitchell ought to be replaced. Rozen thinks Harel is angling to get Dennis Ross the position.

While Israelis would regard Ross as a neutral party, and would probably be more open to engaging with him than they are with Mitchell, I don't believe that Ross would make any difference substantively. This is the wrong 'peace process' at the wrong time.

And sure enough, Glenn Kessler reports:

Diplomats noted that the Obama White House still appears to lack a discreet back channel that would allow President Obama and Netanyahu to directly handle sensitive issues, but the glimmerings of one may have emerged in this crisis. Yitzhak Molcho, a low-key private lawyer in Israel who negotiated the settlement freeze with Mitchell, worked closely behind the scenes on the Israeli response with Dennis Ross, a senior official on the National Security Council.

But most of Kessler's article is about the Obama administration's lack of strategy for dealing with the Middle East. He quotes Dan Kurtzer, Aaron David Miller, Elliott Abrams and Martin Indyk, all old peace processors, and all of whom are critical of Obama's lack of strategy. (By the way, he now lists Indyk as an adviser to George Mitchell). Miller comes up with the line that Obama just has talking points.

I disagree with all of them. There is a strategy. It's the execution that's missing, and thank God it's missing. The strategy is to do anything that has to be done to bring about the creation of a 'Palestinian state.' One reason the strategy isn't working is that the 'Palestinians' don't want a state - they won't even come to the table. They're still waiting to be handed a 'state' on a silver platter.

The other reason the strategy isn't working is that Israel still has a lot of support in Congress and Obama needs Congress for other things, like his domestic agenda. When the letters that are going to be circulated around Congress by AIPAC members next week have as their lead signatories Barbara Boxer and Steny Hoyer and Jesse Jackson Jr. (yes, really - I'll have more on that later), Obama is going to have a hard time shoving things down Israel's throat.

And that's a good thing.

Israel Matzav: Does Obama have a foreign policy or talking points?

Love of the Land: The Folly of America Training the Palestinian Army

The Folly of America Training the Palestinian Army


JINSA Report #: 974
19 March '10

Fairly authoritative sources have noted that Lt. Gen. Keith Dayton, the U.S. Army general responsible for training Abu Mazen's Palestinian security force/army, has become increasingly marginalized by the Fatah government. Last summer his staff was reportedly no longer directly involved in training or planning and had been "expelled" from the Palestinian Authority (PA) "Strategic Planning Department." Then came news that American DynCorp International's contract for training and mentoring Palestinian forces had not been renewed. Now, another shoe has dropped.

According to Janes' Defence Weekly as reported by wire services, the PA has drafted a plan to end American training and supervision of the force entirely. "Dayton's role would be limited to bringing money and equipment for the security forces. He would not deal with PA operations or deployment," a Palestinian official was reported to have said. "Officials said the PA leadership...determined that U.S. intervention was hampering security force development and undermining the legitimacy of the regime."

We suspect that Lt. Gen. Dayton would retire rather than be in that position, but that would suit the PA as well. He has already done the job they wanted done. He's built their army and now they want to use it as they see fit.

(Read full report)

Related: America's Shiny New Palestinian Militia

Love of the Land: The Folly of America Training the Palestinian Army
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...