Archive for the ‘Israel’ category

« WarSclerotic home page
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Palestinians Turn Jerusalem Into a Tool of Terror

February 2, 2017

Palestinians Turn Jerusalem Into a Tool of Terror, Investigative Project on Terrorism, Noah Beck, February 2, 2017

1960

Palestinian and other Arab leaders threatened violence in response to President Trump’s pledge to move the U.S. embassy from Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem. While Bill Clinton and George W. Bush also promised such a move as candidates, each backed off.

The terrorist who killed four Israelis in Jerusalem Jan. 8 by mowing them over with his truck expressed agitation after hearing a sermon at a local mosque criticizing Trump’s embassy relocation promise.

The Palestinian Authority (PA) leadership reportedly instructed the mosques it controls to focus their religious sermons on the embassy relocation. Worse still, the PA promised the terrorist’s widow a lifetime, $760-per-month stipend for her husband’s “martyrdom for Allah.”

Arab reactions to Trump’s embassy plans are more heated than they were to those of candidates Bush and Clinton perhaps because of Trump’s pledge to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and relocate the embassy there from Tel Aviv, not only as a candidate (including during his address at last year’s AIPAC Policy Conference) but also as president-elect, issuing public reassurances on the issue. Trump even planned to visit the Temple Mount as a candidate, although the visit never materialized and – as president – he said last Thursday that it was “too early” to discuss moving the U.S. Embassy.

Nevertheless, Palestinian and Arab leaders have warned that moving the embassy could lead to unrest and violence. Influential Iraqi Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr called the idea “a declaration of war against Islam.” PA President Mahmoud Abbas said he could revoke the PLO’s recognition of Israel, while his Fatah party warned the move “would open the gates of hell.”

Such declarations by political and religious leaders give a green light to Palestinians to react violently, as the Jerusalem terrorist truck attack shows.

Palestinian leaders, including the “more moderate” Palestinian Authority, regularly deny that Jews have any historical or religious connection to the Temple Mount.

PA Jerusalem Affairs Minister Adnan al-Husseini demanded an apology Sunday after United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said it was “completely clear that the Temple that the Romans destroyed in Jerusalem was a Jewish temple.” The statement “violated all legal, diplomatic and humanitarian customs and overstepped his role as secretary general,” al-Husseini said.

This is not the first time that the Palestinians, including the “more moderate” Palestinian Authority, manipulated Jerusalem into an incendiary trigger for terror.

As Palestinian Media Watch reported, Abbas led calls in 2015 for Palestinians to act violently to “defend” Muslim holy sites. He blessed “every drop of blood that has been spilled for Jerusalem” and presented violence in “defense” of holy sites and against the Jews’ “filthy feet” as a religious imperative.

Indeed, the “stabbing intifidah” was launched in 2015 by false rumors that Israel was trying to change the status quo on the Temple Mount.

“Arabs are convinced that Israel is set on destroying, desecrating or ‘Judaizing’ Haram al-Sharif, the Jerusalem compound that includes al-Aqsa, Islam’s third-holiest site,” Benny Avni wrote in the New York Post. Such incitement persists, Avni noted, even though “Israel points out that the arrangements that have existed since 1967, when it seized control of the Temple Mount, Judaism’s holiest site, are intact, and will remain so: A Jordanian trust, the Waqf, maintains the Mount. Jews can visit, but not pray there.”

Even worse, President Obama’s State Department reinforced the dangerously false incitement about Jerusalem promoted by Palestinians.

Writing about the 2015 “Stabbing Intifida,” journalist Jeffrey Goldberg rightly pointed out that it was “prompted in good part by the same set of manipulated emotions that sparked the anti-Jewish riots of the 1920s: a deeply felt desire on the part of Palestinians to ‘protect’ the Temple Mount from Jews.”

In the 1929 Arab riots, Arabs killed more than 130 Jews, and nearly as many Arabs died when British police responded. Among the findings of a subsequent investigation by the Shaw Commission was that “the Mufti was influenced by the twofold desire to confront the Jews and to mobilise Moslem opinion on the issue of the Wailing Wall” (in Jerusalem) and that one of the chief causes of the riots was “Propaganda among the less-educated Arab people of a character calculated to incite them.”

Arab incitement against Jews happens regularly, often without the explosive element of Jerusalem. In a sermon broadcast on Hamas’s Al-Aqsa TV in early January, a Hamas leader name Marwan Abu Ras, accused Jews of sending “AIDS-infected girls to fornicate with Muslim youths.” He also claimed that Israel was allowing drugs to be smuggled through tunnels into Gaza, while blocking the entry of essential goods. “Their state is about to disappear,” Abu Ras said. “…My brothers, know that people, stones, and trees all hate [the Jews]. Everyone on Earth hates this filthy nation, a nation extrinsic to Mankind. This fact was elucidated by the Quran and the Sunna.”

But adding Jerusalem to Arab incitement against Israelis can make the resulting violence even more explosive.

Qanta Ahmed, a pro-Israel Muslim reformer who visited both the Jewish and Muslim holy sites at the Temple Mount, eloquently noted the Islamist thinking that enables the weaponization of Jerusalem: “Forbidding worshippers from entering holy sites in Islam, including non-conforming or pluralist Muslims who reject both the ideology and accouterments of Islamism is an impassioned pastime of fervent Islamists who foolishly believe only they are the keepers of our Maker…”

Unfortunately, Jerusalem has a long and bloody history of being manipulated by Muslim leaders into an explosive tool of incitement. But if Islam truly is a religion of peace, its leading practitioners should stop turning religious holy sites into weapons of war, and instead embrace Doctor Ahmed’s tolerance.

Categories: Fatah, Hamas, Israel, Jerusalem, Palestinian Authority, Palestinian incitement, Palestinian terrorists, Palestinian truth, President Trump, Temple Mount, U.S. Embassy
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Palestinian Columnist In Response To UN Secretary-General’s Statements On Jerusalem’s Jewish Connection: The Jews Have No Connection To Jerusalem Or Palestine At Large

February 1, 2017

Palestinian Columnist In Response To UN Secretary-General’s Statements On Jerusalem’s Jewish Connection: The Jews Have No Connection To Jerusalem Or Palestine At Large, MEMRI, February 1, 2017

(Not only that, but Joseph, Mary and Jesus were Muslims, not Jews. — DM)

Fatah and PLO officials lashed out at the new secretary-general of the UN, António Guterres, for remarks he made on January 28, 2017 to Israeli Radio. Guterres said that there is no doubt Jerusalem is holy to all three major monotheistic religions today, but it is “completely clear that the temple which was demolished by the Romans was a Jewish temple.”[1]

The Palestinian officials said that Guterres’s remarks encourage Israel to step up its measures against Jerusalem, constitute direct aggression against the Palestinian people’s rights in the city, and deal a blow to international efforts for peace. They also undermine the UN’s credibility and contradict truth, history and UNESCO’s resolution from October 2016 stating that the Al-Aqsa Mosque is a Muslim site.

‘Omar Al-Ghoul, a columnist for the PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida who was an advisor to former PA prime minister Salam Fayyad, published a scathing article in which he demanded that Guterres apologize to the Palestinian people for the injustice of his remarks. Jerusalem and all of Palestine, from the river to the sea, belong to the Palestinian people, he wrote, and the Jews have no historical connection to them. He added that Jerusalem belongs to the Muslims and Christians alone, and that the Temple of Solomon never existed in Palestine.

The following are excerpts from his article and from other Palestinian responses to Guterres’s remarks.

guterresAntónio Guterres (image: english.alarabiya.net)

Fatah, PLO Officials: Secretary-General’s Comments Deal A Blow To UN’s Credibility, Encourage Terrorism Against Palestinians

PLO Executive Committee member Ahmed Majdalani called the UN secretary-general’s statements “a severe breach of policy and a blow to the UN’s credibility as an international body [reflecting] bias towards an occupying force.” He added: “The secretary-general should clarify his remarks, which undermine international efforts for peace and give the occupation a green light to step up its measures against Jerusalem… The UN secretary-general appears to be uninformed and not updated in the field in which he engages, and we remind him of the resolution by UNESCO, which considers the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the entire Haram Al-Sharif [i.e., Temple Mount] to be a sacred Islamic site designated for worship.”[2]

Fatah Revolutionary Committee deputy secretary Fayez Abu ‘Aita called the secretary-general’s statements “direct aggression against the Palestinian people’s rights in Jerusalem and [a show of] bias towards the occupation by legitimizing and empowering the illegal Israeli presence in Jerusalem.” He added that they “encourage Israel to use more terrorism against the Palestinian people, to attack the sites sacred to Islam and to Christianity, and to continue expanding settlement construction until the two-state principle is eliminated.”[3]

Columnist In PA Daily: Jerusalem And All Of Palestine, From The River To The Sea, Is Muslim Land

‘Omar Al-Ghoul, a columnist for the PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida and advisor to PA prime minister Salam Fayyad during the latter’s term in office, harshly condemned Guterres: “The world expressed great optimism at Mr. António Guterres’s recent appointment as UN secretary-general, especially in light of his promise to reform this leading international institution in order to develop it and in order for it to be able to follow events around the world more quickly and vitally. But that optimism is apparently misplaced, since someone who wants to reform and awaken the international organization does not deviate from the UN Charter, or from its resolutions and rules, but must instead be wiser and bolder when taking political positions, instead of making offhand comments according to whims and narrow interests.

“António Guterres made a clear and obvious mistake towards peace and the political process on the Israeli-Palestinian track when he stated… that he believes in the connection between Jerusalem and the Jews. The secretary-general argued, contradicting the UNESCO resolution, history and facts, that in his opinion – which deviates from the truth and the facts – it is as clear as the sun is clear that ‘the temple which was demolished by the Romans was a Jewish temple.’ Thus, the new secretary-general fell into the trap of his own unbalanced view, because the issue of Jerusalem and the Palestinian-Israeli blood feud are not resolved by personal opinions. [Mr. Secretary-General,] your personal opinion is yours alone and not a binding position held by the UN or by the nations of the world. You, as secretary-general, must not involve the UN in positions that it does not need and that do not correspond with its regulations and resolutions. Furthermore, you have no right to err in flattering Israel due to considerations easily understood by any observer – because your remarks do not correspond to history or to the existing data.”

Jerusalem Belongs To The Muslims And Christians, Not To The Jews; Guterres Must Apologize Immediately To The Palestinian People And Leadership

“If you are interested in history, and committed to it, Mr. António, [then you should know that] Jerusalem and all of Palestine from the river to the sea, belong to the Palestinian people, and their history is its history. The establishment of Israel based on the UN Partition [Plan for Palestine,] Resolution 181, adopted in November 1947, and the Palestinian people’s consent to peace and the two-state solution on the basis of the June 1967 borders, absolutely do not mean that the history of Palestine changes. Jerusalem is Arab-Palestinian and belongs to the Muslims and the Christians, and not to the Jews – although this does not mean that Jews should be prevented from visiting it. The so-called ‘Western Wall’ is actually the ‘Al-Buraq Wall’ [Al-Buraq is the winged horse on which Muhammad ascended to Heaven]. Solomon’s Temple does not exists and never existed in Palestine. The Israelis have been excavating across the entire land for nearly a century since fully occupying it in June 1967 and have found nothing related to Judaism in all of Palestine, not just in Jerusalem.

“So on what grounds do you voluntarily express incorrect positions that have no connection to reality? What is your interest in doing so? Are you serving the peace process, or entangling and threatening it? Additionally, you express irresponsible views, such as that you ‘do not intend to take the reins of initiative in any political process between the Palestinians and Israelis.’ Why? What is your role as UN secretary-general? Are you the U.S., or do you speak for it? Does this not constitute conspiring with the racist Israeli ethnic-cleansing state and giving it a green light to continue its imperialist settlements? Is this the reform you want to bring to the UN?

“This grave injustice committed by the new UN secretary-general in the matter of the Palestinian-Arab Islamic-Christian and human Jerusalem means that he must immediately apologize to the Palestinian people and leadership, and rectify this matter by issuing a clear, direct, and explicit position in line with the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization – UNESCO, which issued two resolutions on this matter in October 2016.

“You may issue no personal decisions on your own, because ever since your appointment as UN secretary-general, you represent not yourself but the entire UN, including its peoples, member states, resolutions, treaties, and regulations. Therefore, you are not authorizedto say whatever you think or whatever you, or the deviant countries you flatter, wish you to say – particularly not Israel and its ally the U.S.

“Have you have the courage to acknowledge [that this is what you have done] and to correct this shameful injustice?”[4]

____________________

[1] Jpost.com, January 30, 2017.

[2] Wafa.ps, January 29, 2017.

[3] Wafa.ps, January 29, 2017.

[4] Al-Hayat Al-Jadida (PA), January 29, 2017.

Categories: Fatah, Israel, Israel - Jewish state, Israel and UN, Jerusalem, Palestinian Authority
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Pseudo-liberal Jews cause great damage

January 29, 2017

Pseudo-liberal Jews cause great damage, Israel Hayom, Isi Leibler, January 29, 2017

We live in a world of chaos and upheaval.‎

Now is the time for all committed Jews to unite, stand together and concentrate primarily on ‎securing their own rights. Diaspora Jews who, from their comfortable armchairs, claim a ‎better understanding than Israelis of what is good for their security, should be treated with ‎contempt. Israel is entitled to expect support from committed Jews over the next few years ‎until it stabilizes its relationship with the world and creates an iron barrier to deter its ‎genocidal enemies.‎

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

Chaos is the order of the day throughout the entire democratic world.‎

This has been accelerated by the hypocrisy and intolerance of the vindictive Left, aided and ‎abetted by foolish bleeding-heart pseudo-liberals who have become accomplices in the ‎undermining of democracy.‎

One can understand that many Democrats were incredulous and devastated that Hillary ‎Clinton could be defeated by Donald Trump, whose lack of civility, absence of political ‎experience and coarse language even offended conservatives.‎

But the outpouring of rage, the histrionic protest marches throughout the world, the ‎establishment of committees to impeach Trump — even prior to the traditional 100-day ‎honeymoon period — is unprecedented. Contrary to all the claptrap about democracy that ‎they sanctimoniously preached while in office, leftists are unwilling to accept the fact that their ‎candidate was defeated by a parvenu.‎

The same chaos has swept through Europe, many of whose citizens are revolting against the ‎failure of the Brussels-based European Union bureaucrats to address their needs and above all ‎the collapse in the quality of their lives resulting from millions of so-called refugees flooding ‎their countries.‎

This has led to a rise in global populism, a revival of conservative and right-wing political ‎parties and rejection of the “politically correct” way of life imposed by sanctimonious liberal ‎ideologues.‎

How has this chaos impacted on Diaspora Jews?‎

As history has testified, during periods of stress and anxiety, Diaspora Jews face grave threats. ‎Anti-Semitism, already having reached record levels since the Nazi era, is poised to become ‎even more vicious. That situation has been temporarily muted because the prevailing threat of ‎Islamic fundamentalist terror attacks in many Western nations has directed public anger ‎toward Muslims rather than Jews. This does not apply to Hungary, Greece and Germany.‎

The Jews, as a minority that has suffered tyranny and persecution, would be expected under ‎current circumstances to concentrate primarily on their own security.‎

Ethics of the Fathers quotes Hillel the Elder, “If I am not for myself, who will be for me? But if I ‎am only for myself, what am I?”‎

Liberal-inclined Diaspora Jews — especially those lacking an authentic Jewish education — ‎appear to have reversed this dictum. They consider that the well-being of the world and ‎politically correct standards of social values must be their priority — with disregard to the harm ‎this inflicts on them as a community.‎

Observing Conservative and Reform Jewish leaders in the U.S., accompanied by once-‎mainstream liberal Jewish groups like the Anti-Defamation League and National Council of ‎Jewish Women, at the forefront of hysterical demonstrations accusing Trump of being fascist ‎and encouraging anti-Semitism, it is if they have been possessed by a dybbuk. ‎

The same bleeding hearts in the U.S. as well as those in Europe were at the forefront of calls to ‎open the gates to Muslim “refugees” steeped in anti-democratic behavior and nourished on ‎diets of undiluted, visceral anti-Semitism. Setting aside the question of ISIS terrorist sleeper ‎cells, there is little doubt that these elements will strengthen existing anti-Semitism in the older ‎immigrant Muslim communities that failed to integrate. Yet many Jews are so dismally ignorant ‎and oblivious that they even compare these immigrants to Jews facing annihilation during the ‎Holocaust who were denied haven by other democratic countries.‎

This behavior is even more disturbing at a time of historic opportunities with Trump’s election. ‎

Although by no means yet assured, the U.S., still the only true global superpower, may truly ‎treat Israel as a genuine ally, a move that would be reinforced by an overwhelmingly pro-Israel ‎Congress ‎

Trump has repeatedly proclaimed his determination to reverse former President Barack ‎Obama’s hostile anti-Israeli policy and create a new alliance between the U.S. and Israel that ‎would be sensitive to the security needs of the Jewish state. ‎

His commitment to recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel would have more than ‎symbolic value. It would have a major impact in reversing the odious definition of the ‎settlement blocs and even the Western Wall and Temple Mount as occupied territory. Israel ‎could proceed to build homes and the Jewish neighborhoods over the Green Line would ‎prosper. ‎

Furthermore, the U.S. will hopefully no longer acquiesce to the U.N. persecution of Israel and ‎will reject calls to return to the indefensible 1949 armistice lines. ‎

Trump is also likely to bring an end to the U.S. component of the scandalous $300 million per ‎annum provided to the Palestinian Authority, much of which is doled out to murderers. ‎

Israel will also have a powerful ally that recognizes Iran as a rogue state and would ‎substantially reduce the genocidal threat from the Iranian Muslim fundamentalists.‎

All this has yet to be delivered but there is no doubt that there is now a window of opportunity ‎which Israel should exploit to dramatically minimize the security challenges and separate from ‎the Palestinians with defensible borders. This can be achieved if Israel now has the support of a ‎U.S. that can be counted on as a true ally. Over the past eight years under Obama, the U.S. ‎dramatically eroded Israel’s diplomatic standing, treated the Jewish state as a pariah and ‎provided incentives to the Palestinians to stall negotiations and engage in terror. With ‎renewed American support, Israel could at long last stabilize itself.‎

There is no disputing that many Democratic Party supporters, including large numbers of Jews, ‎were bitterly disappointed at the election result and were further outraged by Trump’s ‎triumphant and, in their view, divisive inaugural address.‎

But surely it is in the interest of the Jewish community to develop a good relationship with the ‎new administration, especially taking into account the enormous uplift it could provide to the ‎beleaguered Jewish state. Even setting aside his religious Jewish son-in-law, Trump has always ‎been close to Jews and his inner councils incorporate an unprecedented number of passionate ‎religious Zionist Jews. This was highlighted by the honored role of Rabbi Marvin Hier as the ‎first Orthodox rabbi invited to invoke a prayer at the presidential inauguration. ‎

In this context, setting aside individual political beliefs, one must question the legitimacy of ‎those purportedly mainstream Jewish organizational leaders who led the scurrilous accusation ‎of fascism against the new president and the Jewish progressive religious groups calling for ‎mourning and fasting. ‎

One of the main justifying positive elements of progressive Jews was that even if they did not ‎consider themselves obligated to follow Halachah, their activity would ensure that ‎they at least remained within a Jewish framework. What their leaders are doing now is the ‎opposite — encouraging them to take up liberal causes even if it means forsaking Israel, the ‎most fundamental component providing them with a Jewish identity. ‎

They have reversed Hillel’s maxim and act for what they perceive to be the universal needs of ‎humanity, dismissing the interests of their own people. They are undermining themselves as a ‎community and acting as lemmings marching off a cliff to their own destruction. ‎

There is only one example in Jewish history to which such behavior can be compared. The ‎Jewish Bolsheviks also turned against their own people and ultimately the revolution ‎consumed them. Unfortunately, the vociferous anti-Trump Jewish activists are a far ‎greater proportion of the American Jewish community than ‎Jewish Bolsheviks were among Russian Jews.‎

It is clear that in the Diaspora, committed Jews will remain overwhelmingly supportive of Israel ‎while the pseudo-liberal or progressive Jews will become less interested in Israel and ultimately ‎lose their identity. Indeed, Christian evangelicals now play a far greater role in promoting Israel ‎than some of the mainstream Jewish groups. ‎

We live in a world of chaos and upheaval.‎

Now is the time for all committed Jews to unite, stand together and concentrate primarily on ‎securing their own rights. Diaspora Jews who, from their comfortable armchairs, claim a ‎better understanding than Israelis of what is good for their security, should be treated with ‎contempt. Israel is entitled to expect support from committed Jews over the next few years ‎until it stabilizes its relationship with the world and creates an iron barrier to deter its ‎genocidal enemies.‎

Once the threats to the Jewish people have been overcome, we can and will become more ‎directly involved in tikkun olam and fulfilling Rabbi Hillel’s wise advice.‎

Categories: 2016 elections, Anti-Israel Jews, Israel, Israeli security, President Trump, Trump and Iran, Trump and Israel
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Saudi Journalist to Palestinians: Armed Resistance to Israel is Futile, Arab World Has Lost Interest in Your Cause

January 28, 2017

Saudi Journalist to Palestinians: Armed Resistance to Israel is Futile, Arab World Has Lost Interest in Your Cause, Algemeiner, Barney Breen-Portnoy, January 26, 2017

hamas-2Hamas fighters. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.

The Palestinian cause is “no longer a top priority” for the Arab world, a Saudi journalist declared earlier this month.

In an article published by the Saudi daily Al Jazirahnewspaper — and translated by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) — Muhammad Aal Al-Sheikh wrote that the reliance of radical Palestinian groups on armed resistance “constitutes a kind of political suicide that only political ignoramuses [can] condone.”

According to Al-Sheikh, a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the sole option “that can be demanded and which enjoys the support of most of the international community.”

What the Palestinians, Al-Sheikh went on to say, “need to understand is that the Arabs of today are not the Arabs of yesterday, and that the Palestinian cause has lost ground among Arabs. This cause is no longer a top priority for them, because civil wars are literally pulverizing four Arab countries, and because fighting the ‘Islamic’ terrorism is the foremost concern that causes all Arabs, without exception, to lose sleep. It is folly to ask someone to sacrifice [tending to] his own problems and national interests in order to help [you solve] your own problems.”

“All I can say to my Palestinian brethren is that stubbornness, contrariness, and betting on the [support of] the Arab masses are a hopeless effort, and that ultimately you are the only ones who will pay the price of this stubbornness and contrariness,” he concluded.

In recent years, Israel has been quietly developing ties with the Sunni-Arab axis in the Middle East – including Saudi Arabia. In his September address to the UN General Assembly, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that in addition to Egypt and Jordan, which already have signed peace treaties with the Jewish state, “Many other states in the region recognize that Israel is not their enemy. They recognize that Israel is their ally. Our common enemies are ISIS and Iran. Our common goals are security, prosperity and peace. I believe that in the years ahead we will work together to achieve these goals.”

Categories: Arab nations, Israel, Palestinians, Two state solution
Tags: , , ,

Comments: 8 Comments

Now That Trump Is in the White House, Can Israel Seize the Moment?

January 28, 2017

Now That Trump Is in the White House, Can Israel Seize the Moment? Alegmeiner, Martin Sherman, January 27, 2017

(Please see also, Trump Will Keep Vow on Jerusalem Embassy Move, Giuliani Says. — DM)

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meets with Republican Presidential candidate, Donald Trump, in New York, on September 25, 2016. Photo by Kobi Gideon/GPO *** Local Caption *** ??? ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ?? ????? ?????????? ? ?????? ????? ?????, ????? ????? ? ??? ???? ?????

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meets with Republican Presidential candidate, Donald Trump, in New York, on September 25, 2016. Photo by Kobi Gideon/GPO

To date, there seems to be only one central pre-election commitment that the new administration appears uncharacteristically hesitant in embracing: the promise to transfer the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.

Of course, not all this regrettable reluctance can be blamed on the Trump administration. After all, the Israeli government itself has not been overly enthusiastic in promoting the embassy relocation.

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

“There is a tide in the affairs of men,
Which taken at the flood, leads on to fortune.
Omitted, all the voyage of their life is bound in shallows and in miseries.
On such a full sea are we now afloat.
And we must take the current when it serves, or lose our ventures.”

— William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Act IV, Scene 3.

“If I am not for myself, who is for me? …And if not now, when?”

— Hillel the Elder, Ethics of the Fathers, Ch. 1:14.

In the first few days of his presidency, Donald Trump has acted with remarkable resolve to promote a number of his more strident campaign pledges, and to dismantle much of the edifice his predecessor had hoped to leave as his “legacy.”

Robust resolve

Thus, Trump moved to withdraw the US from the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, which the New York Times dubbed “Obama’s signature trade achievement.”

Similarly, he instigated measures to begin rolling back “Obamacare,” the centerpiece of Obama’s domestic policy; approved the construction of two large oil pipelines (Keystone pipeline between the US and Canada, and Dakota Access Pipeline), which Obama had vetoed; cut funding of charities providing abortion services abroad, reinstating a 1984 bill that Obama had rescinded; and ordered a freeze on hiring federal government workers (apart from the military) in an “effort to reduce government debts and decrease the size of the federal workforce.”

Then, later this week, Trump “signed directives to begin building a wall along [the] US border with Mexico and crack down on US cities that shield undocumented immigrants.” Likewise, he is reported to be drafting directives to be implemented “in the coming days [that] would…suspend the entry of any immigrants from Muslim-majority Middle Eastern and African countries Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Iraq, Iran, Libya and Yemen while permanent rules are studied.”

So, regardless of whether one commends or condemns these policy decisions, they certainly reflect a firm — indeed, a seemingly unswerving — commitment to his campaign pledges, no matter how controversial or contentious.

With one notable exception.

Rare reticence 

To date, there seems to be only one central pre-election commitment that the new administration appears uncharacteristically hesitant in embracing: the promise to transfer the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.

Readers will recall that in October 1995, the US Congress passed a law (the Jerusalem Embassy Act) with broad bi-partisan support — including from Obama’s vice president, Joe Biden and Secretary of State John Kerry — that, in effect, recognized Jerusalem as the undivided capital of Israel, under Israeli sovereignty, and explicitly called for the relocation of the US embassy to the city by May 1999. The bill, however, included a proviso permitting the president to issue a waiver holding up the relocation of the embassy should he deem it in the US national interest. The waiver is renewable every six months and since the legislation of the bill, every president — both Democrat and Republican — has exercised the waiver option. Indeed, 36 such waivers have been issued in the past — including eight by Obama — the last of which was put through in December 2016 and is due to expire in June 2017.

Accordingly, all Trump really needs to do to fulfill his pledge to relocate the US embassy to Israel’s capital is, well…nothing. Indeed, he need take no proactive measures at all. He does not need to build a wall, lay a pipeline, pass new legislation or sign a contentious executive order. All he needs to do is let the current waiver lapse, and allow the existing 1995 legislation to take effect.

Yet, for some reason, it is precisely on this issue that the new administration is displaying rare reticence in moving briskly forward to deliver on its clear commitments.

Disturbing lack of enthusiasm…from Israel

Of course, not all this regrettable reluctance can be blamed on the Trump administration. After all, the Israeli government itself has not been overly enthusiastic in promoting the embassy relocation.

Reflecting Israel’s lack of fervor in applauding Trump’s pledge was Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman’s offhand apathy in addressing the prospect at last month’s Saban Forum in Washington. When asked by the moderator, CNN’s Jake Tapper, what he thought of Trump’s declaration that he would move the US embassy in very short order to Jerusalem, Lieberman was distinctly dismissive, indicating that he was skeptical as to the prospect: “You know, [what] we see before in every election is the same promise to remove the embassy to Jerusalem. But I think that we will wait and we will see.”

Then, virtually providing the administration with the justification to renege on its commitment, or at least significantly postpone it, Lieberman stated: “We have many other issues…we have enough challenges all around Israel. I think that it will be a mistake…to take the embassy as the focal point…We have many items on our common agenda. I think that maybe the Embassy will be one of the points.”

With such lethargic endorsement from the Israeli government, there would be little room for surprise if America’s new commander-in-chief does not push his proffered relocation vigorously forward.

Plethora of invalid arguments

A plethora of bad reasons has been advanced for not moving the US embassy to Jerusalem. Typical of such baseless arguments was the one articulated in an Haaretz op-ed, in which the writer warned: “Relocating its embassy to Jerusalem would mean the US taking a partisan stance on a central and sensitive issue, a source of controversy between Israel and the Palestinians, and between Israel and the international community.”

But of course, quite the opposite is true. By not relocating the embassy even to the western portion of Jerusalem, the US is, in fact, taking a partisan stance against Israel. For, in effect, this endorses the Palestinian/Arab position disputing Israeli sovereignty over any part of the city, including the portion that was under Israeli control prior to the Six-Day War. After all, if the US does not dispute Israeli sovereignty of the city within the pre-1967 lines, surely there should be no reason to refrain from establishing the embassy there. Or am I missing something here?

After all, the western portion of Jerusalem is, undisputedly, the functioning capital of Israel. There sit the national parliament, the prime minister’s office, all the government ministries (apart from agriculture) and the Supreme Court. Any capitulation to the notion that the Palestinians have a legitimate claim to any part of it would immediately torpedo the chances of an agreement. Accordingly, abstaining from relocating the embassy to western Jerusalem implicitly sustains grounds for such a claim and, in effect, constitutes a partisan pro-Palestinian stance.

By contrast, relocating the embassy would send a strong, even-handed message that the US will not tolerate exorbitant and unreasonable Palestinian territorial demands.

Invalid arguments (continued) 

But, perhaps the most common argument advanced for not relocating the embassy is because the Arabs and Muslims will get really mad. The threat of uncontrollable rage due to grievous insult (which would not provoke any other segment of humanity to similar conduct) has frequently been raised as reason to avoid offending Muslim sensibilities. It has already almost completely curtailed free speech in much of Western Europe and Scandinavia, where Muslim thugs are free to ravage the domestic population in the name of moral relativism and cultural diversity.

Clearly, giving into Arab/Muslim extortion because of threats of violence is a slippery slope. Once you capitulate on one issue, there is little reason not to capitulate on another.

Indeed, if the menace of Muslim mayhem can coerce nations to forgo free choice, what is to prevent further far-reaching demands, such as universal application of Shariah law, the discrimination against females and the persecution of gays?

The threat of violence is no reason to refrain from establishing the US embassy in Israel’s capital, but rather the reason to do so — and it will convey to the Arab/Muslim world that brandishing “uncontrollable rage” is an unacceptable and counter-productive mode of conducting international relations.

Respite not redemption 

The election of Trump was a huge stroke of good fortune for Israel. Just how dire its position might have been had Hillary Clinton been elected to continue the Obama legacy was vividly conveyed by two recent incidents.

The first: a surreptitious transfer of almost a quarter billion dollars to the Palestinian Authority by the outgoing president in the final hours of his incumbency, in defiance of a congressional hold on the funds.

The second: a jarring disclosure made last week by former director-general of Israel’s ministry of foreign affairs, Ambassador Dore Gold, of an astonishing admission by Obama’s National Security Adviser Susan Rice, that “even if Israel and the Palestinians reach an agreement, it is possible that the United States would oppose it” – because it might not do justice to the Palestinians.

These disturbing revelations starkly expose the blatant pro-Palestinian proclivities of the outgoing Obama administration and of the expected Clinton administration as the designated surrogate-successor.

Israel can be excused for feeling a huge sense of relief at the outcome of the November elections. However, a word of caution is necessary. For all the potential advantages involved in the Trump victory, it is — for the moment — merely a respite and still far from redemption. To attain that, there is yet much work ahead.

Catalyst or constraint?

There can be little doubt that the Trump victory harbors the potential for great opportunity for Israel. Not only is the incoming administration free from innate malice and anti-Israel bias that characterized the manifestly Islamophilic propensities of the previous one, but many in Trump’s inner circle are unabashedly pro-Zionist, and together with the wider Republican Party, unshackled to the failed “two-state solution.”

At last, after almost a quarter century, Israel has a real chance of being able to free itself of the deadly, debilitating tentacles of this pernicious paradigm — and to choose a new path that will allow it to extricate itself from the perilous cul-de-sac into which it had been led and allowed itself to be led.

The question now is whether the Israeli political class can rise to the occasion, and grasp the opportunity that destiny has provided. Will the nation’s leaders display the intellectual daring and the ideological resolve for which the hour calls? Will they be able to cast off the prevailing constraints of political correctness and forge new and sustainable paradigms for the conduct of the nation’s affairs, taking advantage of the new benign winds in Washington? Or will they, as it seems, remain captive to old molds of thought — and thus prove to be a constraint, rather than a catalyst, impeding rather than inducing the chances that the Trump administration may well afford them if they were to strike out in a bold new direction?

“There is a tide in the affairs of men…”

More than ever before, Israel’s destiny is in its own hands. The outcome of the US elections has given it a real chance to shape its destiny. The crucial question now is whether it will seize the moment or let it slip away.

Almost six months before the Trump inauguration, shortly after the Republicans had removed their endorsement of a two-state model in its party platform, I published a column entitled “What if the GOP wins?”. I called on the Israeli “Right” to prepare for the possibility of a Republican victory and formulate a credible alternative to the discredited two-state prescription.

However, I cautioned that haste to discard this failed two-state formula should not lead to the proposal/promotion of alternatives that are no less inimical than the ideas they were designed to replace.

I urged that, to reap the potential benefits of the Trump phenomenon:

Israel must prepare. It must formulate a cogent, comprehensive paradigm to replace the two-state folly, which addresses both its geographic and demographic imperatives for survival — lest it promote a proposal that threatens to make it untenable geographically or demographically — or both.

It must be a proposal that ensures that Israel retains its vital geo-strategic assets in Judea-Samaria and at the same time drastically reduces the presence of the hostile Arab population resident there — preferably by non-coercive means such as economic inducements…which, of course, is what brought the bulk of the Arab population here in the first place.

This is now becoming an urgent imperative, lest we miss the flood tide and find ourselves “bound in shallows and in miseries” that a lapse will inevitably entail.

Categories: Israel, Jerusalem, Trump and Israel, U.S. Embassy
Tags: , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

PA threatens to cut US ties, turn to UN if US embassy moves to Jerusalem

January 24, 2017

PA threatens to cut US ties, turn to UN if US embassy moves to Jerusalem, Jihad Watch, , January 24, 2017

Appeasement of jihadists and jihadist states does not work. It strengthens their resolve against the House of War and weakens democratic interests and those of human rights.

History and hard archeological evidence proves Israel’s full right to its land. History also reveals Israel’s need to defend itself against obliteration by jihadist thugs and the necessity of ignoring and rejecting the global voices that strengthen jihadists against it.

As much as every Westerner wants peace, jihadists do not. It’s time that the West stops appeasing jihadists while hoping for peace in return. The Arab Muslim states that surround Israel have repeatedly tried to destroy Israel militarily. Nor is the jihad imperative limited to Israel. “First the Saturday people, then the Sunday people” is an accurate description of jihadist ambitions. Thus the news that Nasser al-Kidwa, a Fatah central committee member, has threatened to downgrade US ties if America moves its embassy to Jerusalem, should come as no surprise. America can, in fact, expect more conflict with jihad entities now that Obama’s policy of appeasement has ended. But appeasement leads only to full surrender.

President Mahmoud Abbas, added that the Palestinian leadership should also declare, in the event that US President Donald Trump follows through with his campaign promise to move the embassy, that the US is no longer a broker in the Middle East peace process and turn to the UN.

us-embassy-israel

“Fatah official: Palestinian leadership should downgrade US ties if embassy moved”, by Adam Rasgon, Jerusalem Post, January 23, 2017:

The Palestinian leadership should downgrade its diplomatic ties with the United States if the American embassy is relocated from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, a top Fatah official said on Monday.

“If that [the relocation of the embassy] takes place, the Palestinian side would have to sever its ties with the official staff of the illegal US Embassy in Jerusalem. In addition to that, there is the issue of the Palestinian political representative’s office in Washington; it would also be necessary to close [it],” Nasser al-Kidwa, a Fatah central committee member, told Al-Quds, a Palestinian daily newspaper, clarifying that the relocation the of the US Embassy would leave the Palestinians with “no other choice.”

The Palestinian leadership and the US have had a close relationship since the establishment of the PA in the early 1990s, to which the US has sent hundreds of millions of dollars in aid.

Kidwa, who is considered a contender to succeed PA President Mahmoud Abbas, added that the Palestinian leadership should also declare, in the event that US President Donald Trump follows through with his campaign promise to move the embassy, that the US is no longer a broker in the Middle East peace process and turn to the UN.

“It would be necessary for the Palestinian side to make clear that it no longer officially considers the United States an interlocutor and that it cannot cooperate with it directly or through the Quartet,” Kidwa stated, adding that it would also be imperative “to go to the Security Council to raise a complaint against the United States of America.”

In every round of bilateral negotiations, including the most recent talks mediated by former secretary of state John Kerry, the US has been the primary peace broker between the Israeli and Palestinian negotiating teams.

The Palestinian leadership launched a campaign two weeks ago to mobilize the international community against the relocation of the US Embassy to Jerusalem.

Abbas sent a letter to Trump, Russian President Vladimir Putin, UK Prime Minister Theresa May and many other world leaders, warning that moving the embassy would have “destructive” consequences for the region’s stability and the two-state solution.

Abbas also met with King Abdullah in Jordan on Sunday to discuss the possible relocation of the American embassy.

According to Wafa, the official PA news site, Abbas said that he and Abdullah agreed to take a series of coordinated steps if the US relocates its embassy…

Categories: Abbas, Israel, Jerusalem, Palestinian Authority, Trump and Israel, U.S. Embassy, United Nations
Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Revealed yesterday: The Muslim Brotherhood lost a good friend when Obama left office and gained a formidable opponent with Trump

January 24, 2017

Revealed yesterday: The Muslim Brotherhood lost a good friend when Obama left office and gained a formidable opponent with Trump, American Thinker, Thomas Lifson, January 24, 2017

Yesterday saw a stunning contrast as it was revealed that the outgoing Barack Obama funded Palestinians as almost his last act in office, while Donald Trump’s first full workday saw him call Egypt’s President Al-Sisi to offer support in his battle against the Muslim Brotherhood, the Ikhwan, which seeks his overthrow.

It’s all about the Muslim Brotherhood, that octopus of Islamic supremacist jihad that seeks to use all methods — legal, violent, or deceptive – to advance the goal of a world ruled by Islam.

Former President Obama’s last few hours in office saw him override a Congressional “hold” placed on $221 million funding for the Palestinians, whose goal remains the destruction of Israel in line with the Muslim Brotherhood’s strategy. Matthew Lee and Rick Lardner broke the story for the AP:

A State Department official and several congressional aides said the outgoing administration formally notified Congress it would spend the money Friday morning. The official said former Secretary of State John Kerry had informed some lawmakers of the move shortly before he left the State Department for the last time Thursday. The aides said written notification dated Jan. 20 was sent to Congress just hours before Donald Trump took the oath of office. (snip)

Congress had initially approved the Palestinian funding in budget years 2015 and 2016, but at least two GOP lawmakers — Ed Royce of California, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Kay Granger of Texas, who sits on the House Appropriations Committee — had placed holds on it over moves the Palestinian Authority had taken to seek membership in international organizations. Congressional holds are generally respected by the executive branch but are not legally binding after funds have been allocated.

That this move was a single digit salute to his opponents is evident in the other last minute beneficiaries of Obama’s granting of boons: the United Nations and climate change funding:

In addition to the $221 million for the Palestinians, the Obama administration also told Congress on Friday it was going ahead with the release of another $6 million in foreign affairs spending, including $4 million for climate change programs and $1.25 million for U.N. organizations

President Trump has come under fire for allegedly being anti-Muslim, when in fact his opposition is to violent jihad and those who promote world domination for Islam and the imposition of sharia law on every human being on the planet.  Oddly enough, the women marchers on Saturday were led by a fan of sharia, Linda Sarsour.

Actually, President Trump sees good relations with Muslims who oppose violent jihad and the Ikhwan, and acted dramatically on that yesterday, as Reuters reports:

 Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi and U.S. President Donald Trump discussed ways to boost the fight against terrorism and extremism on Monday and the new American leader underscored his commitment to bilateral ties, the two countries said.

Trump told Sisi in a telephone call he appreciated the difficulties faced by Egypt in its “war on terror” and affirmed his administration’s commitment to supporting the country, Sisi’s spokesman Alaa Youssef said in a statement.

“The U.S. president also expressed during the call his looking forward to the president’s awaited visit to Washington which is being prepared for through diplomatic channels,” the statement said.

“The U.S. president also expressed during the call his looking forward to the president’s awaited visit to Washington which is being prepared for through diplomatic channels,” the statement said.

The people who want to inflict terror attacks on us support the Palestinians funded by Obama, while they want to force Sisi out of office. For the moment, I will leave it to historians to explain why Obama chose to align himself with the former group, and I thank God that president Obama [sic] is supporting President Al-Sisi, who has openly called for reform of Islam.

 

Categories: Egypt, Islamic reformation, Israel, Muslim Brotherhood, Obama and Islamists, Obama and Israel, Obama and Muslim Brotherhood, Obama and Palestinians, Palestinian Authority, President Trump, Sisi, Trump and Egypt, Trump and Muslim Brotherhood
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

10 Reasons Hamas Should Not Be in Any Government

January 19, 2017

10 Reasons Hamas Should Not Be in Any Government, Clarion Project, Elliot Friedland, January 19, 2017

(Similar claims could be made legitimately about Fatah and Islamic Jihad. — DM)

hamasrallyHamas leaders at a rally. (Photo: © Mahmud Hams/AFP/Getty Images)

Fatah and Hamas, which control the West Bank and the Gaza Strip respectively, concluded an agreement to form a national unity government. The Palestinian Authority, which is the official body that rules the Palestinian-controlled areas, as per the Oslo Accords, will now begin the process of forming a new national council. The P.A. president is Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas.

Hamas and Fatah also announced they will hold elections that will include members of the Palestinian diaspora. Elections were last held in 2007.

“We have reached agreement under which, within 48 hours, we will call on [Palestinian Authority President] Mahmoud Abbas to launch consultations on the creation of a government,” Fatah spokesman Azzam al-Ahmad told media.

Here are ten reasons why Hamas is not fit to be part of any government.
Hamas Is A Designated Terrorist Organization

Hamas is a terrorist group and is designated as such by Israel (obviously) but also the United States, the EU, Canada and Japan so this one should come as no surprise.

Hamas Deliberately Targets Civilians

Most recently Hamas praised the string of violent attacks that hit Israel over the past year and half.

In the last Gaza war, Hamas fired thousands of rockets indiscriminately at Israeli civilian areas. “Deliberate targeting of civilians by Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups defies humanity and is morally and legally reprehensible” Israeli left-wing human rights organization B’Tselem said about the last Gaza war.

They Use Civilians As Human Shields

According to the Geneva Conventions, “The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations. The parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations.”

Hamas does precisely this. In the last Gaza war, in 2014, Hamas ordered civilians to remain in their homes if they were about to be bombed. All the more gallingly, Hamas deliberately manipulates the inevitable civilian casualties that result, using the blood of Palestinians to purchase international sympathy.

Hamas Steals Palestinian Aid For Military Purposes

Hamas receives a lot of aid from around the world for the Gaza strip, which is frequently the subject of international aid campaigns. Yet Hamas steals much of this aid for its own purposes. “From our own investigations we found that out of every 100 sacks of cement that come into the Gaza strip [from Israel], only five or six are transferred to civilians,” said Israeli Foreign Ministry Director-General Dore Gold. “A hundred sacks is what is necessary to rebuild a home, the rest are confiscated by Hamas and used for military purposes.”

Hamas uses the cement to construct multi-million dollar tunnels via which it hopes to carry out cross-border raids into Israel to murder Israeli civilians and attack Israeli soldiers.

In August 2016, Israel leveled charges against Mohammed el Halabi the head of World Vision in Gaza for allegedly funneling tens of millions of dollars earmarked for humanitarian purposes to Hamas for its terrorist activities.

Hamas Steals Money From Palestinians to Enrich Their Leaders

Hamas controls the lucrative smuggling tunnels that bring goods into Gaza from Egypt. They tax incoming products for revenue. “Most of the money that went into the pockets of people in the Gaza Strip was obtained through tunnel deals and the creation of a flourishing smuggling market, which it is believed has created several hundred millionaires in the Gaza Strip, although most of the people there don’t live like that,” Col. (res.) Moshe Elad, a lecturer at the Western Galilee Academic College who served in a variety of senior military positions told Globes. “The man pulling the strings from Egypt with the tunnels is none other than the number two man in the Muslim Brotherhood, Khairat el-Shater. His connection with Hamas was ostensibly for Islamic religious purposes, but they actually built a prosperous business, which earned phenomenal profits.”

Hamas also receives donations, both from wealthy Muslims in America and internationally, but also from state sponsors such as Saudi Arabia, Iran and Qatar.

This money has been appropriated by the Hamas leadership who enriched themselves at the expense of Palestinians. The inner circle of Hamas are millionaires.

Hamas Executes Dissenters and Stifles Critique

Hamas routinely carries out extrajudicial killings, abductions and torture of dissidents within the territory it controls. This includes supporters of rival Palestinian factions such as Fatah (with whom Hamas will now be forming a unity government) as well as those accused of collaborating with Israel.

Hamas is not believed to conduct fair trials.

In 2014 during the last Gaza war, Hamas carried out a campaign of targeted killings and abductions detailed in the Amnesty International Report entitled “‘Strangling Necks’ Abductions, Torture And Summary Killings Of Palestinians By Hamas Forces During The 2014 Gaza/Israel Conflict.”

“In the chaos of the conflict, the de facto Hamas administration granted its security forces free rein to carry out horrific abuses including against people in its custody,” said Philip Luther, Amnesty International, then Director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme at Amnesty International. These spine-chilling actions, some of which amount to war crimes, were designed to exact revenge and spread fear across the Gaza Strip.”

Nor did this stop after the war. “Palestinian governments in both Gaza and the West Bank are arresting and even physically abusing activists and journalists who express criticism on important public issues,” Human Rights Watch said as recently as August 2016.

Hamas Wants a Theocratic State and Murders LGBT People

Hamas is an affiliate of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is pledged to establish an Islamic State as a final goal. It terms itself “The Islamic Resistance Movement” and article one of its founding charter reads “The Movement’s programme is Islam.”

Although Hamas is continually on a war-footing and has therefore been less focused on establishing a sharia-based system of governance than other Islamist groups, it still takes the time to implement sharia governance where it can.

In this vein Hamas has imprisoned women for sex outside marriage.

Hamas Persecutes the LGBT Community

In January 2016, Hamas executed one of its senior commanders after allegations of gay sex emerged. John Calvin (not his real name) is from one of Hamas’ most important families and fought for and gained asylum in the United States because if he returned to Nablus he would be murdered.

These are rarely mentioned by those in the “Queers for Palestine” movement.

Israel Withdrew From Gaza And Hamas Turned it Into A Terrorist State

In 2005 Israel completely withdrew from the Gaza Strip. In 2007 Hamas took over and turned the enclave into their own personal fiefdom.

Governmental errors in the Israeli withdrawal notwithstanding , Hamas demonstrated its lack of commitment to its own people and to the path of peace by choosing rejectionism and violence instead.

Hamas Perpetrates Child Abuse

Hamas trains young children in its military training camps to indoctrinate them with the group’s Islamist and jihadist ideology and train them for hatred and warfare.

This is backed up by Hamas media outlets which produce children’s programs that inculcate the next generation with the Hamas ideology.

Categories: Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Israel, Palestinian Authority, Palestinian elections, Palestinian state, Palestinian terrorists, Two state solution, unity government
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

The factors of a U.S. embassy in Jerusalem

January 18, 2017

The factors of a U.S. embassy in Jerusalem, Center for Security Policy, Jacub Gorski, January 17, 2017

President-elect Trump’s recently announced plans to have the incoming U.S. ambassador to Israel live in Jerusalem. The Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995 already recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and instructs the executive branch to move the embassy or file a national security waiver. With the U.S ambassador to Israel living in Jerusalem what would be the implications for the region if the U.S. moved its embassy to the city as well?

Critics warn that moving the embassy to Jerusalem will spark international protests and cause more instability in the region. Secretary John Kerry warned that “you would have an explosion, an absolute explosion” in the Middle East. The head of the Palestinian Authority (PA) Mahmoud Abbas in a letter to Trump wrote that moving the embassy will “have destructive consequences on the peace process, the two state solution and the safety and security of the region.”

By “explosion” Secretary Kerry probably means an increase in the frequency and strength of Islamic terrorist attacks on the Israelis, Arab states cutting off relations with the U.S. and Israel, or Israel’s neighbors declaring war on the country.

Israel suffered Hamas rocket attacks in the past and is currently undergoing a wave of terror perpetrated by Palestinians. It is the stated goal of the Palestinian terrorists to attack Israel. In its charter Hamas promises to wage jihad against the country and the Israeli Defense Minister suspects that the organization is trying to develop new offensive capabilities in order to do so. So Israel will probably continue to see a spike in terrorist attacks regardless of whether the U.S. moves its embassy to Jerusalem.

Arab states will likely issue condemnations if the U.S. moves its embassy, but they would not cut off ties with America or Israel. Middle Eastern regimes need U.S. help in fighting ISIS and finance their own military operations. Given Arab dependence on U.S. aid it is unlikely they would want to jeopardize their relations with Washington over an embassy.

There is no fear of Arab economic boycotts because Israel’s neighbors have maintainedsanctions on the country for decades.

Also, given Israel’s success in the Six Day and Yom Kippur Wars and the subsequent military strength the Arab states are unlikely to ever declare war on the country.

Israel’s neighbors need its help in countering the growing Iranian influence in the region. With Iran and Hezbollah giving military aid to the Assad regime, Israel’s Sunni neighbors might want to consider possible cooperation with Tel-Aviv. In a move that might signal cooperation, the former intelligence chiefs of Saudi Arabia and Israel held a public meeting. If the Arabs want Israeli help then they are unlikely to jeopardize their already fragile relations over the U.S. embassy.

Despite Abbas’ warnings, moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem could make the peace process easier. It would send a clear message to the PA that the U.S. considers Jerusalem to be part of Israel. Instead of having our embassy located in Jerusalem U.S. issue waivers that have delayed the move. To the PA this probably looks like America wavering in its support to Israel because the U.S. is failing to keep up its promise. Moving the embassy will send a message that Washington keeps its promises and does not waiver in support of its allies.

Categories: Arab nations, Israel, Jerusalem, Palestinian terrorists, Trump and Iran, Trump and Islamists, Trump and Israel, Trump and Middle East, U.S. Embassy
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Palestinian Factions Reaffirm Agreement on Need to Form National Unity Government

January 18, 2017

Palestinian Factions Reaffirm Agreement on Need to Form National Unity Government, Jerusalem Post, Adam Rasgon, January 18, 2017

(According to an unsourced article at the Latin American Herald Tribune,

MOSCOW – Palestinian factions, including the nationalist movement Fatah and the Islamist Hamas, agreed on Tuesday to give Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas 48 hours to form a government of national unity.

Azzam al-Ahmad, head of the delegation of Fatah, said at a press conference that factions agreed in Moscow to grant Abbas a period of 48 hours to start consultations to form the national unity government that precedes the formation of the Palestinian National Council.

The Fatah representative, who participated in the reconciliation talks in Moscow between the different Palestinian parties, stressed that in the last ten years of confrontation between Fatah and Hamas there have never been better conditions than now.

This may suggest that the possibility of a unity government is more substantial than suggested by the Jerusalem Post article. — DM)

palunitygovtMustafa Barghouti.. (photo credit:Wikimedia Commons)

The Palestinian factions have reached numerous reconciliation agreements previously that ultimately have gone unimplemented. In May 2014, the factions agreed to form a national unity government and hold elections by December 2015. While a government of technocrats and independents was formed with limited autonomy over resources in the Gaza Strip, elections never took place.

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

Hamas, Fatah and other Palestinian factions on Tuesday in Moscow reaffirmed an agreement they reached in Beirut a week ago, which said that they should form a new Palestinian National Council and a unity government, a top PLO official said.

“The agreement in Moscow is a confirmation of what we agreed on in Beirut,” Mustafa Barghouti, a PLO Executive Committee member, told The Jerusalem Post, upon the conclusion of a series of reconciliation talks in Moscow.

All the Palestinian factions including Hamas and Islamic Jihad participated in a meeting last week in Beirut to begin discussions on the possibility of convening the Palestinian National Council, the PLO’s parliament.

The Beirut meeting concluded with a statement, expressing “the necessity of holding a meeting of the Palestinian National Council which includes all Palestinian factions” and “the necessity of implementing reconciliation agreements and understandings beginning with the formation of a national unity government,” without setting specific timeframes for such measures to come to fruition.

Barghouti, who is also the secretary-general of the Palestinian National Initiative, said there was only one difference in the conclusions of the meeting in Moscow compared to that of Beirut.

“There was one addition to the Beirut meeting, which is that there will be a recourse to the president to act as fast as possible to initiate discussions regarding the formation of a national unity government,” Barghouti stated, adding that, “The idea of the government would be to start bridging the division between Gaza and the West Bank and prepare for national elections in six months.”

A national unity government would include ministers from the different Palestinian factions with representation in the Palestinian Legislative Council, the PA’s parliament, including Hamas and Fatah.

The Palestinian factions have reached numerous reconciliation agreements previously that ultimately have gone unimplemented. In May 2014, the factions agreed to form a national unity government and hold elections by December 2015. While a government of technocrats and independents was formed with limited autonomy over resources in the Gaza Strip, elections never took place.

Categories: Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Israel, Palestinian Authority, Palestinian elections, Palestinian state, Palestinian unity government
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »