Archive for July 27, 2013

President-Elect Stirs Optimism in Iran and West – NYTimes.com

July 27, 2013

President-Elect Stirs Optimism in Iran and West – NYTimes.com.

( I can see the smile break out on Khamenei’s lips as the reads the West’s “newspaper of record.” – JW }

TEHRAN — Bogged down in faltering nuclear talks with the European powers nearly 10 years ago, Hassan Rouhani did something that no Iranian diplomat before or since has managed to do.

He took out his cellphone, say Western diplomats who were there, dialed up his longtime friend and associate, Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and convinced him that Iran needed to suspend nuclear enrichment. The call by Mr. Rouhani, who was elected president in June and will take office next week, resulted in an agreement in October 2003, the only nuclear deal between Iran and the West in the past 11 years.

“Rouhani showed that he is a central player in Iran’s political establishment,” said Stanislas de Laboulaye, a retired director general of the French Foreign Ministry, who was a member of the European delegation during the talks between 2003 and 2005. “He was the only one able to sell something deeply unpopular to the other leaders.”

There is growing optimism in Iran and in the West that Mr. Rouhani, 64, is ready to restart serious talks on the nuclear issue; Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki of Iraq told the United States this month that Mr. Rouhani was ready to start direct talks, and the Obama administration has indicated a willingness to engage in head-to-head dialogue after years of inclusive multiparty negotiations.

In his campaign for president and again in recent weeks, Mr. Rouhani has made it clear that he is deeply concerned about his country’s growing economic troubles and is determined to soften the harsh tone and intransigent tactics of his predecessor, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, which have stalled nuclear negotiations and cut off relations with most of the developed world. But the question, as always in Iran, is the extent to which a President Rouhani can accomplish these goals.

“It is clear that numerous challenges await him,” said Mirza Agha Motaharinejad, a communications professor who campaigned for Mr. Rouhani in his home province of Semnan. “His political survival starts with who he will pick as cabinet members. The more representatives from different factions, the more support he will have.”

Mr. Rouhani rarely gives one-on-one interviews to reporters.Any Iranian president has to answer to the supreme leader. But that is not the only limitation on his power in the treacherous and complex politics of the Islamic republic. The rise and precipitous fall of Mr. Ahmadinejad stands as a warning of the fleeting nature of a president’s power in Iran.

Mr. Ahmadinejad came to power and was re-elected — fraudulently, most observers said — as the candidate of the traditionalist faction of ultraconservative clerics and Revolutionary Guards commanders. For years he rode high, taking particular pleasure in sticking the West in the eye, denying the Holocaust and challenging Israel. But by the end of his tenure he was locked in bitter infighting with his former patrons and widely unpopular with the public, which blamed him for the country’s economic woes.

Mr. Rouhani was defeated by the traditionalists after the nuclear deal fell apart in 2005 and left, politically speaking, for dead. He was a “sellout” in his critics’ eyes who had committed the unpardonable sin of showing weakness — though his supporters would call it reasonableness — in the negotiations with the Europeans.

In one of the most startling turnarounds in the history of the Islamic republic, he has managed to resurrect his career from that low point, drawing on connections that trace back to the earliest days of the clerical resistance to the shah. If he is to realize his ambitions of redirecting the country to the moderate course he has laid out — stressing greater individual rights, a relaxation of tensions with the West and the repair of Iran’s flagging economy — he will have to contend with precisely those forces that defeated him and Mr. Ahmadinejad.

Mr. Rouhani was born Hassan Fereydoon during the reign of the pro-Western shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, into a family of bazaar businessmen and clerics in a small desert town. A precocious boy, he was only 13 when he began studies at a seminary in the theological center of Qum, where he would befriend many of the men who would later become central figures in the Islamic republic.

“From an early age I would overhear my father telling family members that I would become a cleric,” Mr. Rouhani writes in his memoir, one of six books he has published. “It was my destiny.”

Qum was a hotbed of resistance against the shah, and young Hassan fit right in. “We, the students, were ready to be killed, imprisoned or tortured,” Mr. Rouhani wrote in that same memoir, of the 1963 arrest of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who would later lead the 1979 Islamic Revolution. “We had sticks in our room, and when we heard a car pull up in our alley we were sure we would be arrested.” He was all of 14 at the time.

He later studied law at Tehran University and performed his compulsory military service in Mashhad, where he struck up a friendship with Mr. Khamenei.

In 1978 Mr. Rouhani moved to Britain, taught Islamic jurisprudence at Lancaster University and was set to attend Harvard as a graduate student when the revolution broke out. Instead of Cambridge, Mass., he headed off to Paris to join the exiled Ayatollah Khomeini.

Long known as fiercely intelligent, he became renowned after the revolution for his ability to navigate a system dominated by ideologues, building consensus among many opposing forces. Those close to him describe Mr. Rouhani as the golden boy of the Islamic republic’s close-knit group of leaders and a deal maker who has had a direct hand in most of Iran’s major foreign policy decisions over the past three decades.

He was one of three Iranian officials to meet with the former national security adviser Robert McFarlane when he secretly visited Tehran in 1986 to arrange the arms-for-hostages deal that would later erupt into the Iran-contra scandal. But they caution that he is, above all, a Shiite Muslim cleric who has dedicated his life to the Islamic Revolution, which he will never betray.

“Our opponents are wrong to expect compromises from Rouhani; the sanctions and other pressures will not make us change our stances,” said one of his former closest associates during an interview in Tehran. He requested anonymity because Mr. Rouhani has asked that no one speak in his name. “Rouhani is interested in a dialogue, not a monologue, with the West. He is prepared to reach common ground, but only if the other side is ready to reach common ground.”

In his books on foreign policy, Mr. Rouhani writes that modernity has failed, and that Christians in the West gave in to secularism without a fight. According to him, the United States and the Islamic republic are in permanent conflict. Israel, he writes, is the “axis of all anti-Iranian activities.” Yet he also raises issues like Iran’s massive brain drain and high unemployment figures in a book on the economy, and proposes membership in the World Trade Organization. “We need to keep a good relation with the people; only with them we can continue to resist and confront the U.S.A.,” he wrote in one of his two books on “foreign policy and Islamic thought.”

Nevertheless, diplomats who have faced him in negotiations praised his skills and flexibility. “He is perfectly placed in Iran’s system of power,” said Paul von Maltzahn, a former German ambassador to Iran who met Mr. Rouhani several times. “He is not easily manipulated and assertive.”

The last time they met was during a private visit by the former German foreign minister, Joschka Fischer. Mr. von Maltzahn recalled: “We all had dinner. Mr. Rouhani spoke about Glasgow, where he had studied in the 1990s. He cracked jokes. He’s straightforward, no double dealer.”

During his 16 years as the secretary of Iran’s most important decision organ, the National Security Council, Mr. Rouhani prevented hard-liners from forming an alliance with Saddam Hussein after Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, his associates said. Instead, Iran remained neutral. He directed Iran’s unexpectedly respectful reaction to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and he was instrumental in helping the United States coordinate with opposition forces in Afghanistan and Iraq when the United States invaded those countries.

It was his toughest negotiation — the one that led to the 2003 agreement — that led to his public fall from grace. Is he willing to try again? Analysts say he might well be. “He is a proactive soldier of this system since his youth,” said Nader Karimi Joni, a columnist for reformist papers. “It’s his brainchild, and he feels responsible. Any solutions he will come up with will be within the limits of the system of the Islamic republic.”

Some European diplomats say they fear that Mr. Rouhani was too optimistic in 2003, perhaps getting ahead of most of the leadership. “After a while we started to worry whether he or his team had fully briefed the other leaders,” said one European negotiator, who requested anonymity, not wanting to hurt the chances of success for any coming talks.

But Mr. Rouhani’s associate, who has full knowledge of the talks, disagreed. “Our mistake was that we gave the Europeans too much credit, but they were on the phone with the Americans all the time,” he said. “What matters now is that with Mr. Rouhani’s election a new window of opportunity has opened up for the West. I suggest they seize the moment.”

Libyan protesters storm Islamist offices

July 27, 2013

Libyan protesters storm Islamist offices | The Times of Israel.

Inspired by events in neighboring Egypt, hundreds gather in Tripoli for anti-Islamist demos

July 27, 2013, 7:35 pm
Libyan militias from towns throughout the country's west parade through Tripoli, Libya in February 2012. (photo credit: AP/ Abdel Magid Al Fergany)

Libyan militias from towns throughout the country’s west parade through Tripoli, Libya in February 2012. (photo credit: AP/ Abdel Magid Al Fergany)

TRIPOLI, Libya (AP) — Protesters stormed the offices of Islamist-allied parties in Libya’s main cities on Saturday, angry over the killing of an activist critical of the country’s Muslim Brotherhood group.

Hundreds gathered in the capital Tripoli after dawn prayers, denouncing the Friday shooting death of Abdul-Salam Al-Musmari. They set fire to tires in the street and demanded the dissolution of Islamist parties.

Protesters appeared to be inspired by events in neighboring Egypt, where millions took to the streets Friday to answer a call from the army chief, who said he wanted a mandate to stop “potential terrorism” by supporters of the country’s ousted president, Mohammed Morsi, who hails from the Brotherhood.

“We don’t want the Brotherhood, we want the army and the police,” Libyan protesters chanted, repeating a slogan also used in Egypt. Libya’s nascent security forces are struggling to control the country’s militias, most of whom have roots in the rebel groups that overthrew dictator Moammar Gadhafi in 2011.

Some protesters stormed the headquarters of a Brotherhood-affiliated political party and another Islamist-allied party, destroying furniture. Witnesses say a Brotherhood party office was also stormed in the eastern city of Benghazi.

Al-Musmari, who used to publicly criticize the Muslim Brotherhood, was killed by unknown assailants in a drive-by shooting in Benghazi.

In a statement Saturday, Human Rights Watch urged the Libyan government to “conduct a prompt and thorough investigation” of al-Musmari’s death, believed to be the first targeted killing of a political activist.

“Libya’s fragile transition is at stake if political killings go unpunished,” said Nadim Houry, deputy Middle East and North Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “This makes investigating al-Musmari’s murder all the more urgent.”

Libya’s top religious figure, Grand Mufti Sheikh Sadeq al-Ghariani, warned his countrymen earlier in the week against copying Egypt and bringing down the Libyan government. Morsi, Egypt’s first freely elected president, was ousted by the military on July 3 after millions took to the streets demanding his removal.

Al-Ghariani’s warning was posted Wednesday on his official website against unspecified parties “trying to create crises in electricity and gas, and those taking advantage of tribal loyalties to the ousted dictator Moammar Gadhafi.” Long hours of blackouts and the severe shortage of fuel contributed to Morsi’s unpopularity.

Copyright 2013 The Associated Press.

Netanyahu on prisoner release: Sometimes PMs have to make unpopular choices for good of the country

July 27, 2013

Netanyahu on prisoner release: Sometimes PMs have to make unpopular choices for good of the country | JPost | Israel News.

By JPOST.COM STAFF, KHALED ABU TOAMEH
07/27/2013 20:34
PM writes open letter explaining “incredibly difficult decision” to free 104 prisoners as peace talks gesture; PM set to take issue before cabinet for approval; Kerry informs Abbas that Israel to free prisoners.

Netanyahu and Abbas were unsuccessful in 2010, will this time around be different?

Netanyahu and Abbas were unsuccessful in 2010, will this time around be different? Photo: REUTERS

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu turned to the citizens of Israel in an open letter on Saturday explaining his decision to release Palestinian prisoners as a gesture to the Palestinian Authority ahead of the renewal of peace talks in Washington next week.

Netanyahu will take the decision to free the prisoners before the cabinet on Sunday,  Israeli officials said on Saturday.

Netanyahu has already agreed to free the prisoners, but wanted cabinet approval to help overcome qualms among Israelis about freeing inmates convicted of involvement in lethal attacks, Israeli officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

He said that the plan was to release 104 Palestinian prisoners, not before the talks start, but at stages as they progress.

“This is an incredibly difficult decision. It hurts the bereaved families, it hurts all of the Israeli people and it hurts me very much. It clashes with the most important principle, the principle of justice,” Netanyahu stated.

Netanyahu said that “sometimes prime ministers are forced to make decisions that go against public opinion – when the issue is important for the country.”

Netanyahu addressed the upcoming start of peace talks, saying that “in the next nine months we will determine if across from us is a Palestinian partner that desires a true end to the conflict as we do.”

The prime minister stated that such an end to the conflict would have to ensure security for Israelis and “ensure Israel’s essential national interests.”

Israeli-Arabs reportedly to be freed as well

Ami Palmor, head of the pardons department of the Justice Ministry told the Knesset Interior and Environment Committee last week, that the 82 prisoners Israel intended to release were all Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza who were sentenced for their crimes before the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993.

It was revealed in the Knesset briefing that all of the prisoners to be released had blood on their hands and were serving life sentences.

Israel Radio reported on Saturday that Netanyahu decided to raise the number of prisoners that Israel will release from 82 to 104 after the Palestinians threatened that they would not attend the opening meeting of talksin Washington next week otherwise.

Some of the prisoners to be released were Israeli-Arab prisoners that in the past Israel had refused to free, according to the source.

The decision to release Israeli-Arab prisoners as a goodwill gesture to the Palestinians contravenes Israeli policy not to allow the Palestinian Authority to intervene in Israeli-Arab affairs, the report stressed.

Kerry informs Abbas that Israel to release prisoners

US Secretary of State John Kerry phoned Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas on Friday and informed him of the Israeli government’s decision to release Palestinian prisoners.

Abbas’s spokesman, Nabil Abu Rudaineh, said that Kerry told the PA president that US President Barack Obama’s administration fully supports the resumption of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.

During a meeting with Palestinian journalists in Ramallah, Abbas was quoted as saying that Palestinians should expect “good news” on Sunday regarding the release of Palestinian prisoners.

Abbas refused to elaborate, but told the journalists: “Follow the Israeli media on Sunday and you will hear good news on the prisoners.”

Abbas reiterated his commitment to a two-state solution and said the Palestinians were keen on the success of the peace process.

Opposition to prisoner release within coalition

Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon on Saturday called on fellow Likud ministers to vote against the release of Palestinian security prisoners.

In a letter addressed to Likud ministers, Danon wrote, “This sets a future standard for Israel of far-reaching compromises in the face of ridiculous requests from the other side.”

Danon added, “I call on you to vote against releasing prisoners, but in favor of negotiations without pre-conditions.”

The deputy defense minister stated that there is a “consensus” among Likud members against “the crazy release of dozens of terrorists with the blood of hundreds of Israelis on their hands.”

Danon ended his letter with a call for the release of Israeli agent Jonathan Pollard from prison in the United States.

Ben Hartman and Reuters contributed to this report

Diplomacy: Top EU official says Europe needs Israel

July 27, 2013

Diplomacy: Top EU official says Europe needs Israel | JPost | Israel News.

( As I have maintained before, Israel’s salvation will come not from it’s military might,  but rather from its high tech economy. – JW )

LAST UPDATED: 07/27/2013 17:08
Elmar Brok, head of influential EU Parliament committee, says in a ‘Post’ interview that limiting cooperation with Israel is not in European interests and the EU is not married to the pre-1967 lines.

Netanyahu at meeting with Catherine Ashton, EU High Rep for Foreign Affairs, June 20, 2013.

Netanyahu at meeting with Catherine Ashton, EU High Rep for Foreign Affairs, June 20, 2013. Photo: Courtesy – GPO

With the outbreak of the Six Day War in June 1967, a 21-year-old German student named Elmar Brok wrote to the IDF volunteering his service to protect the Jewish state.

Fortunately, as Brok has related the story a number of times over the years to Israeli officials, the war ended quickly, before the IDF could deal with this request. Forty-six years later, Brok is the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee in the European Parliament, a notoriously difficult forum for Israel in Brussels.

Brok, a German Christian Democrat politician who has served in the European Parliament since 1980, is considered one of the most important figures in the European Parliament, and also one of German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s top foreign policy advisers. He is also considered a friend of Israel.

On a visit this week to Jerusalem and Ramallah, during which – among others – he met Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu for nearly an hour, Brok told The Jerusalem Post that the timing of the publication last week of Europe’s new guidelines for engagement with Israeli entities beyond the Green Line was “catastrophic.”

“Do it three months before, three months afterward, but not that week,” he said of the week in which US Secretary of State John Kerry was struggling mightily to get the Palestinians to return to the negotiating table.

Not only was the timing bad, he said, but the guidelines themselves could be counterproductive for Europe, because they could chase Israel away from projects and programs that are beneficial for Europeans. To hear Israelis, such as Deputy Foreign Minister Ze’ev Elkin, say this is one thing; but to hear influential European politicians like Brok say it is something completely different.

And Brok says it, and he says it publicly and clearly.

THE CONTROVERSIAL GUIDELINES essentially do two things: they concretize in writing what has already been EU practice, that no EU money – in the forms of grants, prizes, or “financial instruments” such as loans – could be used by Israeli entities beyond the pre-1967 lines, including in east Jerusalem and the Golan Heights.

They also specify, however, that the contents of the guidelines will be reflected in future agreements, something known as a “territorial clause.”

There are different ways to word that clause, in a way that Israel could live with it – as was done most recently in the Open Skies aviation agreement – or using terminology that Israel will not be able to stomach.

The Open Skies agreement read: “The application of this agreement is understood to be without prejudice to the status of the territories that came under Israel’s administration after June 1967.”

That is language Israel can live with.

By contrast, the territorial clause of a draft for the next stage of the Euro- Med Youth Program read, “This agreement will be implemented in conformity with the European Union’s position that the territories that came under Israel’s administration in June 1967 are not part of the territory of Israel.”

That is wording Israel will not sign, not the least because it runs contrary to Israel’s own laws – Israel has formally annexed both Jerusalem and the Golan.

This issue will become very relevant next month, when negotiations begin on the EU’s massive 80 billion euro Horizon 2020 innovation flagship program meant to create jobs and fuel economic growth. Israel is the only non- EU country to have been asked to join as a full partner, and is expected to pay some 600 million euros over the next seven years to take part. This is considered a worthwhile investment, however, because for every shekel contributed, it is expected to get back NIS 1.5 in research funds and other inbound investments.

And here, Brok said, the Europeans need to be smart. The new guidelines will not go into effect until January 1, 2014, and in the meantime Israeli and European officials are expected to work on language that both sides can live with. Brok said that the EU position should be one that “takes the peace talks into account,” and also one that does not take up a position that is detrimental to European interests.

“I am not quite sure that it is only an Israeli advantage to have Horizon cooperation,” he said, bluntly. “I think it is a European interest. It would be stupid of us if we do not continue this cooperation. Because it is very much to our advantage.”

Brok acknowledged that “the quality of Israeli research” is among the best in the world, “and it would be stupid from our side to boycott that.” This sentiment, he said, was shared by many EU foreign ministers with whom he met last week.

The guidelines that were published made clear what the European position on the settlements is, Brok said (as if anyone had any doubt). But now when negotiations begin about how to implement those guidelines and the wording of future territorial clauses, it needs to be done in such a way as to not hurt the peace talks, “and that we should not come to the wrong results regarding overall cooperation [with Israel] in research and development.”

Make no mistake, Brok is not opposed to the guidelines. He questions, however, their timing and wants to ensure that the sides come to a “common interpretation” of what they mean and how and where they will be applied.

LIKE ISRAELI OFFICIALS, Brok said the guidelines governing EU contracts and agreements with Israel were drawn up by the EU bureaucracy, which was working off a statement issued by the EU foreign ministers last December.

“The bureacratic machinery has been working on it for six months, and the machinery goes on,” he said over coffee Tuesday in a Jerusalem hotel, just prior to leaving for meetings in Ramallah with the Palestinian leadership.

This type of thing happens very often the world over, he said, explaining the phenomenon of a bureaucracy beginning work on a project, and then once in motion continuing with blinders, seemingly divorced from what is happening around it.

And what was going on outside the offices of the Brussels bureaucracy, he said, was an effort to restart negotiations.

“Since Friday the world is different,” he said of the Kerry announcement to re-launch talks in Washington.

“If the people in Brussels do not understand that, they have no understanding of politics.”

Asked if indeed just the announcement of talks has changed that much, he replied that if the purpose of the guidelines was to “create a certain pressure for peace talks” then now that the talks have been achieved “certain instruments are not helpful anymore.”

In this narrative, then, Kerry’s very announcement of talks – even though no one knows what will be their frame of reference or when they will start in earnest – has already altered the situation and made it a bit more favorable for Israel in Europe.

And if the talks really do get off the ground and begin to move, Brok said “there will be a new political debate in Europe in September.”

BROK SAID THAT the lack of any progress in the “peace process,” the “settlement question,” the “pictures from Gaza – TV pictures speak louder than arguments,” has created a negative “emotional dimension” for Israeli in the European Parliament.

“People say that David became Goliath,” he said. “More and more people think that.”

Brok said he did not share that attitude for a couple reasons. “First of all I hope that I think a little bit more strategically,” he said. “And secondly for historical reasons. I feel my responsibility to this state, as a German.”

Asked to explain why other members of the European Parliament, whether from Germany or other countries that carry a heavy historical burden toward the Jewish people, don’t share that same sentiment, he replied, “It has to do with time. You have young members of the European Parliament who are 30- to 35-years-old, for them [the Holocaust] is a far, distant history.”

Brok insisted that the parliament – a parliament that took close to three long years to ratify the ACAA free trade agreement in pharmaceutics with Israelbecause of political problems in getting it passed – is not anti-Israel. (All EU-Israel agreements must now be ratified by the European Parliament, one reason for that body’s importance to Israel.) “There is a very broad majority [in the parliament] to secure the State of Israel, but it feels the secure State of Israel should do more in order to find an agreement,” he said. “So in that sense it is not an anti-Israel development. Ninety percent in the European Parliament support the Jewish state of Israel.”

Challenged that many Israelis find hollow European protestations that they are concerned about Israeli security – at a time when it takes them nearly two decades to realize Hezbollah is a terrorist organization and when they are trying to press Israel back to 1967 lines which most Israeli leaders believe are indefeasible frontiers – Brok replied that there was now broad international agreement for a two-state solution.

“When we talk about the 1967 lines, that does not mean that at the end of the negotiations it must be the 1967 line completely,” he said.

“We believe that is the international line, the starting point, but I believe that the final drawing of the line will solely be the result of negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. It is not for us to judge that – if you reach an agreement on another line that is fine.”

Israel, Brok said, mistakenly believes that when Europe talks about the pre-1967 lines, “it is to the last millimeter of the 1967 lines.

That is not the case, there must be possibilities for compromise that takes the developments of the last two decades into account.”

If that is the case, he is asked, then why not – in the plethora of statements and guidelines that the Europeans issue on this subject – spell that out? Why not say, for instance, that the EU recognizes that the Western Wall and Ramat Eshkol are going to be a part of Israel, as is Ma’aleh Adumim and Gush Etzion? “That would be seen by the other side as already making a decision that this will be the new borders,” he said, adding that this is something that simply could not be done.

BROK IS MORE SANGUINE than many about the prospect of the Kerry-initiated talks actually going anywhere.

He said that the “new international context,” especially the specter of a nuclear Iran, may be a new element that can lead to success where other such attempts have failed.

“You have new a new international context that could create a political momentum for a solution,” he said.

Asked to elaborate, he explained that the Arab states – like Israel and the West – do not want Iran to achieve nuclear capability. “There is a broad possible unspoken coalition” he said.

But what is the connection to the Palestinian issue? “Things often interconnect,” he said, hesitant to elaborate any further.

“I think there might be some Arab countries – because of the Iran question now – who might be more cooperative in international affairs, and who can perhaps be helpful this way [on the Israel-Palestinian issue].”

“I do not know whether that momentum is enough,” he added.

“But let’s try. If you say at the very beginning that it will fail, then it will fail.”

In the meantime, he advised, Israel would be wise – if indeed the talks take off – to send representatives to the European Parliament to “explain why you want to have a deal, and to show that they want support for that deal.”

“Take Europe emotionally on board as part of the peace process,” he said. “Let it come from Israel – that would then be very helpful for the whole political environment.”

‘Israel agrees to release 24 Israeli-Arab pre-Oslo prisoners’

July 27, 2013

‘Israel agrees to release 24 Israeli-Arab pre-Oslo prisoners’ | The Times of Israel.

If true, Israel Radio report means all ‘serious’ security inmates, including major terrorists, will go free as new talks move forward

July 27, 2013, 1:57 pm
Palestinian school children, in a Hamas-organized procession, march in solidarity with prisoners held in Israel (Photo credit: Sliman Khader/ Flash 90)

Palestinian school children, in a Hamas-organized procession, march in solidarity with prisoners held in Israel (Photo credit: Sliman Khader/ Flash 90)

Israel has agreed to release 24 Israeli Arab prisoners serving life sentences who were incarcerated before the 1993 Oslo Accords, having already agreed to free 82 pre-Oslo Palestinian prisoners, Israel Radio reported Saturday. The releases would be carried out in phases, the radio report said, in parallel with progress at Israeli-Palestinian peace talks which are set to resume next week.

If true, this would appear to mean all the pre-Oslo prisoners would go free as the talks continue. The Palestinian Authority had long sought the prisoners’ release as a precondition for resuming talks, a demand Israel refused. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had reportedly long been offering to free several dozen of the pre-Oslo prisoners, many of whom were convicted for terrorist crimes involving multiple murders, but had balked at releasing them all.

As recently as last week, officials in Jerusalem said Israel would release the 82 veteran Palestinian prisoners, gradually, during the negotiations but was refusing to release the Israeli Arab prisoners.

For his part, PA President Mahmoud Abbas, speaking to Arabic media Saturday in an apparent reference to the freeing of the prisoners, said he was expecting “good news” on Sunday.

At the regular cabinet meeting on Sunday, Netanyahu is set to authorize a ministerial team to handle the release of the Palestinian prisoners.

US Secretary of State John Kerry announced in Amman on July 19 that a basis for the resumption of negotiations had been worked out and that Israeli and Palestinian negotiators could be expected in Washington within a week or so. However, in the following days Palestinian officials claimed that the framework for the negotiations was not fully resolved — and restated their demands for the release of pre-Oslo Palestinian prisoners and for the use of the pre-1967 lines as the basis for negotiations on a Palestinian state.

An Arab member of Knesset told The Times of Israel on Thursday that Kerry had promised Palestinian officials that negotiations would not resume before Israel agreed to release all the 100-plus pre-Oslo prisoners. He said this group included 21 prisoners who are either Israeli citizens or Jerusalem residents and whom Israel had steadfastly refused to free as a goodwill measure to boost negotiations.

MK Ibrahim Sarsur (Ra’am-Ta’al) said that intense pressure exerted by Palestinian politicians and Arab Israeli members of Knesset succeeded in convincing the Americans to accept the Palestinian precondition of releasing all Palestinian security prisoners sentenced in Israel before the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993. He made the comments after a press conference Thursday that was organized by the Arab Union of Prisoners and Liberated Prisoners, an NGO that deals with incarcerated Palestinians and their families within Israel.

“An hour ago, Kerry asked the Palestinian side to send him the list [of prisoners] after reviewing it. He promised that he will not summon the sides to the first meeting of negotiations before granting the Palestinians Israel’s agreement to release the full list, not part of the list,” Sarsur told The Times of Israel following the press event.

Israeli Minister of Intelligence and International Relations Yuval Steinitz told Israel Radio on July 20 that Israel would release prisoners involved in “serious cases” as part of the renewed talks, but did not specify an exact number of prisoners. Israeli media later cited 82 as the number to be released in four phases, as negotiations progress. That number reportedly excluded 14 prisoners with Israeli citizenship and 7 Jerusalem residents.

Out of a total of roughly 5,000 Palestinians currently serving time in Israeli jails on security convictions, 140 hold Israeli citizenship. Fourteen of those prisoners were sentenced before the Oslo accords, signed between Israel and the PLO.

Report: Israel increases number of prisoners to be freed before talks start

July 27, 2013

Report: Israel increases number of prisoners to be freed before talks start | JPost | Israel News.

( My gut feeling is that this otherwise inexplicable capitulation on the part of Netanyahu to unacceptable demands of the PA means only one thing.  The attack on Iran is happening VERY soon.  Bear in mind, I’ve always been wrong in the past on this issue.  – JW )

Please check the comments on this post.

By JPOST.COM STAFF
LAST UPDATED: 07/27/2013 14:30
Decision comes after Palestinians threaten to scuttle talks.

Netanyahu and Abbas were unsuccessful in 2010, will this time around be different?

Netanyahu and Abbas were unsuccessful in 2010, will this time around be different? Photo: REUTERS

Israel has decided to raise the number of prisoners that it will release from 82 to 104 as a condition for the Palestinians to return to the negotiating table Israel Radio reported on Saturday.

Israel increased the number of people to be freed after the Palestinians threatened that they would not return to the opening meeting of talks that is scheduled to take place next week in Washington according to the report that cited a source with knowledge of the negotiations.

Some of the prisoners to be released were Israeli prisoners that in the past Israel had refused to free, according to the source.

The decision to release Israeli prisoners as goodwill gestures to the Palestinians contravenes Israeli policy not to allow the Palestinian Authority to intervene in Israeli-Arab affairs, the report stressed.

Ami Palmor, head of the pardons department of the Justice Ministry told the Knesset Interior and Environment Committee last week, that the 82 prisoners Israel intended to release were all Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza who were sentenced for their crimes before the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993.

It was revealed in the Knesset briefing that all of the prisoners to be released had blood on their hands and were serving life sentences.

Abbas says Israel to make prisoner announcement

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said “happy news” about the Palestinian prisoners would be announced Sunday, Israel Radio reported quoting the Xinhua News Agency.

“You should follow the Israeli media tomorrow, because there will be happy  announcements with regard to the prisoners,” Abbas said at a press conference in Ramallah on Saturday.

Abbas confirmed that the peace talks would be officially resumed on Tuesday and that former US ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk was chosen by the White House as the US representative to the talks.

To those Palestinians opposed to the resumption of talks he said, “There were also those who were opposed to the move to seek UN recognition and as at it turned out that opposition was unfounded.”  Abbas was referring  to the Palestinian Authority’s 2012 decision to seek non-member observer status at the UN.

Ben Hartman contributed to this report.

Up to 100 Muslim Brotherhood protesters reported killed in Cairo rally

July 27, 2013

Up to 100 Muslim Brotherhood protesters reported killed in Cairo rally.

DEBKAfile Special Report July 27, 2013, 11:02 AM (IDT)
Scenes at the Muslim Brotherhood rally in Cairo

Scenes at the Muslim Brotherhood rally in Cairo

The Moslem Brotherhood claimed up to 100 dead and 1,000 injured by live fire early Saturday, July 27 as their supporters rallied around Rabaa al-Adawiya mosque in Nasser City.  These figures are confirmed by medical sources. Earlier, Interior Minister Mohammed Ibrahim vowed to end the sit-in at the mosque calling for the reinstatement of ousted president Mohamed Morsi and restore order to Cairo streets after the two massive rival demonstrations Friday night. The military claim millions rallied in support of the army in Tahrir Square.  Eilat residents woke up Saturday morning to the sound of unexplained explosions from Sinai.

debkafile reported Friday night:

Hundreds of thousands of demonstrators filled Cairo’s streets and squares Friday, July 26 in rival rallies shortly after deposed president Mohamed Morsi was formally charged and detained for 15 days. Tahrir Square was packed with crowds responding to Defense Minister Gen. Abdel Fattah El-Sisi’s call for a mandate to support the military fight on “terrorists.” Another huge crowd of Morsi supporters packed the streets around the Rabaa al-Adawiya mosque in Nasser City.
Instead of directing their ire at the overthrown Muslim Brotherhood, the pro-military demonstrators shouted “Bye Bye America!” as huge placards waved over their heads depicting as a threesome Gen. El-Sisi, Vladimir Putin and Gemal Abdel Nasser, who ruled Egypt in the 60s in close alliance with the Soviet Union.
Their rivals in a separate part of Cairo chanted “Sisi out! Morsi is president! Down with the army!”
In Alexandria, five people were killed in clashes between Muslim Brotherhood supporters and opponents.

The anti-American banners represented a message: No matter if President Barack Obama denies the Egyptian people US support because of the military’s steps against the Muslim Brotherhood, Cairo has an option in Moscow.

Reports began appearing Friday morning on the social networks including Facebook from sources close to Putin that Moscow is considering supplying Egypt with advanced fighter bombers to replace the F-16 planes, whose delivery Obama suspended Wednesday, July 24. This was a gesture to show the US President’s displeasure over Gen El-Sisi’s rejection of the demand to release the ousted president and integrate the Muslim Brotherhood in the interim government.
The military gave the Muslim Brotherhood an ultimatum to endorse the new situation by Friday. The Brotherhood, whose supporters have maintained a sit-in in Nasser City for 20 days, did not respond.

The military accordingly gave the screw another turn.

A Cairo investigating judge Friday ordered deposed president Morsi detained for 15 days pending investigation into charges of plotting with the Palestinian Hamas to orchestrate a jailbreak during the 2011 revolution and conniving with Hamas in killing police officers and soldiers.

He has been held at an unknown location since the coup.
These charges carry potential death sentences.

They relate to the attack by armed men who on Aug. 5, 2012 killed 16 Egyptian border policemen in their camp in northern Sinai near Rafah. The prosecution claims to have evidence that the raid was plotted by Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood to depict the Egyptian military as a spent force. That attack kicked off the current armed Salafist mutiny against Egyptian military and police targets in Sinai

The other charge relates to the raid on Wadi Natroun prison at the tail end of the 2011 uprising against Hosni Mubarak, which broke out of jail thousands of inmates including Morsi and other Muslim Brotherhood leaders.
According to debkafile’s intelligence sources, the jailbreak was executed by special networks of Hizballah and Hamas which had been planted in Cairo and Suez Canal cities for subversion and terrorism.
The radical Hamas, offspring and ally of the Egyptian Brotherhood, is now solidly in the military regime’s sights as a hostile entity.

The military takeover of power in July 3 is gaining the aspect of a neo-Nasserist revolution. Many Egyptians are beginning to turn to Moscow in search of their country’s primary world ally rather than Washington. They have taken note that Putin has shown himself to be the foe of the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria as well as Egypt.