Posted tagged ‘Israel’

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.

Mashaal: ‘A strong Turkey means a strong Palestine’

December 27, 2014

Mashaal: ‘A strong Turkey means a strong Palestine’In address to ruling party supporters,

Hamas leader praises Erdogan, Davutoglu; crowd shouts ‘down with Israel’

By Ricky Ben-David December 27, 2014, 4:15 pm

via Mashaal: ‘A strong Turkey means a strong Palestine’ | The Times of Israel.

 

Hamas chief Khaled Mashaal answers AFP journalists' questions during an interview in the Qatari capital of Doha, on August 10, 2014. (photo credit: AFP/al-Watan Doha/Karim Jaafar)

Hamas chief Khaled Mashaal answers AFP journalists’ questions during an interview in the Qatari capital of Doha, on August 10, 2014. (photo credit: AFP/al-Watan Doha/Karim Jaafar)

xiled Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal hailed Turkey’s leaders Saturday in Konya province in central Anatolia during a surprise speech to officials and supporters of the ruling AK party, saying he hoped to “liberate Palestine and Jerusalem” with them.

Mashaal congratulated the people of Turkey for “for having [Prime Minister Ahmet] Davutoğlu and President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan” as heads of state, adding that “a strong Turkey means a strong Palestine … Inshallah, God is with us and with you on the road to victory.”

“Inshallah we will liberate Palestine and Jerusalem again in the future,” Mashaal said.

The Hamas leader was introduced to the crowd gathered for the annual event by Davutoglu himself. His speech was frequently interrupted by supporters shouting “down with Israel!” and “God is great.”

“A democratic, stable and developed Turkey is a source of power for all Muslims,” Mashaal went on, adding “I greet all the brave people who claim Jerusalem … Our flag is the symbol of all the oppressed in the world.”

Mashaal often shows up at the ruling party’s events. He also attended the AKP’s congress in 2012 when President Recep Tayyip Erdogan was serving as prime minister.

Davutoglu, in his speech Saturday said Turkey’s red flag featuring a crescent with a star was a “symbol of the innocent in the world.”

“God is witness … we will make this red flag a symbol of the innocent. This red flag will fly side by side with the flags of Palestine, free Syria and all other innocents’ flags anywhere in the world,” he told the congress.

Turkey and Hamas have seen a rapid rapprochement as Israel’s ties with Ankara continued to deteriorate. The AK party has had close ties with Hamas since its rise in 2001, led by Davutoglu and Erdogan. The two have been known for their frequent outbursts against Israel over the years.

In August during Israel’s Operation Protective Edge, Erdogan accused Israel of being “more barbaric than Hitler.” Israel launched the campaign on July 8 to stop rocket fire from Gaza and destroy tunnels dug under the border by Hamas for attack purposes.

Jerusalem has also accused Turkey of allowing Hamas to operate on its soil, a charge Ankara strongly denies.

Last month, Israel appealed to the NATO coalition — of which Turkey is a member – and to the US leadership to take steps against Ankara for enabling Hamas terrorists to operate and plan terror attacks against Israelis from its territory.

Israel has alleged on several recent occasions that Hamas cells operating in the West Bank and planning major terror attacks were doing so under the guidance and leadership of Hamas’s Saleh al-Arouri, who was deported from the West Bank to Turkey in 2010, while Ankara turns a blind eye to his actions.

Last month, the Shin Bet security service said members of a Hamas terror ring in the West Bank, run from the organization’s headquarters in Turkey, sought to carry out an array of major attacks, including on Jerusalem’s main soccer stadium and its light rail line.

Arouri, they said, built up and funded the network, and has effectively established a Hamas command post in Turkey which is leading terror efforts in the West Bank. Arouri is reportedly aided by dozens of operatives, some of whom were deported by Israel in the wake of the Gilad Shalit prisoner deal in 2011.

The officials accused Turkey as well as Qatar — the current home of Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal — of enabling Hamas to operate freely within their territories to carry out attacks against Israel and undermine the Palestinian Authority.

In October, Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon said Hamas had two command centers: one in the Gaza Strip, which has been ruled by the Islamist group since 2007, and one in Turkey.

Israel’s ties with Turkey became strained after Israel’s Operation Cast Lead in Gaza in 2008-2009, but nosedived in May 2010 when the Mavi Marmara ferry was boarded by Israeli commandos as it attempted to break the naval blockade of the Gaza Strip. In the ensuing melee, after the Israeli soldiers were attacked with iron bars and wooden bats, troops opened fire and nine Turkish activists were killed; 10 Israeli soldiers were injured.

AFP and Times of Israel staff contributed to this report.

Report: Nasrallah is pushing for Hamas reconciliation with Syria and Iran

December 27, 2014

Report: Nasrallah is pushing for Hamas reconciliation with Syria and Iran

via Report: Nasrallah is pushing for Hamas reconciliation with Syria and Iran – Arab-Israeli Conflict – Jerusalem Post.

 

Hamas has urged the urged Hezbollah to withdraw its forces from Syria, where they are battling for Syrian President Bashar Assad.

Hassan Nasrallah

hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah.. (photo credit:REUTERS)

Hezbollah’s leader Hassan Nasrallah is reportedly mediating between Hamas on the one hand and Iran and Syria on the other in order to patch up the alliance that has been damaged due to the war in Syria.

The reconciliation efforts were reported on Saturday in the Lebanese newspaper As-Safir.

According to a senior official, Nasrallah is playing a key role in the mediation effort which is also being encouraged by Tehran, that is planning to invite Hamas Political Bureau Chief Khaled Mashaal to the Iranian capital.

Possible signs of the mediation could also be seen from Gaza, where in a ceremony earlier this month marking 27 years since the founding of the Islamist movement, Abu Ubaida the spokesman for the Kassam Brigades, the armed wing of Hamas, recognized Iran’s role in supporting the Palestinian resistance.

Hamas has urged Hezbollah to withdraw its forces from Syria, where they are battling for Syrian President Bashar Assad, and focus on fighting Israel instead. Iran is Syria and Hezbollah’s strongest regional ally.

The Islamist group which controls the Gaza Strip, was once an Assad ally, but in 2012 it endorsed the revolt against him in a shift that at the time deprived the Syrian leader of an important Sunni Muslim supporter in the Arab world.

“We call on Hezbollah to take its forces out of Syria and to keep their weapons directed against the Zionist enemy,” Moussa Abu Marzouk, a Cairo-based Hamas leader, said on his Facebook page last year.

Before the rift overt the war in Syria, Hamas and Hezbollah, were two long-time allies who have each fought against Israel and advocate its destruction.

Hamas’s leaders in exile were once based in Damascus but left, mainly for Egypt and Qatar, in 2012 as the civil war escalated.

Reuters contributed to this report.  

Thawing U.S. ties: Cuba today, Iran tomorrow?

December 26, 2014

Thawing U.S. ties: Cuba today, Iran tomorrow? Al Arabiya NewsMajid Rafizadeh, December 26, 2014

(Please see also Obama’s Worst Lie About his Dirty Castro Deal is in his First Sentence.

Obama Cuba negotiations

Also, Obama’s need for a legacy consistent with his ideology trumps all else, including Iran’s abysmal human rights record, its theocratic government, its support for terrorism, its hatred for Israel and desire to eliminate her, its duplicity in its P5+1 negotiations and its insistence on getting (or keeping) nukes. True, removal of statutorily based sanctions would require congressional action. However, Obama has little interest in avoiding constitutional irregularities. No congressional approval was granted for the “temporary suspension” of sanctions and laws inconsistent with Obama’s desires can be and are waived. Litigation over the de facto removal of sanctions by executive order would take many years.– DM)

After almost 53 years of Cold War between the U.S. and Cuba, the transformation of ties between these two adversaries has sparked a considerable amount of debate with respect to the normalization of ties with other longstanding rivals. The possibility of resolving other diplomatic imbroglios, specifically the revival of diplomatic ties between the U.S. and Iran is a case that comes to mind.

Some Iranians showed their excitement on Twitter with regards to the Cuban deal. Some showed hope that their government will be next and they could soon see an American embassy in Tehran. However, others thought that an Iran-U.S. deal is an idealistic and unreachable dream.

Indeed, any normalization of diplomatic relationships between the Islamic Republic and the U.S. will likely have significant positive impacts on both nations, leading to a critical strategic and geopolitical shift in the Middle Eastern political chessboard. Currently, both countries have some shared strategic and geopolitical objectives in Iraq and Syria particularly when it comes to fighting ISIS.

A possible Iranian deal will remove the economic sanctions on the Islamic Republic, assisting Tehran to achieve its highest economic potential in exports, imports and wealth. The tourist industry would be revived in Iran, with many European and Americans fond of visiting thousands of years old historical sites in Esfahan Shiraz, Hamadan, and other provinces. Normalization of diplomatic ties will lead to the flow of (primarily) European companies to do business with the Islamic Republic. In addition, as Iranian youth have shown to be in favor of American brands and products, American manufactures will find a share in Iran’s market as well. Further, U.S. airplane companies will begin cooperation with Iranian airlines.

As many people are pondering on the likelihood of a deal similar to the recent Cuba agreement with Iran, the question is whether the executive order to lift the embargo on the Islamic Republic and conducting back channel diplomacy to fully open ties with Tehran is possible?

Iran’s file is more complicated and multilayered

There are some partial similarities between the Obama administration’s method to initiate a deal with Raul Castro’s government and the way it has recently approached the Islamic Republic. The major commonalities are the back channel diplomacy and talks.

Similar to the Cuban deal, the Obama administration has conducted back channel talks with Iranian politicians with respect to Iran’s nuclear program. In addition, President Obama sent a clandestine letter to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei highlighting some of the shared strategic, national and geopolitical interests that both nations have in the Middle East.

Nevertheless, these commonalities in diplomatic approaches have led some scholars, politicians, and policy analysts to jump to the conclusion that the same deal should be applicable to the case of Iran because such an approach was possible with Cuba and the embargo on Cuba was lifted.

But, not too fast.

Iran’s file is much more complicated, multifaceted and multilayered than the Cuban case. While Cuba is a small island close to the state of Florida with a population of approximately 11 million, Iran, with a population of over 80 million, is located in the complex geopolitical chessboard of the Middle East, and entangled among mixture of alliances and enmities in the oil rich region.

Second of all, from Washington’s perspective, Cuba has hardly been a serious threat to American strategic, geopolitical, or economic interests. On the other hand, the Islamic Republic has been a major player in scuttling U.S. foreign policy objectives and opposing its allies (including Israel) in the Middle East.

Third, several crucial regional developments are viewed from the prism of a zero-sum game for both Iranian and American officials. Iranian leaders are less likely to accept any compromises on their top foreign policy priorities, such as: keeping President Bashar al-Assad in power, withdrawing its financial, advisory, intelligence, and military support to the Iraqi and Syrian government, and assisting formidable proxies such as Hezbollah.

Fourth, there was no international consensus on the U.S. embargo and economic sanctions against the Cuban government. As a result, President Obama can issue an executive order to lift the embargo. Many European countries were doing business with the Cuban government and the United Nations repeatedly condemned U.S. sanctions. On the other hand, the four rounds of economic sanctions on Tehran came with the approval of the U.N. Security Council. Unlike Cuba, many regional and global powers are dubious about Iran’s nuclear and regional hegemonic ambitions.

Fifth, several developments in Iran, such as revelations of clandestine nuclear sites, the possibility of testing exploding detonators for nuclear weapons in Parchin military site, and the military dimension of Tehran’s nuclear program, have led to regional and international strain.

Finally, and more fundamentally, unlike Castro, Khamenei has shown no interest in fully normalizing diplomatic ties with the United States. For example, the Obama administration received no positive response from Khamenei through its diplomacy. In addition, there is no official public debate among Iranian politicians, across various spectrums of Iran’s political system, of even allowing the opening of an American embassy in Tehran. The U.S. domestic opposition to normalize ties with Iran, particularly from the Republicans, is much higher in comparison to the Cuban case. Although the Obama administration has taken some back channel steps to negotiate with the Islamic Republic, Iran’s supreme leader has not responded with signs of willingness to normalize relationships and he has been clear in not trusting the “Great Satan. “

The signal that Iranian leaders received from the Cuban deal is not what the Western media depicts- that Iran is optimistic about normalizing ties with the U.S.. The message that Tehran received was that the Islamic Republic has to persist in its policies and that economic sanctions will ultimately fail. As foreign ministry spokeswoman Marzieh Akfham articulated: “The defense by the Cuban government and people of their revolutionary ideals over the past 50 years shows that policies of isolation and sanctions imposed by the major powers against the wishes of independent nations are ineffective.”

 

Is there a solution?

December 26, 2014

Is there a solution? Israel Hayom, Dror Eydar, December 26, 2014

(For European nations, America and others, abortive efforts to bring “peace” among Israel and warring Islamic factions provide welcome distractions from difficulties elsewhere which are even less tractable and more damaging to them. — DM)

[N]ot even a utopian-style peace treaty will end the fight against Israel that is being waged by Europe and the global left wing (and here as well, to some degree). The dozens of organizations that have been established to take away the Jews’ right to their own land (for some reason, these groups are known as “human-rights organizations”; after all, you know, we Jews have no human rights) will no longer show any interest in the cruel dictatorship that they helped set up next door. Instead, they will aim their heavy artillery against Israeli society, which they will accuse of racism for being an exclusive state for the Jewish ethnic group instead of a “state of all its citizens,” which is actually code for “a state of all its nationalities.”

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

1. The upcoming elections have plunged Israel into a wartime atmosphere, and a good deal of blame is being thrown about. Each side, instead of looking to its own misdeeds, is making accusations against the other. They are not saying, “We have sinned,” but rather, “You have sinned.”

Here, too, the accusations are meant to generate shallow headlines rather than addressing deep issues. This is a big mistake. Despite the piles of mud and refuse that are customarily dumped onto the average Israeli, the average Israeli is generally well aware of what is going on. They understand ideology and vision.

On the political plane, one gets the impression that the discourse, at least on the Left, is still stuck in the 1980s, before the great experiments that the Oslo Accords brought upon us — before Hamas, before Islamic State, before the Middle East fell to pieces. What can Tzipi Livni accomplish with the Palestinians that she hasn’t done over the past two years, when she was in charge of the talks with them? Did she bring any sort of agreement to the government that it turned down? If so, let her tell us.

But she knows that there is nobody to talk to on the other side. They never had the slightest desire to end the conflict with the Jews. I would be glad to hear any Arab leader name his final demands — the ones for which, if they were fulfilled, he would sign on the dotted line that the conflict was over and state that he had no further claims. Are there any volunteers?

We have not even mentioned Jerusalem or the refugees or recognition of Israel as a Jewish state. The demand that our neighbors recognize Israel as the national home of the Jewish people was not for us, but for them. That is the litmus test of the integrity of their intentions. Do they recognize the right of Jews to any part of the historical Land of Israel? We know that any Arab leader who grants such recognition can expect an uncomfortable death.

That is the reason for the effort to anchor the Jewish nature of the State of Israel in a Basic Law. It is because not even a utopian-style peace treaty will end the fight against Israel that is being waged by Europe and the global left wing (and here as well, to some degree). The dozens of organizations that have been established to take away the Jews’ right to their own land (for some reason, these groups are known as “human-rights organizations”; after all, you know, we Jews have no human rights) will no longer show any interest in the cruel dictatorship that they helped set up next door. Instead, they will aim their heavy artillery against Israeli society, which they will accuse of racism for being an exclusive state for the Jewish ethnic group instead of a “state of all its citizens,” which is actually code for “a state of all its nationalities.”

2. As we look on, Europe is falling like a ripe fruit at the feet of the radical Islam sweeping over it. The more terrorism conquers the streets of Europe, the greater the Europeans’ desire will be to pay the terrorists a ransom in exchange for being left in peace, unmolested. As history has taught us, the ransom will be the Jews. The ludicrous statements by the European parliaments about recognizing the Palestinian state show the blindness of a society in decline that lost its basic instincts long ago. The Europeans care nothing about the Palestinians, whom they have doomed to a life of misery and suffering under oppressive regimes that are among the worst in the world, where there is no such thing as basic human rights.

The Palestinians are the last thing that the Europeans care about, just as they care nothing about the atrocities being perpetrated in Syria, Iraq or Africa. The Europeans are recognizing the Palestinian state not because they have any desire to improve our neighbors’ situation, but because they have a problem with the Jews. They always did.

Ironically, the return to Zion made the Jewish problem worse because it gave the Jews an independent political living space — which the Europeans find completely unacceptable. That is also the reason why there are dozens of European organizations in this region, and why they funnel hundreds of millions of euros supposedly to help the Palestinians, but actually in efforts to undermine the legitimacy of the Jewish state. The “peace process” is just one more tool in that mechanism.

3. The talk of a “diplomatic agreement” is also a media ransom, lip-service paid by politicians who seek the sponsorship of the media party. Avigdor Lieberman is quite familiar with this work.

“We must reach a diplomatic agreement,” he said in a “closed-door conference,” and received flattering headlines right away. “What is going on today is that they are doing nothing; there is a status quo. The initiative must be a comprehensive regional agreement.”

Have we not heard those empty phrases a thousand times already? Have we not tried to reach a political agreement in all kinds of ways? Has Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not gotten into trouble with his own camp over it? Did he not freeze construction in Judea and Samaria for ten months? And, before him, did Ehud Olmert not offer our neighbors what even Lieberman (I hope) would never dare offer?

And what about the two Yisrael Beytenu princes, Uzi Landau and Yair Shamir? Where are they? Why are they not responding to their party chairman’s heretical statements? After all, were they not the ones who gave Lieberman the stamp of approval to be a right-wing party? More evidence of Lieberman’s desertion to the Left is his use of the well-known leftist scare tactic terminology: “a political tsunami.” But what burst out this week was more of a police tsunami against the members of Yisrael Beytenu. Now that the leader has adopted the Orwellian language of peace and speaks the language of the media party, maybe they will cut him some slack.

4. In the end, the dispute between most of the Right and most of the Left boils down to one question: Do we believe the Palestinians or not? Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has declared many times that he will never recognize Israel as a Jewish state, and he specifically named 6 million, with all its symbolism, as the number of Palestinians who expect their demand for the right of return to be fulfilled. Abbas is currently being kept alive by the Israeli army, which is protecting him as they would a delicate flower from attacks by the street, which supports Hamas. This does not stop the Palestinians from going all over the world, accusing us of every possible atrocity.

The purpose of their action is to gain the maximum amount of territory at the minimum price — actually, for no price at all — but not to establish a tiny statelet. The past hundred years have taught us that what unites Arab-Palestinians is not the desire to improve their own living conditions, but to destroy the Jews’ lives. What more has to happen for us to believe what they say? In the meantime, they are sticking close to us so that we will protect them against Islamic State.

5. So what is the solution? First, whoever said that there was a solution? Second, if we tried and did not succeed, maybe we ought to leave something for future generations to accomplish. You do not really believe the well-known chorus of lamentation that things are bad here and that the country is “stuck.”

We have succeeded quite well, thank God, considering the fact that only one of our hands is engaged in construction, development and cultural work, since the other is busy with self-defense. Where were we just 70 years ago, in 1944 — and where are we now? Let us put things in perspective.

Kurdistan: More Like Israel, Less Like Iraq

December 25, 2014

Kurdistan: More Like Israel, Less Like Iraq, Gatestone Institute, Lawrence A. Franklin, December 25, 2014

It is a society that rejects religious zealotry. Most Kurds are Sunni Muslim and one can hear the five-times-a-day Muslim call to prayer, but it is muted and ignored by most.

Like Israel, Kurdistan is more democratic than any of its neighbors. Like Israel, Kurdistan is surrounded by enemies that wish it did not exist. Like Israel, Kurdistan looks West. And like Israel, Kurdistan has maintained an internal equilibrium though all the world betrays it.

Iraqi Kurdistan is full of surprises. Probably, the most unexpected discovery is how normal life is in its capital city, Erbil. Despite a late summer scare by Islamic State [IS] military gains north of Mosul and the threat of suicide bomber attacks, the social discipline of Kurdistan’s citizens is admirable. There is a relaxed state of tension. It is “business as usual.”

There is also a sense of optimism, pervasive and infectious. Entrepreneurial spirit is alive and well. While there was an exodus of foreign businessmen after the initial territorial gains by the IS, foreign investors are filtering back. The Kurdistan Regional Government [KRG] has already drawn up plans for large-scale projects to improve the infrastructure. Heavy-duty construction vehicles are everywhere. The most visible project is the beltway being built around the city.

853An aerial view of Erbil, in Iraqi Kurdistan, featuring the ancient Erbil Citadel in the center. (Image source: Wikimedia Commons/Jan Kurdistani)

Political pluralism has come to the Kurdish north as well. While the Kurdistan Democratic Party [KDP] and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan [PUK] respectively remain the one-two political powerhouses, they now have plenty of company. No one party dominates the parliament. There is plenty of horse-trading on issues, fleeting coalitions, and new political personalities are being heard. Nevertheless, the most influential and respected leaders still come from the Barzani extended family, which run the KDP. The late Mustafa Barzani (1903-1979) is revered as the warrior-godfather of modern Kurdistan.

Kurds, for the most part, are a welcoming lot. The methodical and rapid settlement of tens of thousands of refugees from IS-controlled Iraq required bold leadership by the Barzani-led government and especially from the Catholic hierarchy of Kurdistan. This success also reflects the compassion of a self-confident people. The population of the Dohok region, for example has doubled due to the influx of refugees. There is no observable tension between the newcomers and the population of the host country. Despite the inveterate resentment of the excesses of past Arab regimes, Kurdistan is a multi-ethnic and multi-religious society. It has become even more so with the emigration from other parts of Iraq of Turkmen, Yezidis, and Christian Assyrians and Arabs. It is also a society that rejects religious zealotry. Most Kurds are Sunni Muslim and one can hear the five-times-a-day Muslim call to prayer, but it is muted and ignored by most.

Men, mostly, walk on the streets of Erbil, Dohok, and Zako, especially at night. Kurdistan is not, however, a society that represses women. There are many in parliament, and they are outspoken on the issue of violence to females in Kurdish society. At one conference in mid-November, at least half of the speakers were women prominent in Kurdistan. Women military volunteers are widely admired. The Kurdish media celebrates the Kurdish Peshmerga‘s female fighters. One woman — a veteran of the fierce battle to save the Syrian Kurdish town of Kobane (near Turkey’s border) from an IS takeover — who recently visited Erbil, was received as a national hero. Female Yezidis who have escaped after torture by IS operatives are deeply admired too.

Zako, once the center of Kurdistan’s Jewish population, still invites back descendants of those who long ago left for Zion. Zako’s isolated villages are the wild west of Kurdistan. Its stark beauty against a ring of mountain chains may become a tourist magnet both for its ancient historical attractions and recreational possibilities.

For all of the above reasons, Kurdistan reminds one of Israel. Like Israel, Kurdistan is not dominated by the Arab, nor by Islam. Like Israel, Kurdistan is more democratic than any of its neighbors. Like Israel, Kurdistan is surrounded by enemies that wish it did not exist. Like Israel, Kurdistan looks West. And like Israel, Kurdistan has maintained an internal equilibrium though all the world betrays it.

Israel’s need for Jordan’s king diminishing

December 25, 2014

Op-Ed: Israel’s need for Jordan’s king diminishingIn the wake of the Hashemites aligning themselves with the Muslim Brotherhood to stay in power, promoting anti-Israel resolutions at the UN Security Council, and possessing structural weaknesses in their Air Force, is Jordan a reliable ally for Israel?

Dec 25, 2014, 02:09 PM | Rachel Avraham

via Israel News – Op-Ed: Israel’s need for Jordan’s king diminishing – JerusalemOnline.

 

Yarmoul TV, the official Muslim Brotherhood channel, which is licensed by the Jordanian king and broadcasts to the entire world from Jordan, broadcasted a song titled “Run over that settler” which was an even bigger hit in the Arab world than the PA version.

Many people in Israel falsely believe that supporting the Hashemite Monarchy is critical for Israel’s security needs, as Jordan possesses the longest border with Israel and they believe that the Hashemites are an ally in the war against Islamic State and other Islamist radical groups.     However, in the wake of the Hashemites aligning themselves with the Muslim Brotherhood to stay in power, promoting anti-Israel resolutions at the UN Security, and Islamic State capturing a 24-year-old Jordanian pilot, one should ponder whether the Hashemites are a reliable partner for Israel and if it is a wise policy to continue relying upon Jordan’s king to keep the Islamists out of power in Jordan.

While the international community has been disturbed by the gruesome images emerging of a 24-year-old Jordanian pilot being taken hostage by Islamic State after his F-16 fighter jet was reportedly shot down by the terror group, few have pondered the broader issue of whether Jordan’s king can be a trusted ally in the War against Terrorism. Jordanian Palestinian journalist Mudar Zahran noted: “From a technical point of view, let us examine the capability of the Jordanian Air Force which is involved in the war on IS.”

“The Jordanians have a fleet of F-16s, approximately 60 of which have been delivered by the US over the last 10 years,” he noted. “Those jets are not modern ones. They are basically F-16’s type A and B, which represent the early model of the jet. Nevertheless, they have been upgraded by the Dutch and Belgium Air Force which conducted what is known as mid-life upgrades to the F-16 models, which gave them more stability and made them comparable to later models such as the F-16 C and D. While the Jordanians have received modern jets from the US, they still hold the world’s record on crashed F-16’s. Officially, Jordan has admitted that 9 jets fell during regular training missions. Given that their fleet size is 60; that is a very high number.”

Zahran believes that the reason why so many Jordanian F-16s crash is because the Jordanian Air Force recruits based on who is a political favorite of the monarchy rather than solid qualifications or even physical strength: “For starters, the Jordanian Air Force allows high school graduates who concentrated in literature enter, even though they have less knowledge of math and science, despite the fact that an understanding of aerodynamics is essential. At the same time, the minimum grade point average required to enter the Jordanian training program for pilots is 60%, basically a D average.”

Rhaed Khames, the Shadow Secretary of Defense for the Jordanian Coalition of Opposition who for 20 years was a commander in the Jordanian Army, commented that the quality of Jordanian trainees is not proper. He stressed that “like everything else in Jordan, it is based on whether the king likes your family or not and the hot shots make their children become pilots.” Furthermore, Khames noted that “if you think those operating the Jordanian jets and even managing the Jordanian Air Force are all moderates, think again.” He noted that Captain Majali, a cousin to the king’s security chief and who was formerly in the Jordanian Air Force, defected from his job and joined Islamic State. He died while fighting for Islamic State five months ago. Given this, Zahran questions how useful the Jordanian Air Force can potentially be in the War against Islamic State and other Islamist groups.

However, the problem with Jordan being relied upon as an ally for Israel and the west does not end with the weaknesses of the Jordanian Air Force. CNN confirmed that Jordan is one of the biggest purchasers of IS oil on the black market. One must ponder, does Jordan’s king use the oil it purchases from Islamic State to fuel those F-16 fighter jets? And given that the Hashemites are relying upon the Muslim Brotherhood to stay in power and that the Muslim Brotherhood openly supports Islamic State, facts that were previously reported on JerusalemOnline, how can Israel view the Jordanian monarchy as a reliable partner?

It should be noted that Yarmoul TV, the official Muslim Brotherhood channel, which is licensed by the Jordanian king and broadcasts to the entire world from Jordan, broadcasted a song titled “Run over that settler” which was an even bigger hit in the Arab world than the PA version. Zahran noted that the anti-Israel incitement in the Jordanian media is worse than it is in the Palestinian Authority. For example, Khalil Ateyeh, a MP loyal to the Jordanian King, stated specifically, “I hate the Jews.”

Additionally, YNEWS reported that the Jordanian King was the one who proposed to Kerry a peace plan that calls upon Israel withdrawing to the 1967 borders, which many have noted are not the “secure and recognized borders” envisioned by UN Security Council Resolution 242 and contradict understandings reached between former US President George Bush and former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. The Hashemites have also supported Palestinian unilateral efforts that violate previous agreements the Palestinians reached with Israel and Jordanian Ambassador to the US Alia Bouran boasted how Jordan is behind the anti-Israel resolution presently at the UN Security Council.

Upon reading these facts, many may wonder, given this, what alternative does Israel have other than to support the Jordanian king? Many fear that the only choices are between the Hashemites on the one hand and Islamic State/Muslim Brotherhood on the other. For these peoples, it is critical to note that Jordan is not Egypt. In Jordan, the Muslim Brotherhood supports the king staying in power, preferring to reform the regime rather than topple it. For this reason, Zahran does not believe that IS views toppling the Hashemites to be a priority, as they view time to be on their side.   They merely have to wait until the country radicalizes more by the Muslim Brotherhood before getting rid of the Hashemites.

However, in a recent article published in the Jewish Press, Zahran warned: “At the right time, IS could capitalize on the anger and frustration of Jordanians, including the majority of Palestinian heritage. Under this king, Jordanians of Palestinian origins are denied state jobs, education and healthcare and are forced to pay taxes which others do not pay. They are also under-represented in the parliament and discriminated against on business opportunities. All of this has led to a wide spread frustration.”

“In addition, the Jordanian East Bankers have been particularly disgruntled by the king’s incredibly lavish life style and the way he treats them, for example, confiscating their vast tribal lands and registering those in his name,” Zahran wrote. “In other words, the Jordanian public is a fertile ground of anger that could be easily exploited by IS. While the American establishment-US Department of State in particular- has failed to establish connections to Jordan’s secular /pro-peace opposition, Jordanians are left abandoned with nobody to turn to and desperate for any change. That thrust for “change” might be abused by IS.”

Jordanian East Bank opposition leader Muhammad Mubaideen told the Jewish Press: ”People are so desperate; they are now hoping IS would come and change their conditions. They have nothing to lose and they want to try anyone other than this king.” Emad Tariffi, member of the Jordanian Coalition of Opposition-who is now in jail, reported similar things: “People have lost any hope for change under the king; most of them hope IS could topple the king now.”

In other words, the international community is repeating the same mistake in Jordan that they made in Syria. At the beginning of the Syrian Revolution, there were pro-democracy activists who were fighting against Assad that sought to create a viable democracy within their country. They were not hostile towards the west and would have at the very least kept the status quo with Israel. However, the world was silent and did not support them. As the revolution waged on in Syria, these people were either killed off, forced to flee for their lives or to go underground, as mostly Islamists took over the Syrian Revolution. It got to the point where now, outside of the Kurdish areas, the two strongest groups are Assad backed by Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood, Islamic State and other Islamist groups.

Now, the Jordanian opposition is dominated by secular pro-democracy activists that greatly admire General Sisi in Egypt. They want to maintain the peace treaty with Israel and are very much opposed to the Islamists. However, these people are routinely persecuted by the monarchy and without outside assistance, the moment that IS decides to overthrow the Hashemites, the seculars who have faced persecution that the Muslim Brotherhood never experienced within the country will be at a disadvantage, which could lead to the Islamists taking over Jordan. For Israel and the west, remaining silent and not supporting the Jordanian secular opposition has not been a prudent move. Will the Israeli leadership change course before it is too late?

Netanyahu and Jordan's king

Netanyahu and Jordan’s king Photo Credit: Government Press Office

The unlikely founding fathers of the Islamic State

December 24, 2014

The unlikely founding fathers of the Islamic State

 By Missing Peace

via The unlikely founding fathers of the Islamic State | Missing Peace | missingpeace.eu | EN.

 

Islamic State

The rise of the Islamic State (sometimes called ISIL) is commonly seen in the West as something that emerged more or less out of the blue. US President Obama for instance has said the dramatic rise of IS was not anticipated by the intelligence services of the US.

That’s not true, however. At about the time that Obama made this claim, European diplomats stationed in Syria told a journalist working for an Asian newspaper that the CIA had repeatedly warned the US government of the danger posed to America by the IS. The CIA termed it the greatest threat to the US since the Second World War, according to the diplomats.

So it may be more accurate to say it was Obama himself who underestimated the danger of the Islamist movement, and who chose to ignore the CIA’s warnings.

Why? Because heeding those CIA warnings would have meant admitting that US policy in Syria and Iraq had failed, and that his disengagement policy in the Middle East needed significant adjusting.

Von Oppenheim’s Jihad strategy

As we will see,the Islamic State ‘s current campaign of Jihad is not only unsurprising but is in large measure the result of a strategy that has been known for  more than a hundred and twenty years and was devised by a German diplomat of Jewish origin.

That diplomat was Max von Oppenheim, born in Cologne in 1860 to a Jewish banking family whose members converted to Catholicism after his birth.

Von Oppenheim traveled throughout the Middle East in the last years of the 19th century, visiting Syria, Mesopotamia (now called Iraq), the Persian Gulf, Morocco and Egypt. After his return to Germany, he published his observations in a two-volume book. He studied law and, later, Arabic in Egypt, and in 1896 was became an attaché at German’s embassy in Cairo, Egypt.

During that Egyptian stint, von Oppenheim authored 467 reports on the Middle East, including a lengthy report on the rise of the Pan-Islamic movement. These influenced and to an extent even determined German policies in the region. He eventually became a key adviser to the German emperor Wilhelm.

On the eve of Wilhelm’s visit to the Middle East in 1889, von Oppenheim recommended that Germany support the emerging Islamist movement. This, he argued, would benefit German interests in the region. On one hand, the Germans were without colonies in the Middle East. On the other, the area’s Muslims sought an end to the dominance of the Christian powers – Great Britain, France and Russia – in a region with a Muslim-majority population. There was therefore a shared interest. The Muslims alone were not able to bring an end to foreign domination. And German was anxious to expand its influence in the Middle East at the expense of the French and British.

In his report to the emperor on Pan-Islamism, Von Oppenheim explained that the Muslims already had established a Caliphate, an overarching state, in the Middle East in the seventh century and that state had existed for centuries. The German diplomat argued that the Ottoman Turks had managed to breathe new life into this state and had succeeded in attracting Muslimloyalty to the Sultan/Caliph.

The Muslim masses increasingly viewed the Ottoman leader as the protector of Islam and its holy sites, Von Oppenheim wrote. He concluded that if the Sultan would issue a fatwa calling for Jihad, three hundred million Muslims could be counted upon to rise in revolt and put an end to Anglo-French dominance in the Middle East.

The mission, in his words, was therefore “to unleash Muslim fanaticism that would border on madness”.

Von Oppenheim’s plan led to a pact between Germany and the Ottoman Empire.  However, the concept of a massive jihad that might have produced a German-Turkish victory over the Allies in the First World War failed completely.

Mainly, this was the result of fundamental errors in his analysis. Von Oppenheim ignored the internal divisions in the Muslim world, for instance. And he over-estimated the extent of Arab acceptance of the Turkish Caliph’s authority.

But along with a group of German Middle East experts, Von Oppenheim succeeded in establishing Islamist groups that did in fact begin to execute the planned Jihad in certain Muslim countries.

In November 1914, he dispatched a 136-page plan entitled “Revolutionizing the Islamic territories of our enemies” to his emperor. The plan was quickly approved and Von Oppenheim’s team was provided with the necessary funds. Shortly afterwards, Von Oppenheim’s terrorist groups began deploying suicide attacks as a means of achieving their goals. In India, for instance, a group of 25 Jihadists attacked British targets.

German experts

The German experts recognized that there was a risk the forces of jihad would eventually be out of control and turn into an offensive against the West. The unfolding of events after the defeat of Germany and Turkey in World War I and the emergence of Franco-British domination over the Middle East resulting in the Sykes Picot agreement proved them right.

Sykes-Picot, in particular, resulted in a redefined Middle East of states whose borders were drawn by the French and British. These borders however failed to take account of the tribal nature that had long characterized the Middle East. They also ignored the sharp divisions between Sunni and Shiite Muslims.

The so-called Arab Spring in 2010 represented a kind of turning point. Dictatorships in the area had prevented some of the states that emerged under British-French influence from falling apart. Their leaders had more or less succeeded in curbing sectarian violence within their borders.

But then came the fall of dictators like Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak and Gaddafi of Libya. These changes, plus the uprising against Assad in Syria and the reduction in the United States’ Middle East influence finally offered Islamists the opportunity to establish a new order based on their interpretation of Islam.

Immediately after proclaiming the establishment of an Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, ISIL was able to triumphantly announce – with a certain degree of justification – that the Sykes-Picot era had finally come to an end.

Hitler and Husseini

Following the failure of Von Oppenheim’s plan in World War I, a second German attempt was made by Hitler through his alliance with the Islamist, Haj Amin al-Husseini.

Husseini originally harbored pan-Arab ambitions, aspiring to become the leader of the Arab world. He eventually settled for becoming the Grand Mufti of Palestine and the de facto leader of the Palestinian Arabs.

Husseini and Hitler shared a deep hatred of the Jews and other common interests. Hitler sought an Arab leader who would promote his agenda of world domination in the Middle East. Husseini in turn needed a Western ally who would prevent the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine and put an end to Western domination of Muslim countries.

Husseini’s collaboration with the Nazis is well known. It went well beyond preventing the emergence of a Jewish state in the Middle East. For example, Hitler took the decision to embrace the so-called ‘Entlosung ’, the strategy of systematically exterminating European Jewry, a few hours after a meeting with Husseini. During that meeting, Husseini had exerted pressure on Hitler to solve the “Jewish problem” once and for all.

In 1944, Husseini succeeded in preventing a deal between the Germans and the Allied forces in which 5,000 Jewish children would be exchanged for Allied prisoners of war, and frustrated the escape of 14,000 Jewish children from Hungary. Almost all of these children were later murdered in the Nazi death camps.

Husseini spent much of World War II living in Berlin, establishing his headquarters in a confiscated Jewish mansion. The Nazis provided him with funds to undertake a range of Islamic projects in Europe and beyond.

He developed a plan to establish death camps in Arab countries for the intended extermination of the Jews in the Middle East. This failed because of the 1942 defeat of the advancing German army at El Alamein, Egypt and the collapse of Hitler’s Africa Korps.    Most of the Middle East’s Jews thus escaped the Holocaust.

Husseini escaped prosecution for war crimes after World War II, largely for political reasons. He was thus able to continue to lead the jihad against Israel and keep the Islamist movement alive. In May1946, carrying a false passport, he escaped from French custody and fled to Egypt. Once in Cairo, he founded a new army al-Jihad al-Muqaddas, under the leadership of another Nazi collaborator, al-Qawuqii. With a training camp near the Libyan border, its soldiers prepared for the ”struggle against the Zionists” and participated in the War of Independence in 1948.

Following the Arab defeat in the 1948 war, Husseini united the Islamists under his leadership in a new organization called the Islamic World Congress (IWC). Among its other prominent members: Sayyid Qutb, the ideologue of the Muslim Brotherhood; and the Iranian Islamic spiritual leader Abd al-Qasim al-Kashani. One of Kashani students was Ruhollah Khomeini who went on in 1979 to lead Iran’s Islamic revolution.

Husseini moved the headquarters of the Islamic World Congress (IWC) to Karachi, Pakistan,in 1949. He appointed Dr. Inamullah Khan as its Secretary General. Khan, known for his hatred of Jews, nevertheless became the recipient of the prestigious 1988 Templeton Prize for Progress in. This prize had been awarded in previous years to Mother Teresa and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.

Syrian Islamist Maaruf al-Dawalibi, who had also collaborated with the Nazis, was Husseini’s successor. In 1984, he declared at a United Nations seminar that Hitler had been right when he wanted to exterminate the Jews because of their belief that they were God’s chosen people. In the same speech, he repeated the classic anti-Semitic blood libel that the Talmud commands the Jews to drink the blood of non-Jews at Passover.

Jihad in Europe

Said Ramadan, the son-in-law of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan al-Banna, was asked by Husseini to spread the Islamist ideology in Europe. In 1958, Ramadan fled to Geneva due to the repression of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Syria. In 1959, Ramadan wrote a dissertation on Islamic Sharia law called “Islamic Law: Its Scope and Equity” for the University of Cologne in which he called upon European Muslims to fight against Western secular culture in Europe.

Ramadan, aided by money from al-Husseini’s Nazi funds and later with the financial help of Saudi Arabia, began a process whereby local Muslim communities in Europe came under the control of the IWC and the Muslim Brotherhood. By 2000, many Muslim communities in Europe had adopted the Islamist ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood and were led by members of the organization.

After Ramadan’s death, Ali GhalebHimmat, one of his lieutenants, became the leader of one of Europe’s most important beachheads of radicalIslam – a mosque in the German city of Munich. The mosque had beenestablished by Muslims who had fought for the Nazis.

Together with the Syrian Islamist Yusuf Mustafa Nada Ibada, Himmat built a global financial network for the Muslim Brotherhood. In 1988, they founded the al-Taqwa bank that was involved in financing the Al Qaeda attack on the United States on 11 September 2011. The main architect of the attack on the US was Aiman al-Zawahiri, the current leader of Al Qaeda. He is the grandson of Abd al-WahhabAzzam, who was the spiritual leader of Hajj Amin al-Husseini. Al-Wahhab was the brother of Abd al-Rahman Azzam , the first Secretary General of the Arab League. During World War II, Abd al-Rahman Azzam worked as a secret agent for the Nazis under al-Husseini.

From Hassan al-Banna to ISIL

Prior to his membership of Al-Qaeda, the Egyptian Al-Zawahiri was the leader of Tanzim al-Jihad, the group responsible for the assassination of President Anwar Sadat. He was strongly influenced by Sayyid Qutb, the ideologue of the Muslim Brotherhood.

In one of his writings, he wrote that Qutb started the Islamic revolution against the enemies of Islam in the Middle East and beyond. This bloody revolution continues up to this day, wrote Al-Zawahiri. He fully endorsed Qutb’s view that the establishment of the kingdom of Allah on earth cannot be achieved through prayer and preaching alone. In order to reach this goal, it was necessary that those who did not recognize Allah’s authority should be killed.

According to Qutb and al-Zawahiri, Islam permits killing people in Jihad for Allah.

Al-Zawahiri also explained the importance of the mobilization for Jihad against the enemies of Islam. Since the end of the Anglo-French domination in the Middle East, these enemies had been replaced by the United States and Israel.

This Jihad is not – like the Sufi version of Islam says – a spiritual struggle of the Muslim, but is the ultimate battle between Islam and the infidels and their societies. This is the main theme that connects all Islamist groups and that is practiced by Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic State, Boko Haram (whose name means Western education is forbidden) and many other Islamist movements.

In this view, Jihad against the Jews (and other infidels) becomes a primary religious duty. In this respect, there is no difference between the ideas of Khomeini, Khamenei, Al Qutb, Bin Laden, Al-Zawahiri, al-Husseini, IS leader al-Baghdadi, the current Brotherhood ideologue Yusuf al-Qaradawi and Hamas leaders.

All have said publicly that the Jews control the world and that they are the enemies of Allah and must be expelled from Muslim land (meaning Palestine) or they are to be killed. They also stated that Jihad should continue until Islam rules the world.

So the ideology of the Islamic State is not new. It is rooted in the ideology of Islamists who previously, not coincidentally, collaborated with the Nazis.

The similarities between the methods of IS and those of the Nazis are striking as well as the ideology that underlies those methods. For Islamic State, the ‘ubermensch’ is a Muslim who has abandoned the state of barbaric negligence (Jahaliyah) which in IS view also prevails in Arab countries and that is typical of the West. Jahaliyah existed before the advent of Muhammad and the goal of Islamists is to bring the Umma, the Islamic world community, back to the early days of Islam and the path of the upright Caliphs who led the Islamic empire at the time.

Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna, who was an admirer of Hitler and Mussolini, had the model of the SS in mind when he founded the so-called shock battalions. These battalions intended to do what ISIL is now doing in Iraq and Syria. So it comes as no surprise that a variation on al-Banna’s slogan can now be seen on the black flags of Islamic State: ‘Allah is our objective, the Koran is our constitution, the Prophet our leader; struggle is our way and death for Allah is our highest aspiration. ‘

This article is partly based on research by Middle East expert professor Barry Rubin

Beating Bibi: Obama’s Last Campaign

December 24, 2014

Beating Bibi: Obama’s Last CampaignThe real goal of the Obama administration is to bring Netanyahu down.

by Rich Baehr

December 23, 2014 – 10:47 pm

via Beating Bibi: Obama’s Last Campaign | PJ Media.

 

Barack Obama has proven to be a determined man when it comes to achieving goals he really cares about. He may not get everything he wants when he wants it, but he has shown that there is often more than one way to advance his agenda, and he can be patient when the political environment is unfavorable. This has been true on both the domestic front and in foreign policy.

Obama has used federal agencies such as the EPA and NLRB to move aggressively to favor Obama interests (bashing coal producers, making it easier for workers to organize into unions) when Congress did not adopt climate change legislation or “card check” legislation. The Department of Health and Human Services has regularly changed the rules of Obamacare, seemingly making the rules up as they go along when it became clear that certain provisions were either very badly conceived or politically unpalatable to important Obama interest groups.

There has also been subterfuge to make it seem that the abuse of the separation of powers and routine bypassing of Congress has not really occurred. The president says he has issued far fewer executive orders than prior presidents, when in fact he has issued far more when you include his memoranda – which serve the same purpose.

In foreign policy, the administration has pursued several policies with the same doggedness. One of these has been to damage the historically close ties between Israel and the United States. The alternative way to say this is that so long as Israel elects leaders who do not see things the way the administration does, it will be very much out of favor with the White House.

Over the first six years of the Obama administration, there is little that Israel under the leadership of Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu has ever done right according to the White House or the State Department. Conversely, almost nothing the Palestinians have done has been called out for similar criticism. Meanwhile, the administration has pursued a new relationship with Iran (much as it has with Cuba), signaling that traditional alliances and enmities were out the window with this administration. The obsession of Secretary of State Kerry with pushing the Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations and the Iranian nuclear negotiations seems to be a mix of legacy-building for both Kerry and Obama, but also part of the shift away from the traditional alliance with Israel.

A goal of the White House seems to have been to break the bipartisan support for a strong U.S-Israel relationship in Congress by making it far easier for Democrats to go their own way. In essence, the White House has facilitated a transition within the party to better reflect the views of the Democratic Party’s base, now heavily made up of younger voters and minorities, among whom there is not nearly as much support for Israel as in the past. The Obama administration has set in place a longer-term process to separate Democrats in Congress from their historic role as strong supporters of Israel.

Whether Obama is following his base on this issue or leading it is a different question. As the single most visible political figure in government, when a president is viewed as being engaged in a bitter feud with a foreign leader, as the press has dutifully reported is the case between Netanyahu and Obama, a strong message has been delivered. This message particularly gets to those who support the president in general, and on pretty much all specific issues. The president has also blessed and opened the White House’s door to J Street, an organization allegedly committed to both Israel and peace. In reality, the group is a “blocking back for the White House,” as its own leaders have admitted, for the regular Israel-bashing and pressure campaign that has been underway since both Obama and Netanyahu took office in 2009. If one looks for instances of J Street uttering a kind word about Netanyahu, you will find even fewer than those from the president himself.

Prime Minister Netanyahu’s government has collapsed following the firing of two ministers from parties in his coalition that had broken with his government. New elections have been called for March 17. The Israeli election system is a parliamentary one, although one without legislative districts. Parties nominate slates and determine the order of their candidates. If a party wins 20 of 120 seats in the Knesset, based on their share of the overall vote among the parties who register at least 3.5% of the total vote, then the first 20 names on that party’s list will become Knesset members.

Thirteen parties hold seats in the current Knesset (the hurdle until this current election  had been only 2% of the total vote for representation for a party), an indication of the fragmentation of the current system. After the Knesset elections are held, since no single party ever wins a majority on its own or even comes close, the country’s president picks the leader of a party that he thinks has the best chance of putting together a coalition of parties to get to at least 61 seats, a Knesset majority. That has been Netanyahu for two consecutive elections, though a third victory is not assured.

A recent poll shows right-wing parties winning 40 seats, left-wing and Arab parties winning 40 seats, and 40 seats up for “sale” (or persuasion), though many of these would be with religious parties generally more comfortable as part of a right-wing government.

One of the issues Bibi has to deal with is that many Israeli voters are concerned about deteriorating U.S.-Israei relations. Israel has few allies beyond America, Canada under Stephen Harper, and Australia most of the time. Among these three, of course American support has always mattered most, given the history of foreign aid, weapons supply, and the Americans’ Security Council veto. European behavior, on the other hand, has become  more viper-like every week. Most Israelis are smart enough to understand that whatever Netanyahu’s faults, the problems in the relationship the last few years have been largely created by the Obama administration. Though there are some who are right-of-center on security issues who might think that someone other than Bibi might be better able to shepherd the country through the rocky last two years of the Obama administration, since any new president after Obama is unlikely to be so hostile.

When Bill Clinton was president, he allowed his campaign team, including pollster Stanley Greenberg, Bob Shrum, current J Street operative Jim Gerstein, and Jim Carville, to assist Labor party leader Ehud Barak and to help bring down Netanyahu’s government  in 1999. Greenberg is going back to Israel to help the Labor Party again. Surely, this has the Obama seal of approval.

The Obama team may have overplayed its hand when it allowed a rumor to get out that sanctions against Israel over its settlement building had been discussed at the White House. Congressional Democrats pushed back hard against the idea, and the administration denied it had ever come up. A few weeks back, a reporter close to the White House had repeated various obscenities which top administration figures had used to describe Netanyahu, including “chickens**t.”

This week, Secretary of State Kerry seems to be trying a different approach, by reassuring Israel that the U.S. will use its veto in the Security Council (if it has to, assuming the Palestinians collect nine votes) to prevent the Palestinian Authority from getting its resolution passed on a two-year deadline for statehood within the 1967 borders. Of course, Kerry has generally been milder in his public criticisms of Israel than the off-the-record amateurs at the White House. At the same time, Kerry has let slip that Israeli leaders from the left believe a debate and vote on a PA resolution at the UN now will only solidify support for Netanyahu and right-wing parties, so he is loathe to give Bibi an assist.

In any case, the administration seems to be trying to deliver two messages: things could get far worse for Israel in the next two years (we won’t use our veto at the UN next time), or there could be more support if Israel is more forthcoming and accepts the American approach (offering concessions to the Palestinians and not opposing a U.S.-Iran nuclear deal). Of course, since Bibi Netanyahu is unlikely to become a J Street prime minister, the real goal of the administration, as was the case in the Clinton administration, is to bring him down.

IS captures Jordanian pilot after warplane crashes in Syria

December 24, 2014

IS captures Jordanian pilot after warplane crashes in Syria

via BBC News – IS captures Jordanian pilot after warplane crashes in Syria.

 

Photo posted online by Raqqa Media Center purportedly showing Jordanian pilot Flight Lieutenant Moaz Youssef al-Kasasbeh captured by Islamic State militants near the Syrian city of Raqqa (24 December 2014)
The pro-IS Raqqa Media Center posted photos purportedly showing the captured Jordanian pilot

slamic State (IS) militants have captured the pilot of a Jordanian warplane that crashed in northern Syria, Jordan’s military has confirmed.

The jihadist group claimed it had shot down the jet with a heat-seeking missile near the city of Raqqa.

It published photographs showing the pilot, who has been named as Flight Lieutenant Moaz Youssef al-Kasasbeh.

This is the first US-led coalition aircraft to be lost on IS territory since air strikes began in September.

Jordan is one of four Arab states which have bombed targets in Syria.

Plea for mercyThe confirmation that a Jordanian pilot had been captured came in a statement carried by the state news agency, Petra.

 

Photo published by Raqqa Media Center purportedly showing wreckage of downed Jordanian warplane near IS-held Syrian city of Raqqa (24 December 2014)
IS fighters were shown loading the wreckage of the Jordanian aircraft on to a vehicle
Photo published by Raqqa Media Center purportedly showing wreckage of downed Jordanian warplane near IS-held Syrian city of Raqqa (24 December 2014)
Jordan’s military said the jet was one of several involved in a raid on IS hideouts in the Raqqa region
Photo published by Raqqa Media Center purportedly showing wreckage of downed Jordanian warplane near IS-held Syrian city of Raqqa (24 December 2014)
The aircraft appeared to come down near a river or lake, outside the city of Raqqa

“During a mission Wednesday morning conducted by several Royal Jordanian Air Force planes against hideouts of the IS terrorist organisation in the Raqqa region, one of the planes went down and the pilot was taken hostage,” a military source was quoted as saying.

“Jordan holds the group and its supporters responsible for the safety of the pilot and his life,” the source added.

The source did not name the pilot, but Petra published a photo of Flt Lt Kasasbeh above its report.

line

Analysis: Jonathan Marcus, BBC defence correspondent

We do not know yet if the Jordanian aircraft suffered an engine failure or other technical problem, or if it was actually downed by IS air defences.

IS has been assumed to have a limited air defence capability – based not least on the sorts of shoulder-fired missiles that are rife in the region.

IS fighters have downed Iraqi and Syrian government aircraft and helicopters in the past. We also know that IS has overrun a number of Syrian air defence bases.

It is not clear if IS has personnel capable of operating any of these more sophisticated Soviet or Russian-supplied systems.

The US-led coalition permanently monitors the nature of the air defence threat and if the Jordanian aircraft was shot down then any potential lessons will be fed into the ongoing air campaign.

line

Earlier, the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, said it had received reports from its network of activists that IS members had taken “an Arab pilot prisoner after shooting his plane down with an anti-aircraft missile near the city of Raqqa”.

The pro-IS Raqqa Media Center also posted a photo on its Facebook page showing armed men taking the pilot out of what appeared to be a lake or river.

The man appeared able to stand but was bleeding from the mouth. He was wearing only a white T-shirt and was soaking wet.

A caption identified him as Lt Kasasbeh and later a photo appearing to show his military ID card was published.

 

Moaz Youssef al-Kasasbeh

Photo on Moaz Youssef al-Kasasbeh's Facebook page showing him standing next to a Jordanian air force jet
  • Born in the city of Karak in Jordan in 1988, he is 26 years old
  • Has been a Royal Jordanian Air Force pilot for six years
  • Currently holds the rank of flight lieutenant
  • One of eight children, he got married in July
line

Lt Kasasbeh’s father, Youssef al-Kasasbeh, confirmed his son had been captured in Syria in an interview with the Jordanian newspaper, Saraya.

Youssef al-Kasasbeh said he found out the news after the head of the RJAF informed another of his sons.

He appealed to IS leaders: “May Allah plant mercy in your hearts and may you release my son.”

The air forces of Jordan, the US, UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain have carried out hundreds of air strikes on IS in Syria in the past three months.

Many of the targets have been in and around Raqqa, which is the de facto capital of the “caliphate” whose creation IS proclaimed in June.

German author Juergen Todenhoefer recently met Islamic State fighters in Raqqa and filmed daily life

Syrian government warplanes also regularly bomb Raqqa and the surrounding province. On Tuesday, an air strike killed more than 20 people, according to the Syrian Observatory.

Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, the Netherlands and UK have joined the US in conducting air strikes on IS in neighbouring Iraq.

The BBC’s Jim Muir in Beirut says the latest news will raise concern among the coalition nations about the level of armament available to the militants and the defensive measures deployed by coalition jets.

It may further diminish the appetite of Arab nations to take part in such operation, our correspondent adds.

Map of IS areas of control