Archive for the ‘Israel’ category

« WarSclerotic home page
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Egypt-Qatar rapprochement rattles Hamas

December 31, 2014

Egypt-Qatar rapprochement rattles Hamas, Al-Monitor, Adnan Abu Amer, December 30, 2014

(These guys could form several pretty adequate stand-up comedy teams.

— DM)

Egyptian woman gestures during a protest against what they say is Qatar's backing of ousted Egyptian president Mohamed Mursi's government, outside the Qatari Embassy in CairoAn Egyptian woman gestures during a demonstration against what protesters call Qatar’s backing of ousted Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi’s government, outside the Qatari Embassy in Cairo, Nov. 30, 2013. (photo by REUTERS)

At a time when Hamas is mending its relationship with Iran, Egypt and Qatar are also in the process of rapprochement after more than a year of tension. Resumed ties between them will likely have an impact on Hamas, but questions remain as to whether the Palestinian Islamist movement stands to gain or lose from this important regional development.

Hamas waited several days to announce its final position on the return of positive relations between Doha and Cairo on Dec. 20, when President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi met the envoy of Qatar’s emir in Cairo, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al-Thani, the minister’s assistant for International Cooperation Affairs.

On Dec. 28, senior Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahar welcomed the Egyptian-Qatari convergence and denied Qatar was pressuring the Hamas leadership to leave Doha. He also denied reports that Qatar was planning to suspend its support for Hamas over the warming of ties with Egypt, reiterating that Hamas supports the unity of Arab countries to serve the Palestinian cause.

Yousef Rizqa, the former minister of information and political adviser to former Gaza Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, said in an interview with Al-Monitor, “The Egyptian-Qatari rapprochement serves the interest of the Palestinian national project, and Hamas has no concerns about its relations with Doha being harmed after the Doha-Cairo rapprochement because the movement is not a party to the internal Arab conflict, and it is accepted by the Arab capitals.”

However, an anonymous Egyptian official said in Dec. 26 press statement that Doha informed Hamas leaders that it would temporarily suspend its support for the movement in a bid to pressure Hamas to change its policies against Cairo.

Husam Badran, spokesman for Hamas and a resident of Doha, told Al-Monitor, “There is no suspension of the Qatari financial support for the movement, since their relationship is ongoing.” But Palestinian Minister of Labor Maamoun Abu Shahla revealed Dec. 28 that Qatar had postponed the financial grant supposed to be sent to Gaza’s state workers.

Rizqa neither confirmed nor denied this report, but he told Al-Monitor that Qatar has not cut its support and relationship with Hamas over the rapprochement with Egypt, saying, “The Hamas-Doha relationship is stable and Qatar’s support for the movement is sustained and has never ceased. Moreover, Qatar’s position on Hamas is strategic.”

It is worth noting that Hamas’ fear of Qatar halting its financial support for the movement at Egypt’s request coincides with its renewed attempt to improve ties with Iran, as well as political head Khaled Meshaal’s recent visit to Turkey. Hamas may be reaching out to possible alternatives for regional support should Doha downgrade its ties with the movement in a “secret” deal with Cairo.

The Palestinian Authority did not express a position on the Egyptian-Qatari rapprochement, but on Dec. 25 Ambassador Hazem Abu Shanab, a member of the Revolutionary Council of Fatah, ruled out the consideration that the Egyptian-Qatari convergence would contribute to the improvement of relations between Hamas and Cairo, because this depends on how Cairo decides to deal with the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates, such as Hamas.

This prompted the Egyptian official to reveal Dec. 26, also on condition of anonymity, that Hamas demanded Doha mediate with Cairo to calm the atmosphere with Hamas, as the movement expressed its goodwill toward overcoming the tension with Cairo.

A senior Hamas official told Al-Monitor on condition of anonymity that Hamas is analyzing the extent of Doha’s ability to influence Cairo on reconciling with the movement. Should the rupture between Hamas and Egypt continue irrespective of the Doha-Cairo rapprochement, this would be interpreted by Hamas as being made a scapegoat.

A former member of the Qatari Shura Council, asking not to be named, revealed to Al-Monitor, “There have been contacts made between the Hamas leadership, represented by Meshaal, and Emir Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani, among other Qatari officials. They discussed the rapprochement with Egypt. Meshaal told the emir that he fully supports any Qatari effort to unify Arab positions.”

The Qatari official told Al-Monitor by phone from Doha, “Meshaal received a formal Qatari pledge not to attack the Hamas leadership or tighten the noose around its neck in Doha in exchange for rapprochement with Cairo. This is because Qatar never establishes relations based on bargaining between one party or another, and our relationship with Hamas will continue to exist.”

Interestingly, coinciding with the rapprochement, Egyptian media outlets reported that Cairo threatened to cut ties with Hamas on Dec. 26 unless 13 accused members of the movement were extradited to Egypt. The 13 were accused of involvement in armed operations in Egypt, and allegedly, Egyptian authorities have insisted that extradition proceedings must conclude before they consider improving relations with Hamas.

On Dec. 28, Zahar denied Egyptian media reports that Hamas interfered in Egypt’s domestic affairs.

A senior Hamas official in Gaza who spoke to Al-Monitor on condition of anonymity also denied the reports, saying, “Egypt made no formal request to extradite any Hamas member, and these accusations were featured across all media outlets, which only creates more tensions,” he said.

Ahmed Yousef, a senior Hamas official, told Al-Monitor that he hopes “the breakthrough in the Doha-Cairo relations will positively affect Hamas’ relations with Egypt and that Qatar would do its best to alleviate the tension between Gaza and Cairo,” adding, “The Hamas and Cairo dossier is likely to be opened after the meeting of Emir Tamim with Sisi.” He denied the existence of contacts between the movement and Egypt following the Doha-Cairo rapprochement.

The timing of the Egyptian-Qatari warming may have come as a surprise to Hamas, which took nearly a week to announce that it welcomes the move, making sure that it would not come at its expense. The atmosphere prevailing within Hamas is still ambiguous over whether the Qatari position toward the movement will be affected, despite promises made by Doha to the contrary. Hamas knows that the pressure exerted on Qatar may be stronger than its ability to resist.

 

Categories: Egypt, Fatah, Gaza, Hamas, Iran, Israel, Middle East, Qatar
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

Turkey: America’s unacknowledged problem

December 31, 2014

Turkey: America’s unacknowledged problem, Israel Hayom, Prof. Efraim Inbar, December 31, 2014

(The foreign policy of the Obama administration is difficult to understand. What might be the reasoning behind its apparently continuing support for Islamic Turkey, a bitter foe of Israel? What are the administration’s interests in the Middle East?– DM)

It is not clear why Washington puts up with such Turkish behavior. The Obama ‎administration seems to be unable to call a spade a spade. It refuses to acknowledge ‎that Turkey is a Trojan horse in NATO, and that Ankara undermines American interests ‎in the Middle East and elsewhere.‎

***************

Turkey is a NATO ally, and U.S. President Barack Obama has called Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan his best friend. But Erdogan-led Turkey does not ‎behave as an ally or a friend of the U.S. This is not a new development.‎

Erdogan and his Islamist party, the Justice and Development Party (AKP), have ruled Turkey since 2002. Erdogan’s ‎Turkey has gradually distanced itself from the West, adopting domestic and foreign ‎policies fueled by Ottoman and Islamist impulses. ‎

Turkey has been on the road to an authoritarian regime for several years. Infringements ‎on human rights have gradually increased. In truth, Turkey has never had a political ‎system with checks and balances able to constrain attempts to consolidate power ‎around one politician. In recent years, Erdogan has weakened further the few ‎constitutional constraints against “Putinization” of the Turkish political system. ‎

The longer Erdogan rules, the more power-hungry he seems. His authoritarian ‎personality becomes clearer every day. The press is hardly free. Erdogan arrests even ‎Islamist journalists who are critical of his policies. His party has infiltrated the judicial ‎system and the police. Foci of power, such as the bureaucracy, the banking system, ‎industrial associations and trade unions, have been mostly co-opted by the AKP. ‎Opposition political parties are largely discredited. The military, once active in politics ‎as the defender of the Kemalist secular tradition, has been successfully sidelined. ‎

From a realpolitik perspective, the domestic political developments, deplorable as they ‎may be in Turkey, could be ignored by the democratic West as long as Ankara ‎continues to be a useful ally. Unfortunately, Turkey no longer qualifies as a trusted ‎ally. ‎

‎The most recent examples of nefarious Turkish behavior are its support of Islamic State and ‎Hamas. Turkey is playing a double game on the issue of Islamic State. It pretends to ‎cooperate with the U.S. policy in the attempt to contain radical Islam, but actually ‎Turkey supports the radical group. It allows passage of volunteers through Turkish territory to join ‎Islamic State in Iraq. The group gets logistical support via Turkey, and sends its wounded militants for ‎treatment in Turkey. Turkish military forces stood idly by the besieged city of Kobani, ‎just across the Turkish border, while the Islamists killed Kurdish fighters. Finally, ‎Turkey denies the American air force access to Turkish bases, forcing the U.S. to use far‎away bases when attacking Islamic State targets. ‎

Turkey is also openly supporting another radical Islamist organization, Hamas. ‎Despite the fact that the West regards Hamas a terrorist organization, Ankara regularly ‎hosts Hamas representatives to meet the highest Turkish dignitaries. Hamas, an ‎offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, has a rabid anti-American position. Moreover, ‎Salah al-Aruri, a senior Hamas operative, operates out of Istanbul. Recently, the ‎Turkish branch of Hamas was involved in a series of attempts to carry out terrorist ‎attacks against Israel, and in orchestrating a coup against the current leadership of the ‎Palestinian Authority.‎

Such behavior should not surprise policy makers in Washington. In 2003, Ankara ‎denied the request from Washington to open its territory so that the U.S. military could ‎attack Saddam Hussein’s forces from two separate fronts.‎

AKP-ruled Ankara also defied American preferences on Syria, a country allied with ‎radical Iran and on the American list of states supporting terrorism. In January 2004, ‎Bashar Assad became the first Syrian president ever to visit Turkey. In April 2009, the ‎two states conducted their first ever joint military exercise. No other NATO member ‎had such close relations with the authoritarian regime in Damascus, which has been ‎closely allied with Iran for several decades.‎

Turkey further deviated from the Western consensus in 2008 by hosting Sudanese ‎President Omar Hassan al-Bashir twice. Bashir, who was charged with war crimes and ‎genocide in Darfur, presided over an Islamist regime. ‎

Turkey even welcomed the president of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Mahmoud ‎Ahmadinejad, for a visit in August 2008. No Western country has issued such an ‎invitation to the Iranian leader. Additionally, Erdogan congratulated Ahmadinejad ‎immediately after his re-election in June 2009. When it comes to Iran’s nuclear threat, ‎Ankara, unlike its NATO allies, has refused to adopt the U.S. stance on harsher ‎sanctions, fearing in part the economic consequences of such steps. In June 2010, ‎Turkey voted at the U.N. Security Council against a U.S.-sponsored resolution meant to ‎impose a new round of sanctions on Iran.‎

Turkey also has consistently defied advice from Washington to tone down its anti-‎Israel statements and mend relations with an important American ally. All American ‎efforts in this direction have failed.‎

There is also a clear divergence between the U.S. and Turkey on important global issues ‎such as Russia and China. For example, U.S. wanted to send ships into the Black Sea via ‎the Bosporus Strait during the Georgia war in August 2008. Turkey flatly denied ‎several such requests on the pretext that the military vessels were too large. Moreover, ‎Turkey proposed the creation of a regional security framework involving Turkey, ‎Russia, Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan that left out a NATO role. More blatantly, ‎Turkey has failed to participate in the Western economic sanctions imposed on Russia ‎during the recent Ukraine crisis.‎

Dissonance exists also with regards to China. While the U.S. fears the rise of China, ‎Turkey sees this country as a potential economic partner and not a problem. It held ‎military exercises with China. Ankara even considered purchasing anti-aircraft systems ‎from Beijing, an incredibly brazen position for a NATO member.

It is not clear why Washington puts up with such Turkish behavior. The Obama ‎administration seems to be unable to call a spade a spade. It refuses to acknowledge ‎that Turkey is a Trojan horse in NATO, and that Ankara undermines American interests ‎in the Middle East and elsewhere.‎

Categories: Antisemitism, Foreign policy, Hamas, Human rights, Iran, Islamic State, Israel, Kurds, Middle East, Obama administration
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Exclusive: Terror Org. Harbored by Pakistani Gov’t Now Backs ISIS

December 29, 2014

Exclusive: Terror Org. Harbored by Pakistani Gov’t Now Backs ISIS, Clarion Project, Ryan Mauro, December 29, 2014

Hafiz-Saeed-IPHafiz Saeed, leader of the Jamaat-ut-Dawa terror network has a $10 million bounty on his head issued by the U.S. government.

Saeed is also on record as criticizing the Islamic State for massacring Muslims as “apostates” and suggested it should focus on destroying Israel. Earlier this month, he said he’d say to the Islamic State, “I invite you, you are sitting near the Israel boarder, go and destroy the Israeli Jewish [sic].”

*************

The Clarion Project has learned from a first-hand source in Pakistan that the leader of Jamaat-ut-Dawa, a major terrorist group harbored by the Pakistani government, expressed support for the Islamic State in a recent sermon.

The story breaks as Pakistani embassy is condemning the television show Homeland for depicting Pakistani government officials as complicit in terrorism.

The Clarion Project’s source, whose identity has been verified and will be referred to as “Aamir,” recently attended a public sermon by Jamaat-ut-Dawa (JUD) leader Hafiz Muhammad Saeed at the group’s Jamia Markaz al-Qadsi headquarters in Lahore. JUD is a rebranding of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LET). The group is best known for the 2008 attacks in Mumbai, India that killed over 150 innocents.

The U.S. State Department lists JUD/LET as a Foreign Terrorist Organization and says it has links to Harakat ul-Jihad-i-Islami in Bangladesh, the Indian Mujahideen and Jaish-e-Mohammed. The U.S. Treasury Department says it works with Al-Qaeda, the Taliban and the Haqqani Network and targets U.S. and Afghan forces.

The event was heavily guarded with Saeed’s own security team equipped with assault rifles. The bulk of the sermon was dedicated to promoting jihad against the U.S. and India in order to “save Islam.” Saeed explicitly told attendees to donate to jihad and even recommended registering at a website to fight. Other reports have confirmed the placement of donation boxes for jihad at his events.

Saeed said that the current jihad against America is the same one that was waged against the Soviet Union and that the U.S. is already showing it will suffer the same fate. He boasted that America is so intimidated by him that it is even afraid of his name. Attendees responded with chants of jihad.

Aamir’s report matches Saeed’s bravado. After the U.S. announced a $10 million award for his information leading to his arrest, he held a public rally next to a Pakistani base that is only 40 minutes from the U.S. embassy.

“America should give that reward money to me,” Saeed joked. “I am here. I am visible.”

According to Aamir, Saeed explicitly endorsed jihad against the U.S. in Afghanistan, against India in Kashmir and against the U.S. in Iraq, where American forces are battling the Islamic State.

Saeed’s group is taking a similar stance as other Al-Qaeda-linked groups in endorsing the Islamic State as a group but stopping short of granting legitimacy to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as a caliph.

However, Saeed is also on record as criticizing the Islamic State for massacring Muslims as “apostates” and suggested it should focus on destroying Israel. Earlier this month, he said he’d say to the Islamic State, “I invite you, you are sitting near the Israel boarder, go and destroy the Israeli Jewish [sic].”

What Saeed said to an attendee indicates he is privately more supportive of the Islamic State than his public speeches reveal. Someone from the audience approached Saeed about his implied declaration of the Islamic State as an ally and asked about the group’s presence in Pakistan.

The source was shocked at Saeed’s answer. He said that the Islamic State represents pure Islam and predicted that it would take over Pakistan and seize its nuclear weapons. Saeed emphasized that the Islamic State means no harm towards Sunnis and so it should not be feared.

The immediate focus on nuclear weapons is in line with previous comments. In June, Saeed praised Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal and he took part in a rally in May celebrating the anniversary of Pakistan’s first nuclear weapons test.

In 2011, Saeed and another JUD leader said at a rally that Pakistan must wage jihad against India over Kashmir, even if it means nuclear war. Saeed has reportedly said that Pakistan should share its nuclear weapons with other Islamic countries. Abdul-Qadeer Khan, the “father” of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons arsenal, is linked to JUD/LET.

Aamir said that Islamist groups in the country are becoming more supportive of the Islamic State group, even if they don’t swear allegiance to it or endorse al-Baghdadi as caliph. Increasing numbers of individuals are pledging to it and even putting pro-Islamic State bumper stickers on their cars, he said.

Even tepid support from JUD would dramatically boost the Islamic State’s fortunes in Pakistan and Afghanistan, where its support is already rising. The Islamic State has been endorsed by the Jundullah terrorist group and six Pakistani Taliban commanders have sworn allegiance. It is also approaching Lashkar-e-Jhangv.

JUD is considered the “most dangerous terrorist group operating in South Asia” besides Al-Qaeda. It has been estimated to have 150,000 members, but a Pakistani journalist named Arif Jamal who wrote a book about JUD/LET says it commands at least 500,000 armed men.

It operates like a “state within a state” in Pakistan. It has boasted of having over 200 schools, as well as hospitals, charities, mosques and even ambulances and blood banks. The group has over 2,000 doctorsin its medical services and 60,000 subscribers to its monthly magazine published in Urdu.

In 1998, Saeed vowed his group would “ultimately plant the flag of Islam on [New] Delhi, Tel Aviv and Washington. All evil in the world emanated from the White House, which would be blown up…”

Its fierce Islamism and anti-Americanism creates a pool of recruits for groups like the Islamic State and encourages homegrown terrorism. It has an English website and Jamal says it has a major presence in the United Kingdom and a European headquarters in Paris.

“The U.S. and British governments have both acquired overwhelming evidence that ‘homegrown’ terror cells seeking instruction at ‘real’ terrorist training camps frequently end up at either facilities run by LET or JEM [Jaish-e-Mohammed]. JEM is essentially seen as an equal substitute for LET if the latter is unavailable,” says terrorism expert Evan Kohlmann.

The revelation that Saeed and JUD is speaking supportively of the Islamic State is an embarrassment for Pakistan when its government is railing against the American television show Homeland for presenting the Pakistani government as a sponsor of terrorism.

Aamir said the world needs to focus on the entire Pakistani infrastructure that promotes a “fascist totalitarian ideology.”

He named JUD, Jaish-e-Mohammed, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, Tehreek-e-Nafaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi and Tablighi Jamaat as Islamist groups who openly promote this ideology in Pakistan.

The madrasses indoctrinate children with a “sense of siege” by constantly saying that Islam and Muslims everywhere are facing a dire threat from non-Muslim oppressors and that only Muslims are fit to rule.

He said anti-Semitism is common in their education and that infidel adversaries are portrayed as cowards who run from confrontations with devout Muslims. There are even prayers for the elimination of Israel and poetry about jihad.

The Islamist clerics often preach that “Islam is a religion of peace,” but that does not mean non-violence. The violent jihad waged by “peaceful” Muslims is a response to the oppression of Zionists,infidels and kuffars. These same mosques will have copies of “44 Ways to Support Jihad” by Anwar al-Awlaki, for example.

When these clerics do condemn terrorism committed by Muslim extremists, it is framed as a byproduct of non-Muslim aggression (especially U.S. drone strikes) or even the work of an anti-Islam conspiracy.

Aamir expressed deep concern about the negative impact on society and especially women due to the Islamists’ use of sexual propaganda in indoctrinating boys before they even reach puberty. He said that stories of the Taliban and other terrorists’ sexually abusing boys are not hard to come by.

Pakistan’s status as an “ally” must not depend on its arrests of Al-Qaeda leaders like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed or its offensive against the Pakistani Taliban in North Waziristan. This is done because of their attacks inside Pakistan and is not part of a strategy against all Islamist terrorists and radicals.

From 2002 through 2014, Pakistan has been the recipient of $28 billion in U.S. aid. If Pakistan wants to be an ally of the U.S. and continue to reap those benefits, it needs to dismantle JUD and every other Islamist terrorist network operating from within its borders.

As it stands now, T.V. shows like Homeland are closer to reality than fiction.

Categories: Islamic slaughter, Islamic State, Israel, Pakistan, Terrorism
Tags: , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

Mahmoud Abbas: Failing the Palestinians and Peace

December 29, 2014

Mahmoud Abbas: Failing the Palestinians and Peace, Front Page Magazine, , December 29, 2014

Mahmoud Abbas

[T]he increased authoritarianism of Abu Mazen is reflected in a recent survey by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research. It indicates that 66% of Palestinians are afraid to criticise Abu Mazen and the PA, and 80% consider the PA institutions to be corrupt and infected with nepotism.

***************

Mahmoud Abbas, (aka Abu Mazen) has been a failure as the Palestinian “Rais.” He failed to lead the Palestinian Authority (PA) toward peace with Israel, and he mismanaged the alleged goal to achieve statehood for the Palestinians. Instead of facing the tough issues and making compromises required in negotiating peace and statehood with the Israelis, Abbas chose an alliance with the Gaza controlled terrorist group Hamas. Following Abbas’ pact with Hamas last April, Israel broke off peace negotiations with the Palestinians, just days before the talks brokered by Secretary of State John Kerry were scheduled to expire.

Abbas isn’t only confusing Israelis, Americans, and is his Europeans patrons, he is perplexing his own Palestinian consituents. Following last summer’s Gaza War between Hamas and Israel, Abbas threatened to join the International Criminal Court (ICC) and saught to indict Israel on war crimes. PA Foreign Minister Riad al-Maliki met with the Chief Prosecutor of the ICC last August to explore ways of joining the court by PA President Abbas signing the Rome Statute.  When, however, the U.S. Congress threatened to cut off all funding to Palestine if Abbas filed war crimes charges against Israel, Abbas backed off. At the same time though, Israel’s Prime Minister threatened to counter-sue, alleging that the rockets fired by Hamas terrorists into Israeli civilian areas constituted “double war” crimes.

The Israeli Law Center called Shurat-HaDin, led by Nitsana Darshan-Leitner submitted a complaint against Mahmoud Abbas in the ICC for “war crimes.” The complaint claims that Abbas may be tried for his responsibility in the missile attacks targeting Israeli cities, executed by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), which Abbas heads. It charges that Fatah, also led by Abbas, was responsible for several missile attacks on Israeli cities. Darshn-Leitner pointed out that Fatah leader Abbas may be tried by the ICC. Abbas is a citizen of Jordan and Jordan is a member-state of the ICC. The ICC has jurisdiction over crimes committed by a citizen of a member state. Darshan-Leitner added, the organization “will not allow Fatah to carry out rocket attacks on Israeli population centers, while hypocritically advocating Palestinian membership in the ICC. Abbas falsely believes that alleged crimes against Arabs are the only ones that should be prosecuted.”

A week ago, Abbas threatened again. This time he fingered the security co-ordination with Israel following the death of Ziad Abu Ein, 55, PA Minister without Portfolio. He promptly backtracked. On November 29, 2014, Abbas declared  that if the United Nations Security Council rejects the Palestinian statehood resolution, he will seek membership in the ICC. He said, “We will seek Palestinian membership in international organizations, including the International Criminal Court in the Hague. We will also reassess our ties with Israel, including ending the security cooperation between us.”

Abbas’ latest gambit is a UN Security Council (UNSC) resolution that would force Israel to withdraw from Judea and Samaria (West Bank) within two-years. According to press reports, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry requested to postpone the Palestinian initiative at the UNSC until after the Israeli elections, (March 17, 2015) but the Palestinians refused. PA Foreign Minister Riad al-Maliki intimated to reporters that there was disagreement between the Americans and Palestinians on how the elections in Israel would or wouldn’t advance the PA UNSC resolution. Kerry believed that a UNSC vote before the elections would impact adversely on the winners. In other words, a vote before the elections would strengthen Netanyahu and the Right in Israel. Maliki argued that a vote before January, 2015 would be rather positive.

At a closed meeting last week with 28 EU ambassadors, John Kerry revealed that he was asked by former Israeli president Shimon Peres and Tzipi Livni to prevent the Palestinian initiative at the UNSC because it will help “Netanyahu and Bennett (Jewish Home Party chairman) in the upcoming elections.” Maliki posited that Kerry himself has not abided by his pledge not to intervene in the Israeli elections.

Also last week in London, Secretary of State Kerry met with Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, and according to a PA senior official, Kerry posed a number of U.S. principles that should be included in the Palestinian UNSC resolution. Kerry supposedly refused the two year time period demand by the PA for Israeli withdrawal. The resolution as Kerry suggested should include recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, as well as U.S. opposition to declare Jerusalem as a joint capital for Palestine and Israel. Erekat rejected the U.S. proposals. Kerry declared afterward that the U.S. does not accept the Jordanian (presenting the Palestinian resolution)  and French resolutions. He warned that if the Palestinians insist on presenting the resolutions, the U.S. would use its veto power. Erekat rejected Kerry’s ideas, and insisted that the resolutions would be submitted. As of December 25, 2014, Abbas rejected an Arab League request to delay the submission of the Palestinian statehood until January when five new members who support the Palestinian cause will join the Security Council.

Abbas’ gambits notwithstanding, the increased authoritarianism of Abu Mazen is reflected in a recent survey by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research. It indicates that 66% of Palestinians are afraid to criticise Abu Mazen and the PA, and 80% consider the PA institutions to be corrupt and infected with nepotism. Last summer, according to the survey, support for Abbas (Abu Mazen) declined to 35% from 50%. “There is no doubt about the fact that outlawing freedoms and rights, especially of professional unions, is a factor in Abbas’ decline in popularity,” said Dr. Khalil Shikaki, one of the survey takers.

PA security agents inspect what is written in the social media, and threaten those who criticize Abbas. Abu Mazen critics point out that after a decade in power he is controlling all systems of government to such an extent as to minimize all resistance. Perceived political rivals such as Mohammad Dahlan, who once served as Abu Mazen’s assistant, and Salam Fayyad, the former Prime Minister of the PA, are vilified by Abbas. Following the Palestinian Unity government formation, headed by Rami Hamdallah last May, elections were to follow. But, once again, internal squabbling prevented it, and added to it was Abbas’ fear of a Hamas victory.

Abu Mazen’s strategy for the establishment of a Palestinian state has reached a cul-de-sac.  None of his gambits proved successful. His rivalry with Hamas is bitter and ongoing, despite the alliance he forged at the expense of negotiations with Israel. And, like his predecessor Yasser Arafat, he balks at the idea of ‘ending the conflict’ with Israel. He knows full well that this might be a death sentence for him, targeting him for assassination. It is for this reason that Abbas and the PA are unlikely to forgo the “right of return” of Palestinian refugees to Israel. Israel for its part, cannot accept such a demographic suicide. This is why Abbas would rather avoid negotiations with Israel and bypass it by going to the UNSC. It is also the ostensible reason why peace with Israel cannot be achieved, and as a result, the Palestinian people continue to suffer political and economic deprivation. Abbas has not been the solution to the Palestinian problems; rather, he has been responsible for failing them.

Categories: Abbas, Fatah, Gaza, Hamas, Human rights, Israel, Israeli elections, Jerusalem, Kerry, Netanyahu, Palestinians, Peace process, Terrorism, Two state solution, U.S. Congress, United Nations
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

The Israelis who back UN hypocrisy

December 29, 2014

The Israelis who back UN hypocrisy, Israel Hayom, Dr. Limor Samimian-Darash, December 29, 2014

[T]he more one delves into the U.N.’s outrageous conduct, the harder it becomes to separate the actions of the international community from the tailwind provided by certain Israelis.

******************

The growing relationship between Iran and the Palestinian Authority, as well as Iran’s arms shipments and its involvement in terrorism, are, as always, not being condemned internationally. This is in addition to the world’s silence about the Palestinian terrorist attacks in recent months, which have included stabbings, vehicular rammings and firebombings. None of these produced a U.N. resolution against the Palestinians. And if the massacre at the synagogue in Jerusalem had not looked like a classic anti-Semitic attack in Europe, it is doubtful we would have heard any condemnation of it at all.

One can, of course, complain about the hypocrisy of the world, and particularly that of European nations, who have continued to ignore the growth of Islamic radicalism and terrorism in the world and have focused instead, in a biased manner, on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Alongside this, more and more nations are symbolically recognizing a Palestinian state and turning a blind eye to all Palestinian misdeeds. These moves are indeed symbolic, not just because they have no diplomatic meaning, but also, ironically, because Israel is once again being placed on the altar for sacrifice.

But the more one delves into the U.N.’s outrageous conduct, the harder it becomes to separate the actions of the international community from the tailwind provided by certain Israelis. Indeed, Tzipi Livni, Isaac Herzog and even Avigdor Lieberman have explained to us that this is all happening because of a lack of diplomatic initiative on the part of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. They do this, of course, without attributing any blame to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who, despite all the concessions offered by Netanyahu, would not even agree to begin peace talks.

And there are now more false accusations being hurled around, such as the claim that the lack of negotiations following Operation Protective Edge is leading us toward a renewal of hostilities in the Gaza Strip. There is no mention of Hamas or its desire to expel us from the region. There is also no mention of the use of reconstruction funds by Hamas to re-arm itself ahead of the next round of fighting or the fact that the Palestinian Authority was kicked out of Gaza by the Palestinians themselves. No, they say, everything is the Israeli government’s fault for not initiating a diplomatic process.

And even more bluntly, Israeli politicians are directly appealing to the international community to apply pressure on the Israeli government. For example, Livni had the gall to implore U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry to not support the unilateral Palestinian move at the U.N., as this would have strengthened the Israeli Right. Herzog made a similar claim when he sought to dissuade the British parliament from recognizing a Palestinian state.

Former Labor MK Avraham Burg took a different tack, urging his British friends to recognize a Palestinian state and force a diplomatic solution on Israel. And if we look not too far back in history, this was the exact line taken by Livni when she was appointed foreign minister in 2006 by then-Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. Her first speech at the U.N. did not remind the nations of world about the historical right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel. Instead, her debut speech on the world stage was dedicated to presenting her vision of the establishment of a Palestinian state.

These are not some words uttered by one Palestinian government minister or another. And no, they are not a biased report by a BBC presenter. Rather, these are Israeli politicians who, whether they are just trying to butt heads with the government or if they truly believe in the righteousness of Abbas, are ultimately providing fuel for unilateral anti-Israel moves at the U.N. And when they do this, they are helping the lowlifes at the U.N.

Categories: Abbas, Gaza, Hamas, Iran, Israel, Israeli elections, Jerusalem, Leftists, Netanyahu, Palestinians, Peace process, Terrorism, Two state solution, United Nations
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

The U.S. President is Not Omnipotent

December 28, 2014

The U.S. President is Not Omnipotent, Algemeiner, December 28, 2014. This article was originally published by Israel Hayom.

full-senate-300x200The United States Senate.

Will the 114th Congress follow in his footsteps, or will it abdicate its constitutional responsibilities?

Congress has often abdicated its constitutional power in the area of foreign policy, failing to fully leverage the power of the purse: funding, defunding and “fencing.”

***************

White House and State Department officials contend that, irrespective of Congress, President Barack Obama can apply effective diplomatic, commercial and national security pressure and coerce Israel to partition Jerusalem and retreat from Judea and Samaria to the 9-15 mile-wide pre-1967 sliver, surrounded by the violently turbulent and unpredictable Arab street.

U.S. Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro recently voiced this inaccurate underestimation of the power of Congress — which has traditionally opposed pressure on Israel, echoing the sentiments of most constituents — saying, “What is unmistakable about our foreign policy system is that the Constitution provides the president with the largest share of power.”

The assertion that U.S. foreign policy and national security are shaped by presidential omnipotence can be refuted by the U.S. Constitution as well as recent precedents. The Constitution was created by the Founding Fathers, who were determined to limit the power of government and preclude the possibility of executive dictatorship. They were apprehensive of potential presidential excesses and encroachment, and therefore assigned the formulation of foreign policy and national security to both Congress and the president. Obviously, the coalescing of policy between 535 legislators constitutes a severe disadvantage for the legislature.

According to the Congressional Quarterly, the U.S. Constitution rectified the mistakes of its predecessor, the Articles of Confederation, upgrading the role of Congress to the primary branch of the U.S. government. “Hence, the first article of the Constitution is dedicated to Congress. The powers, structure, and procedures of the national legislature are outlined in considerable detail in the Constitution, unlike those of the presidency and the judiciary.”

Unlike all other Western democracies — where the executive branch of government dominates the legislature, especially in the area of international relations and defense — the U.S. Constitution laid the foundation for the world’s most powerful legislature, and for an inherent power struggle over the making of foreign policy between the legislature and the executive, two independent, co-equal and co-determining branches of government. Moreover, while the president is the commander in chief, presidential clout depends largely on congressional authorization and appropriation in a system of separation of powers and checks and balances, especially in the areas of sanctions, foreign aid, military assistance, trade agreements, treaty ratification, appointment confirmation and all spending.

Congressional power has been dramatically bolstered since the Vietnam War, Watergate, the Iran-Contra affair and globalization, which have enhanced the involvement of most legislators in international issues, upgraded the oversight capabilities of Congress, dramatically elevated the quality and quantity of some 15,000(!) Capitol Hill staffers and have restrained the presidency.

However, Congress has often abdicated its constitutional power in the area of foreign policy, failing to fully leverage the power of the purse: funding, defunding and “fencing.” Legislators prefer to focus on domestic issues, which represent their constituents’ primary concerns and therefore determine their re-electability. Hence, they usually allow the president to take the lead in the initiation and implementation of foreign and national security policies, unless the president abuses their trust, outrageously usurping power, violating the law, assuming an overly imperial posture, pursuing strikingly failed policies, or dramatically departing from national consensus (e.g., the deeply rooted, bipartisan commitment to the Jewish state). Then, Congress reveals impressive muscle as befits a legislature, which is the most authentic reflection of the American people, unrestrained by design, deriving its power from the constituent and not from party leadership or the president, true to the notion that “the president proposes, Congress disposes.”

For example:

  • On August 1, 2014, Democratic senators forced Obama to separate the $225 million funding of Iron Dome batteries from the highly controversial $2.7 billion immigration and border security bill.
  • Since 1982 the Senate has repeatedly refused to ratify the Convention on the Law of the Sea, and since 1999 it has rejected ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.
  • The January 2013 defense authorization bill tightened restrictions on the transfer of terrorists from Guantanamo to the U.S. In May 2009, Majority Leader Harry Reid foiled Obama’s attempt to close down the detention camp.
  • On February 17, 2011, Obama reluctantly vetoed a U.N. Security Council condemnation of Israel’s settlement policy, due to bipartisan congressional pressure.
  • In September 2012, a $450 million cash transfer to the Muslim Brotherhood regime in Egypt was blocked by Congress.
  • The 2012 budget cut into Obama’s foreign aid spending request by more than $8 billion.
  • In 2009, bipartisan congressional opposition prevented the appointment of Charles Freeman to chair the National Intelligence Council.
  • In 1990-1992, Congress approved a series of amendments, expanding U.S.-Israel strategic cooperation to unprecedented levels despite presidential opposition.
  • In 1990, President George H. W. Bush failed in his attempt to cut Israel’s foreign aid by 5 percent due to congressional opposition.
  • In January 1975, the Jackson-Vanik Amendment was signed into law, in defiance of the president.
  • Congress ended U.S. military involvement in Vietnam (the 1973 Eagleton, Cooper and Church Amendments), Angola (the 1976 Clark Amendment) and Nicaragua (the 1982-1984 Boland Amendments).
  • In 1991, Senator Daniel Inouye fended off administration pressure to withdraw an amendment to upgrade the port of Haifa facilities for the Sixth Fleet: “According to the U.S. Constitution, the legislature supervises the executive, not vice versa.”

Will the 114th Congress follow in his footsteps, or will it abdicate its constitutional responsibilities?

Categories: Foreign policy, Ideology, Islamic slaughter, Israel, Jerusalem, Jewish occupation of Israel, Middle East, Moral equivalence, Multiculturalism, Obama, Peace process, Political correctness, Settlements, Two state solution, U.S. Congress
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: 2 Comments

Palestinians desire only true Islamic peace with Jews.

December 28, 2014

Palestinians desire only true Islamic peace with Jews, Dan Miller’s Blog, December 28, 2014

Palestinians are Islamic and Islam is the religion of peace. Don’t forget it, unless you are a hateful Islamophobe and look forward to being murdered.

A You Tube copy of a heart-warming Palestinian instructional video on how to achieve blessed Islamic peace with Jewish oppressors is embedded a few paragraphs below. The video has “gone viral” in the Palestinian social media.

The 1 minute and 13 second-video, as seen below, shows the “teacher” calmly walking up to a “victim,” stabbing him, and walking away.

One of the tactics appears to imitate the Islamic State method of beheading.

The guide to killing Jews teaches that after stabbing the victim, the knife should be twisted to maximize wounds and cause death.

To put the video in proper perspective, here’s an excerpt from Imam Obama’s October 3, 2014 Eid al-Adha greeting to Muslims around the world:

As our Muslim neighbors and friends gather for Eid celebrations, Muslim Americans are among the millions of pilgrims joining one of the world’s largest and most diverse gatherings.  Hajj brings together Muslims from around the world – Sunni and Shiite – to share in reverent prayer, side by side.  It serves as a reminder that no matter one’s tribe or sect, race or religion, gender or age, we are equals in humanity. [Emphasis added.]

On Eid, Muslims continue the tradition of donating to the poor and joining efforts with other faith communities in providing assistance to those suffering from hunger, sickness, oppression, and conflict.  Their service is a powerful example of the shared roots of the world’s Abrahamic faiths and how our communities can come together in shared peace, with dignity and a sense of justice. [Emphasis added.]

And now, the beautiful video showing Palestinian pathways to a shared humanitarian peace between Muslims and Jews with dignity and (social) justice for all:

In similar vein, a Palestinian envoy to Iran recently “said that ‘Israel is a cancer’ that ‘will be destroyed’ . . . ”

anti-Israel-allah

He is the envoy from the Palestinian Authority, Israel’s peace partner in discussions which Secretary Kerry has pushed ever since he first honored and delighted Israel by becoming the U.S. Secretary of State.

Kerry I'm an idiot

Here’s an Andrew Klavan video condemning Israel’s own brutal war on innocent cancer cells. They are probably not the types of cancer cells to which the esteemed Palestinian Authority envoy referred.

Finally, here’s an uplifting video from November of 2011 about the glories of the Arab Islamic Spring and the peace, enlightenment and happiness it is bringing to all whom it touches.

Categories: Cancer, Foreign policy, Human rights, Iran, Islam, Israel, Jews, Kerry, Obama, Palestinians, Peace process, Terrorism
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

Iranian Soldiers Photographed on Lebanon-Israel Border

December 28, 2014

Iranian Soldiers Photographed on Lebanon-Israel Border, Israel National News, Cynthia Blank, December 28, 2014

img537100IDF troops patrol northern border Flash 90

Iran’s military published photos of soldiers on Israel’s border with the message: ‘with Allah’s help, we will trample their bodies.’

****************

The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) has published a report documenting photographs of Iranian Revolutionary Guard soldiers “killing time” at the Lebanon-Israel border.

Preliminary information suggests the pictures were taken in October, but were released only recently, along with verbal threats against Israel. Several photographs published contain the caption: “We have arrived to the cursed Israel.”

The Twitter account linked to the Revolutionary Guards uploaded a number of the pictures on Thursday, with the headline, “The Islamic Republic soldiers are on the border of occupied Palestine.”

The soldiers’ faces were blurred, so as not to be identified.

B52G5N_CEAAVU31

According to MEMRI’s reports, the photos were also published a week and a half ago on the Iranian military’s website. In this case, the soldiers’ faces are visible.

The Iranian military’s websites showcases photos of soldiers taken in the Bekaa Valley and Baalbek in south Lebanon. “We have come close to the motherland of corruption – the cursed Israel. With Allah’s help, we will trample over their bodies” the website writes.

In October, the Hezbollah-affiliated Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar said that terrorists from Hezbollah, which controls south Lebanon, could be found operating in the area near the Litani River – in violation of a United Nations resolution.

More recently, on Thursday, the Iranian army began a massive military drill sprawling from the farthest eastern expanses of the Islamic regime all the way to its southern maritime borders opposite the principality of Oman, in the Strait of Hormuz and the Gulf of Aden.

A full 13,000 Iranian soldiers are taking part in the six-day drill, reportedly marking the first time the Iranian navy is conducting a drill so far offshore.

Iranian media reported Saturday that Iran has begun running tests on a new weapon in their arsenal: domestically produced exploding “suicide” drones meant to strike targets on land, air and sea.

Iranian Navy Commander, Habib Allah Sayyari told a news conference that one of the main objective of the extensive military exercise is to convey a message of peace.

He claims that Iran’s neighbors need to know that improving the combat capabilities of the Iranian army are not directed toward anyone in particular, but are intended only for the protection of Iran’s borders and interests.

Categories: Iran, Israel, Lebanon
Tags: , , ,

Comments: 2 Comments

‘How to Stab a Jew’ Going Viral on Palestinian Authority Social Media

December 27, 2014

‘How to Stab a Jew’ Going Viral on Palestinian Authority Social Media, The Jewish Press,  Tzvi Ben-Gedalyahu, December 27, 2014

stabbing-lesson-screenshotA clip from”How to Stab a Jew,” the latest hit on Arab social media. Photo Credit: Screenshot

All of Israel is paying a heavy price, the price of life, by a decade of conducting “negotiations” with the Palestinian Authority while it has incited an entire generation to hate Jews and the murder them.

****************

The “resisters of occupation in the occupied West Bank and Jerusalem” are spreading on Arab social media a frightening video demonstrating tactics on how to stab a Jew to death quickly and efficiently.

The 1 minute and 13 second-video, as seen below, shows the “teacher” calmly walking up to a “victim,” stabbing him, and walking away.

One of the tactics appears to imitate the Islamic State method of beheading.

The guide to killing Jews teaches that after stabbing the victim, the knife should be twisted to maximize wounds and cause death.

The Palestinian Authority and anti-Israel Arabs in Jerusalem do not need terrorist cells when “resisters” use social media to reach hundreds of thousands of Arabs in Jerusalem as well as in Judea, Gaza and Samaria, with a simple post on social media.

Israel needs to find the source of whoever posted this video and arrest him or them.

All of Israel is paying a heavy price, the price of life, by a decade of conducting “negotiations” with the Palestinian Authority while it has incited an entire generation to hate Jews and the murder them.

Until the Palestinian Authority halts all incitement, and until Mahmoud Abbas starts condemning terrorists in Arabic as well as in English, and until the Obama administration understands that Israel means what it says, the government needs to stop all contact with Ramallah.

Arab stabbing attacks on Jews have increased significantly this year, and every Israeli is a potential victim when “resisters” educate every Arab to be a murderer.

Categories: Israel, Jews, Palestinians, Terrorism
Tags: , , , ,

Comments: 2 Comments

Meshaal on point of relocating Hamas’ political headquarters from Doha to Tehran

December 27, 2014

Original posted by Dan Miller

Meshaal on point of relocating Hamas’ political headquarters from Doha to Tehran, DEBKAfile, December 27, 2014

Khaled_Mashaal_12.14Hamas’ Khaled Meshaal heads for new exile

Hamas’ political leader Khaled Meshaak, forced to quit his old headquarters in Damascus after abandoning his longtime host Bashar Assad and finding sanctuary in Doha – is again being hounded from pillar to post.

A deal struck this week between Egypt and Qatar could result in the Hamas leader settling in the Iranian capital. This would afford Tehran a foothold in the Gaza Strip, its second Mediterranean outpost after Lebanon on the Israeli border.

The Egyptian-Qatar deal, revealed here by DEBKAfile’s Middle East sources, covers the future of the Muslim Brotherhood, the nemesis of Egyptian President Abdel-Fatteh El-Sisis, and its offspring, the Palestinian Hamas, which rules the Gaza Strip. Their memorandum of understanding was concluded Wednesday, Dec. 24, in Cairo by a delegation of Qatari intelligence chiefs and the new Egyptian director of intelligence Gen. Khaled Fawzi. They spent most of the day hammering out its six points, which are listed here:

1.  Qatar withdraws its support from all Brotherhood operations against Egypt and Saudi Arabia;

2.  This point applies equally to any Hamas activity that may be interpreted as inimical to Egypt;

3.  Qatar’s assistance to Hamas will be limited to “civilian” projects (such as repairing war damage in Gaza), which too will be subject to President El-Sisi’s approval;

4. Given the close cooperation maintained at present between the Egyptian president and Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on affairs relating to Gaza, Israel will implicitly have the right to disqualify certain Palestinian projects in the enclave;

5.  Qatar is to shut down the anti-Egyptian propaganda channel run by its Al Jazeera television station;

6.  The emirate is not required to sever all its ties with the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, just to keep them under control as its “strategic reserve.”

It is extremely hard to conceive of these two radical Islamist organizations bowing to the restrictions placed on their operations under the Egyptian-Qatari deal.

Brotherhood leaders have exited Doha and made arrangements to establish residence and a new center of operations in London, U.K.  Khaled Meshaal, after he was denied permission by Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan to set up shop in Istanbul, is on the point of a decision to relocate his offices in Tehran. Iran would thus gain a proxy foothold in the Gaza Strip, its second outpost on the Mediterranean after the first was provided by Hizballah in Lebanon. If Meshaal decided to settle in Tehran, Iran would acquire a handy springboard for action against Egypt and southern Israel.

Categories: Egypt, Hamas, Iran, Israel, Qatar
Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »