Historians will have the rest of the century to unravel the mess that is the Barack Obama presidency. While they can explore these years of foreign policy disaster and domestic malaise at leisure, the rest of us have 29 more months to see just how awful things can get before he slides off to a lucrative retirement. But those who want to start the post-mortem on this historic presidency would do well to read Jackson Diehl’s most recent Washington Post column in which he identifies Obama’s hubris as the key element in his undoing.
As our Pete Wehner wrote earlier today, the president’s reactions to what even Chuck Hagel, his less-than-brilliant secretary of defense, has rightly called a world that is “exploding all over” by blaming it all on forces that he is powerless to control. As Pete correctly pointed out, no one is arguing that the president of the United States is all-powerful and has the capacity to fix everything in the world that is out of order. But the problem is not so much the steep odds against which the administration is currently struggling, as its utter incapacity to look honestly at the mistakes it has made in the past five and half years and to come to the conclusion that sometimes you’ve got to change course in order to avoid catastrophes.
As has been pointed out several times here at COMMENTARY in the last month and is again highlighted by Diehl in his column, Obama’s efforts to absolve himself of all responsibility for the collapse in Iraq is completely disingenuous. The man who spent the last few years bragging about how he “ended the war in Iraq” now professes to have no responsibility for the fact that the U.S. pulled out all of its troops from the conflict.
Nor is he willing to second guess his dithering over intervention in Syria. The administration spent the last week pushing back hard against Hillary Clinton’s correct, if transparently insincere, criticisms of the administration in which she served, for having stood by and watched helplessly there instead of taking the limited actions that might well have prevented much of that country — and much of Iraq — from falling into the hands of ISIS terrorists.
The same lack of honesty characterizes the administration’s approach to the Israel-Palestinian conflict and the nuclear negotiations with Iran, two topics that Diehl chose not to highlight in his piece.
Obama wasted much of his first term pointlessly quarreling with Israel’s government and then resumed that feud this year after an intermission for a re-election year Jewish charm offensive. This distancing from Israel and the reckless pursuit of an agreement when none was possible helped set up this summer’s fighting. The result is not only an alliance that is at its low point since the presidency of the elder George Bush but a situation in which the U.S. now finds itself pushing the Israelis to make concessions to Hamas as well as the Palestinian Authority, a state of affairs that guarantees more fighting in the future and a further diminishment of U.S. interests in the region.
On Iran, Obama wasted years on feckless engagement efforts before finally accepting the need for tough sanctions on that nation to stop its nuclear threat. But the president tossed the advantage he worked so hard to build by foolishly pursuing détente with Tehran and loosening sanctions just at the moment when the Iranians looked to be in trouble.
On both the Palestinian and the Iranian front, an improvement in the current grim prospects for U.S. strategy is not impossible. But, as with the situation in Iraq, it will require the kind of grim soul-searching that, as Diehl points out, George W. Bush underwent in 2006 before changing both strategy and personnel in order to pursue the surge that changed the course of the Iraq War. Sadly, Obama threw away the victory he inherited from Bush. If he is to recover in this final two years in office the way Bush did, it will require the same sort of honesty and introspection.
But, unfortunately, that seems to be exactly the qualities that are absent from this otherwise brilliant politician. Obama is a great campaigner — a talent that is still on display every time he takes to the road to blame Republicans for the problems he created — and is still personally liked by much of the electorate (even if his charms are largely lost on conservative critics such as myself). But he seems incapable of ever admitting error, especially on big issues. At the heart of this problem is a self-regard and a contempt for critics that is so great that it renders him incapable of focusing his otherwise formidable intellect on the shortcomings in his own thinking or challenging the premises on which he has based his policies.
Saying you’re wrong is not easy for any of us and has to be especially hard for a man who has been celebrated as a groundbreaking transformational figure in our history. But that is exactly what is required if the exploding world that Obama has helped set in motion is to be kept from careening even further out of control before his presidency ends. The president may think he’s just having an unlucky streak that he can’t do a thing about. While it is true that America’s options are now limited (largely due to his mistakes) in Syria and Iraq, there is plenty he can do to prevent things from getting worse there. It is also largely up to him whether Iran gets a nuclear weapon or Hamas is able to launch yet another war in the near future rather than being isolated. But in order to do the right things on these fronts, he will have to first admit that his previous decisions were wrong. Until he shed the hubris that prevents him from doing so, it will be impossible.
The US and other western powers have exerted pressure on the International Criminal Court at the Hague to prevent a war crimes probe of Israel’s operation in the Gaza Strip, The Guardian reported on Monday, quoting former court officials.
During Operation Protective Edge, the Palestinian Authority has threatened to request that the court look into allegations that the civilian deaths in Gaza during the IDF’s operation constitute a war crime.
According to the report, the issue is among the matters being discussed at cease-fire talks in Cairo.
Palestinians requested that the court probe Israel for war crimes in 2009 , following Operation Cast Lead, however that request came before the Palestinians were recognized as a non-member observer state at the United Nations in 2012.
The ICC itself is divided on whether or not it has jurisdiction to probe the matter based on the 2009 request, or whether a new request would have to be submitted, according to The Guardian. The Palestinian factions would have to agree on submitting a new request, a difficult task, as Hamas would also be opening itself up to a war crimes inquiry.
The Guardian reported that western pressure has prevented the ICC from taking the view that the 2009 request gives the court jurisdiction to open a war crimes investigation into Israel’s actions.
Both current ICC prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, and Luis Moreno Ocampo, who was prosecutor at the time of the 2009 Palestinian declaration, argue that a new Palestinian request would have to be made to allow the court to open an investigation. However, The Guardian quoted another former official of the court as saying, “They are trying to hide behind legal jargon to disguise what is a political decision, to rule out competence and not get involved.”
The French lawyer representing the Palestinians, Gilles Devers, was quoted by The Guardian as saying that “there is enormous pressure not to proceed with an investigation. This pressure has been exerted on Fatah and Hamas, but also on the office of the prosecutor.
“In both cases, it takes the form of threats to the financial subsidies, to Palestine and to the International Criminal Court,” he added.
Fighters from the al-Qaeda-linked Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL)
marching in Raqqa, Syria, June 2014. (photo credit: AP/Militant Website, File)
NITED NATIONS (AP) — UN Security Council members have reached agreement on a draft resolution that would punish the recruitment and financing of foreign fighters in Iraq and Syria and demand that all al-Qaeda-linked groups disarm and disband immediately, diplomats said Thursday.
Britain’s UN Mission, which currently holds the council presidency, said the resolution will be put to a vote at 3 p.m. EDT (19:00 GMT) on Friday. Diplomats expect it to be approved unanimously.
The resolution was drafted in response to the recent offensive by the Islamic State extremist group, which has taken control of a large swath of eastern Syria and northern and western Iraq, brutalizing civilians and forcing hundreds of thousands to flee, as well as increasing terrorist activity in Syria including by al-Qaeda-linked Jabhat al-Nusra.
It demands that the Islamic State group, Jabhat al-Nusra, “and all other individuals, groups, undertakings and entities associated with al-Qaeda cease all violence and terrorist acts, and disarm and disband with immediate effect.”
It also demands that “all foreign terrorist fighters” associated with the Islamic State group, which is a splinter group of al-Qaeda, and other terrorist groups “withdraw immediately.”
The draft resolution expresses the council’s readiness to impose sanctions on those recruiting, supporting and fighting for terrorist groups.
It names six people to be added to the sanctions blacklist and encourages the council committee monitoring sanctions “to urgently consider additional designations” of individuals and entities supporting the Islamic State group or Jabhat al-Nusra.
The Security Council adopted a wide-ranging resolution immediately after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United States to tackle terrorism, demanding that countries adopt national laws to combat terrorism and cooperate in bringing the perpetrators, organizers and sponsors of terrorist acts to justice. The council also extended sanctions against the Taliban in Afghanistan, which were imposed in 1999 to cover al-Qaeda and later its far-flung affiliates.
The draft resolution urges all countries to meet their obligations under the 2001 resolution and reaffirms its requirement that all countries prevent the financing and active or passive support for terrorist acts.
It notes “with concern” that oil fields controlled by the Islamic State group, Jabhat al-Nusra and other al-Qaeda-linked groups are generating income that is supporting their recruitment efforts and ability to carry out terrorist operations. It warns that any involvement in financing terrorism may lead to sanctions.
The draft resolution calls on all countries to take measures to suppress the flow of their citizens and residents to fight for terrorist groups and bring those who do to justice. It also encourages governments to engage with communities and individuals who are “at risk of recruitment and violent radicalization to discourage travel to Syria and Iraq” to fight for the Islamic State group, Jabhat al-Nusra and other terrorist groups.
More outrageous and depressing news from the Human Wrongs Rights Council. They never met a terrorist they couldn’t love. — AP)
My above title is intended to be a pun – the UN is no wonderland, the exact opposite in fact. And in parallel, the way the UN behaves towards Israel is so reminiscent of the Queen of Hearts’ words that it almost makes one want to chuckle.
Queen of Hearts: Now… are you ready for your sentence?
Alice: Sentence? But there has to be a verdict first…
Queen of Hearts: Sentence first! Verdict afterwards.
As most of you must have heard by now, the UN Human Wrongs Rights Council decision to investigate Israel’s “war crimes” committed during Operation Protective Edge. No matter that the operation is still ongoing, that the ceasefires have proven worthless and that truce talks are taking place at this moment in Cairo between all the sides.
Here is the statement from the UN Human Rights Council establishing a “commission of inquiry:”
…
to investigate all violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip, in the context of the military operations conducted since 13 June 2014. William Schabas will serve as Chair of the three-person commission mandated by the Council at its last special session.
June 13? Operation Protective Edge began on July 8. So why is the UN choosing June 13?
The answer tells you all you need to know about how biased the UNHRC is.
Hamas kidnapped and murdered Naftali Fraenkel, Gilad Shaer and Eyal Yifrah on June 12.
Israel started searching for them in the Hebron area on June 13.
The commission is being given a framework where they are supposed to believe that the kidnapping and murder were not acts of aggression, but Israel’s response was.
While it is true that the next paragraph tries to stave off this criticism by saying “whether before, during or after,” the very mention of that date and not the day before shows that its mandate “to establish the facts and circumstances of such violations and of the crimes perpetrated and to identify those responsible, …all with a view to avoiding and ending impunity and ensuring that those responsible are held accountable, and on ways and means to protect civilians against any further assaults” is directed only at Israel and not Hamas.
Hamas has never been accused of “impunity.” That is a NGO keyword that only applies to Israel in the context of this conflict.
This is not a mistake. Diplomats are very careful with statements like this, and using the words “military operations conducted since 13 June 2014″ shows that the UNHRC does not consider the kidnapping and murder of the teens to be within the mandate of the commission – only the Israeli response.
Kidnapping and targeting civilians is a war crime, by the way, so the choice of June 13 is a very deliberate attempt not only to portray Israel as the initiator of the hostilities but to whitewash Hamas war crimes.
None of this should come as a surprise to those of us who know the character of the UN (bad) and the UN Human Wrongs Rights Council (evil, malicious). Let’s add to this stinking pile the composition of the hastily gathered panel tasked with investigating Israel’s already-determined war crimes, and you get a witch-hunt worthy of the worst of the Salem trials.
Israel dismissed the Monday appointment of the three members of a UN human rights’ investigative committee to review the recent military operation in Gaza, saying the identity of the three proved that the results of the probe were a foregone conclusion.
The committee will be headed by Canadian Prof. William Schabas, and was to include British-Lebanese rights lawyer Amal Alamuddin, best known for her recent engagement to actor George Clooney, and Doudou Dienne of Senegal, who has previously served as the UN’s watchdog on racism and on post-conflict Ivory Coast.
However, Alamuddin later released a statement saying that she was too busy with eight other cases and could not take on the UN position.
The biggest problem is with the chairman of the panel, William Schabas, a man known for his deep hostility towards Israel, and towards Binyamin Netanyahu in particular.
William Schabas, anti-Israel chair of the UN investigatory panel
Schabas, a professor of International Law at London’s Middlesex University, has called for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former president Shimon Peres to stand trial at the International Criminal Court in The Hague for war crimes.
He also supported the 2010 Goldstone Report into Israel’s last ground offensive in Gaza, though he said in a later interview that the scale of destruction in Gaza did not compare to other atrocities in the world.
UN Watch, a Geneva-based watchdog with ties to Israel, slammed the appointment and called on Schabas to recuse himself.
“You can’t spend several years calling for the prosecution of someone, and then suddenly act as his judge,” UN Watch head Hillel Neuer said in a statement. “It’s absurd — and a violation of the minimal rules of due process applicable to UN fact-finding missions.”
Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations predicted on Wednesday that Jerusalem will not cooperate with the so-called “Schabas committee” that has been appointed to investigate alleged war crimes committed during Operation Protective Edge.
…
The Foreign Ministry said that Schabas’s appointment to head the panel proved that Israel cannot expect justice from this body.
“The report has already been written and the only question is who signs it,” the Foreign Ministry said.
In an interview with Army Radio, the Israeli envoy, Ron Prosor, expressed doubt regarding the legitimacy of the panel due to what is perceived by Jerusalem officials as a committee with a clear anti-Israel bias.
“Forming an investigatory committee headed by Schabas is like inviting ISIS to organize religious tolerance week at the UN,” Prosor told Army Radio.
Ambassador Ron Prosor, Israel’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, on Tuesday said “the United Nations Human Rights Council set a new record for anti-Israel bias and proved once again, that it would be better named the ‘Human Wrongs Council’” because of its “complete travesty of justice” by inviting Professor William Schabas, “one of the most outspoken critics of Israel to serve as its judge and jury.”
It was not only Israel of course who objected to the anti-Israel opinions of the committee members:
Jewish organizations also condemned the creation of the commission and its appointments. The Anti-Defamation League called the panel “a farce” with the outcome “all-but preordained.”
“Here we go again,” said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director. “As if on cue, the United Nations Human Rights Council has appointed a so-called ‘independent’ panel to investigate Israel’s conduct in the recent conflict in Gaza, with the outcome all-but preordained. This farce began with an illegitimate Council resolution and will predictably end with an illegitimate panel investigation and report, entirely biased against Israel, which places the blame squarely on Israel for ‘war crimes’ and other violations of international law and pays no attention to the terrorism of Hamas.”
In his last full day in office, former Israeli President Shimon Peres also objected to the creation of the commission in a joint press conference with the UN Secretary-General, who he called out for allowing UN-run schools in Gaza to be used by Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad as rocket depots and launchpads.
“We have seen this theater of the absurd before,” Foxman said. “The inquiry will be stacked against Israel through the appointment of individuals with anti-Israel bona fides like Professor William Schabas. Israel, understandably, will refuse to cooperate. And, finally, a harsh, biased and fundamentally flawed report will be issued, providing fodder to those who have already found Israel guilty on all counts and handing Hamas a phony victory in the court of public opinion.”
“Schabas has made comments critical of Israel’s leadership in the past, and participated in the 2012 Russell Tribunal on Palestine, a conference in which Israel is put on trial, with its guilt on war crimes fully presumed,” Foxman said. “Diène has served as U.N. Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance from 2002 to 2008 and as the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Côte d’Ivoire from 2011 to 2014.”
B’nai B’rith International said “the commission itself illegitimate as it was born of a UNHRC resolution that stridently excoriated Israel in advance of the ‘inquiry’ it launched and didn’t so much as mention Hamas by name. It was specifically designed to scrutinize not years of cross-border terrorist attacks against Israelis, but rather Israel’s defensive response to them. Any suggestion that there is equivalence between terrorism and a state defending its civilians from that threat is both outrageous and unacceptable.”
Schabas tried to defend himself with the old “some of my best friends are Jews” routine, ludicrously saying that he was impartial, not anti-Israel.
The professor appointed to lead a United Nations inquiry into possible war crimes during the recent military campaign in the Gaza Strip defended his record to Israeli media Tuesday and said past statements that paint him as anti-Israel would have no bearing on his probe of the Gaza conflict.
Willam Schabas told Army Radio in an interview on Tuesday that he is not anti-Israel, has visited Israel in the past to give university presentations and is a member of the editorial board of a legal publication.
…
Israel dismissed the probe as one-sided and said the appointment of Schabas — who has called for both Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former president Shimon Peres to stand trial in the International Criminal Court in the Hague — proved the outcome of the report had been predetermined.
…
Asked about a comment made last year that he would most like to see Netanyahu stand trial in the Hague, Schabas said the comments were made in reference to the Goldstone Report, a UN Human Rights Council investigation that claimed Israel had committed war crimes during the 2008-2009 Operation Cast Lead by deliberately targeting civilians during fighting in the Gaza Strip.
“I didn’t prejudge him and I didn’t say he was guilty,” Schabas told Army Radio. “I was making a comment in the context of a discussion about the priorities of the International Criminal Court. I think probably every person in Israel has criticized the government in Israel at some point or other in their lives and the suggestion that I’ve delivered a verdict on this is wrong and unfair.”
He can wriggle all he likes, but his own words damn him:
Read the above words again and note his huge error. This from a supposed “expert” on the Middle East. He can’t even get his Prime Ministers right! Yair Lapid puts him right:
Finance Minister Yair Lapid, in an interview with Channel 2 later on Tuesday evening, pointed out that it was former prime minister Ehud Olmert who was in office during Operation Cast Lead and not Netanyahu.
Schabas’s obsession with Netanyahu reveals the extent of his animosity towards the Prime Minister, and by extension towards Israel. How on earth can anyone expect Israel to get a fair hearing at the hands of an ignorant oaf of a bigot like that?
The Israeli press watchdog site Mida has another video of Schabas in an interview with Israeli TV in which he refuses to call Hamas a terror organization and where he does not walk back his error about Netanyahu.
Mida comments:
So even given the opportunity, Schabas did not recant or walk back his statement. He would like to see Netanyahu tried based on the findgins of the Goldstone Report. There’s only one problem: the Prime Minister responsible for the “alleged crimes” of Operation Cast Lead is none other than Ehud Olmert. Netanyahu was head of the opposition at the time and had nothing to do with it. Thus, already at the beginning of the interview, Schabas revealed his severe bias: as far as he’s concerned, Netanyahu is guilty regardless of the facts.
…
This wouldn’t be the first time Schabas had shown such an attitude towards Netanyahu. Already in 2010, he wrote an article in a law journal that Netanyahu is the man most likely to threaten Israel’s existence. His evidence? Netanyahu’s statement that “we face three strategic challenges: Iran’s nuclear program, rockets fired at us and the Goldstone Report.” Not Hamas, not Hizballah and not Iran – the greatest danger to Israel is its own Prime Minister, who dares to defy the word of UN legists and argue for the innocence of his country. According to this logic, Emil Zola was a traitor and a criminal for daring to charge the French Courts with falsely convicting Alfred Dreyfuss.
And finally, as yet another reminder of the what the Human Wrongs Rights Council is all about, the Gatestone Institute has a very detailed article by Denis McEoin. Again, none of this will be new to most of my readers, but it always bears repeating (and sharing as widely as possible):
But expecting the UNHRC to carry out a fair, balanced or accurate investigation of anything involving the State of Israel is rather like asking the Organization of Islamic Cooperation [OIC] to carry out investigations into the persecution of Christians, Ahmadi Muslims, or Baha’is in Muslim countries.
Before the emergency session ended, Navi Pillay, the South African UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, who has her own office in New York, but supervises the Geneva-based UNHRC, warned the world that Israel may have committed war crimes by not doing enough to protect civilians. Pillay, however, has a long track record of demonizing Israel; it was she who was behind the infamous and totally discredited Goldstone Report of 2009, which accused Israel of deliberately targeting Gazan civilians — a finding that the report’s author, Richard Goldstone, later retracted, although Pillay did not.
…
We are still living in 1984. The UNHRC works to defend and even promote countries that abuse those rights, and to condemn one of the most rights-observant countries in the world — Israel. When anyone tries to take the floor at the UNHRC and reveal the truth about abusive states, watch the abusers press their buzzers and demand that the truth-teller be stopped from speaking. How many times have the vigilant and dedicated human rights activists Anne Bayefsky of Human Rights Voices or Hillel Neuer of UN Watch been attacked for speaking truth?
Watch the indefatigable Hillel Neuer here:
There’s much more at the link. Read it all. The article concludes:
Most disturbingly, both the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly, while pussy-footing with the world’s most ostentatious human rights violators, cannot get savage enough with one of the world’s most tolerant and free countries, Israel. Between its formation in 1947 and 1991, the UN General Assembly has adopted 300 resolutions against Israel. In the year 2006-7, it issued 22 such resolutions — but not one about the Sudanese genocide then continuing in Darfur. The year before, Israel had pulled out of Gaza entirely in an effort to make peace. Yet the General Assembly passes 19 resolutions per year against Israel and almost none on any other state.
No fewer than three UN entities exist that are dedicated to furtherance of the Palestinian cause (which is, in its simplest form, dedicated to destroying Israel). There are no UN entities to advance the Israeli cause, which has always been to make peace with its neighbors and to help its citizens — mainly Christians, Muslims and Jews — build good lives for themselves. Never in history has a human institution for goodwill and peace among men been so betrayed by those who seek to use it for their own ends.
What is Israel supposed to do in these circumstances? No matter how much care we take in avoiding civilian casualties, no matter how much aid we allow through, no matter how many enemy civilians we treat in our field hospitals, no matter how much fuel, water and electricity are provided to the enemy civilians – at Israeli taxpayers’ expense I would add – all we get is a cold shower of intense condemnation in the UN and the international media.
Why do we bother at all? If we’re going to be accused of genocide, maybe we should go out and commit genocide. Then the world will be able to tell the difference.
At the moment all I feel is profound depression and nausea at the utter unfairness and injustice of it all.
Obama to the rescue – of himself.
Photo Credit: White House Photo/Pete Sousa
President Barack Obama’s direct contact with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to devise a long-term cease-fire plan follows a long history of American and U.N. ventures that have flopped, all of them at Israel’s expense.
Egypt has been the power broker in trying to maintain a cease-fire between Hamas and Israel, and Obama is trying to put his foot in the Middle East door to reclaim American influence based by whittling down the popularity of Netanyahu.
His “poll numbers are a lot higher than mine” and “were greatly boosted by the war in Gaza,” Obama told Thomas Friedman of The New York Times last week. . “And so if he doesn’t feel some internal pressure, then it’s hard to see him being able to make some very difficult compromises, including taking on the settler movement.”
It’s always the fault of the settlers. If it rains on the picnic, it is because of the settlers. If Obama’s popularity drops, it is because of the settlers who are an obstacle to his illusions.
The war against terror n Gaza has made Netanyahu even more popular. A Knesset Channel poll released this week shows that the Likud party that he heads would win almost 50 percent more seats than it now has in the Knesset if elections were held today. That translated into 28 mandates compared with 19.
Obama must be politically jealous of Netanyahu, considering the president’s dismal ratings.
Jealous or not, Obama has the habit of most previous presidents to pressure Israel, often by blocking or threatening to block military aid. That is what happened during the war, when Obama stopped the United States from shipping missiles to Israel, according to The Wall Street Journal.
Obama’s phone conversation with Netanyahu was reported as “combative,” nothing new for the two leaders who have distrusted each other during the president’s two terms of office.
The American government’s one-track mind for the “peace process” blocks out all reality, which is a lot different in the Middle East than in the United States. The Jewish Home party’s Housing Minister Ur Ariel said it in a matter of fact way on Thursday – “Americans don’t understand what is happening in the region.”
But that doesn’t stop Obama from throwing his weight around and bullying himself into Iraq, Syria and Egypt only to look like a fish out of water.
Like Carter, Clinton and even Regan, Obama has the freedom to exploit Israel’s democracy and run roughshod over the government to “make peace” with cease-fires that make war.
That is what happened in 2012 to conclude the Pillar of Cloud campaign against Hamas terror, and that is what happened in 2009 to conclude the Operation Cast Lead campaign against terror.
That is what happened in 2006, when the United Nations and the United States brokered a cease-fire that ended the Second Lebanese War and promised the moon, whose location has not moved since. Hezbollah was supposed to be dis-armed under United Nations supervision, which is like Hamas agreeing to dis-arm under Mahmoud Abbas’ supervision.
“For proxies such as the Palestinian Sunni faction Hamas and the Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah, the centuries old Islamic jurisprudence of Hudna (tactical truce) and Tahadiya (temporary calm) serve as a plausibly regrouping tactic that is continuously reshaped amid the changing face of modern warfare in the Middle East,” Israel Defense noted during the war.
Enter U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, whose “peace process” and ceasefires self-destruct.
He and U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon orchestrated a humanitarian cease-fire last month. It lasted for 90 minutes. At least five other cease-fires failed.
Israel Defense reported, “Following the inability to transmute any ceasefire, Hudna or Tahadiya over the last decade into encompassing political progress, the tone is that ceasefires only exasperate the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the medium-to long-term. Paradoxically, it is the achievement of these bitesize ceasefires as a short term benefit that has trampled on the utility of ceasefire.”
And that is one of the reasons Netanyahu cannot stomach Obama, who in his words knows what is best for Israel, more than Israel knows, just as he and his foreign policy advisers knew what is best for Egypt, Syria and Iraq.
“How can you create a State of Israel that maintains its democratic and civic traditions.” He rhetorically asked Friedman in last week’s interview.
“How can you preserve a Jewish state that is also reflective of the best values of those who founded Israel? And, in order to do that, it has consistently been my belief that you have to find a way to live side by side in peace with Palestinians. … You have to recognize that they have legitimate claims, and this is their land and neighborhood as well.”
That is why Obama wants a cease-fire. He is not concerned about Hamas, he is not concerned about Israel
He is concerned about the “peace process,” which for years has proven to be the “war process.”
FRIEDMAN: As The Middle East Burns, The UN Simply Blames JewsBoth the media and the United Nations are willing to legitimize Hamas while reprimanding Israel for defending herself against an existential threat
Yesterday, Hamas broke yet another cease-fire, only hours after Israel had agreed to extend the lull in the fighting. On Monday, the United Nations announced the creation of a special three-person Human Rights Council panel that will review allegations of human rights and international law violations occurring in the current Israel-Gaza conflict. One of the members of this panel has openly stated that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would be his favorite person to have tried in the International Criminal Court. This council is supposed to be unbiased and impartial. While the United Nations was busy focusing all its energy on these allegations, they forgot to discuss a few other crises occurring in the Middle East.
In Iraq:
Over the last year and a half, the terrorist organization known as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, an Al-Qaeda splinter cell, has taken control of large swaths of territory via violent means. At a glance:
Over 13,300: is the number of civilians killed by ISIS since the beginning of 2013
6,000: is the number of Iraqi civilians butchered by ISIS this year
500: is the number of Yazidis (a Kurdish Iraqi minority) killed by ISIS, some of which were buried alive
0: is the number of practicing Christians left in Mosul, a city that is now controlled by ISIS; ISIS has made Christianity punishable by death, thus forcing all Christians to either convert or flee.
As ISIS is carrying out targeted killings against minority groups and Iraqi Christians, it is safe to say that they are successfully carrying out genocide in Iraq. Unlike the Israel-Gaza conflict, this crisis has gone almost unmentioned for the last year and a half, even though scores of more people have been killed in Iraq than in the current Israel-Gaza conflict.
In Syria:
More than 170,000: is the number of people killed since start of the civil war
More than 54,000: is a conservative estimate of the number of civilians killed in the Syrian Civil War
More than 14,100: is the number of women and children killed in the Syrian Civil War
More than 1800: is the number of Palestinian-Arabs killed in the Syrian Civil War
The media scarcely reports on the ongoing civil war that is still raging in Syria; this past July was one of the deadliest months of the conflict thus far. It is of note that the United Nations has stopped updating its count of the Syrian death toll; it claims it cannot verify the sources behind the numbers. Essentially, they refuse to take the time to verify the sources and keep track of the death toll.
Last but not least, for the sake of comparison, Israel:
Approximately 87,000: is the number of Palestinian-Arabs killed in the Israeli-Arab conflict since 1948. More people have died in the last three years alone in the Syrian Civil War, but these victims have largely been forgotten by the international community.
More than 3500: is the number of rockets launched at Israel since the start of Protective Edge, each one of which constitutes an attempt to murder Israeli civilians. This is a war crime.
Approximately 1900: is the number of Palestinian Arabs killed since the start of Protective Edge.
Approximately 900-1300: is the estimated number of Palestinian-Arabs civilians killed amongst the 1900 total. The lower number is that estimated by the IDF, while the higher number is that estimated by Palestinian sources, many of which are run by Hamas. There are varying other estimates that fall between these numbers.
Recently, reports have surfaced that disprove the claim that the majority of the people killed in this conflict have been Palestinian civilians. In fact, research done by both the BBC as well as an Israeli research group indicates that the numbers of civilians and militants killed may be closer to equal. This is not a means to justify the number of civilians killed, because loss of innocent life is terrible. However, it is unfair and unjust to inflate figures merely to claim that one party’s response is disproportionate to the other’s actions. If the validity of war were judged based on the number of casualties on each side, then the Allies would bear the blame for World War II.
As for the allegations Israel of committing war crimes, indiscriminately ordering strikes within Gaza and violating human rights:
4,762: is the number of terror targets the IDF struck between July 8 and August 5. Again, without trying to justify loss of civilian life and using the larger estimates for the number of civilian casualties, this works out to one civilian killed for every 3.6 strikes. If Israel were truly indiscriminately targeting Palestinian civilians, the number of civilians killed in each strike would be much higher.
Additionally, the mainstream media often states that the Gaza Strip is one of the most densely populated areas on Earth, and Hamas only fires from civilian areas because of this fact. This is a distortion of the truth.
Here is the salient point:
Information recently released by the Gatestone Institute indicates that while the city centers of Gaza are very densely populated, there are many emptier areas of Gaza. Mainstream media outlets never show these areas because there is scarcely fighting there. Additionally, maps that show the origin of rocket attacks show that almost none of the attacks originate in these empty areas. This begs the question, if Hamas were concerned with Gaza’s civilians, why not fire rockets from these emptier areas? Why fire them from some of the most populated areas in the world? The answer is that as a terrorist organization, Hamas has no regard for civilians of any kind.
Up to this point I have refrained from addressing the claim that Hamas uses the civilians of Gaza as human shields. There is real and jarring evidence to support this claim. Hamas hides behind the civilians of Gaza by choosing to launch rocket attacks from densely populated areas and leaves the IDF no choice but to carry out strikes in these areas. Hamas does this knowing that images of deceased civilians will flood TV screens throughout the world, and that the international community will cry out in rage against Israel. Hamas has the option to set up their headquarters in empty areas of Gaza instead of in hospitals and homes, but has repeatedly choose the latter. By making this choice, Hamas bears the blame for the loss of civilian life and is committing war crimes.
Lastly, during Operation Protective Edge, Israel provided the following supplies to Gaza:
40,550: is the number of tons of supplies transferred to Gaza
37,178: is the number of tons of food transferred to Gaza
1,694: is the number of tons of humanitarian goods transferred to Gaza
1,029: is the number of tons of medicine and medical supplies transferred to Gaza
1,856: is the number of trucks needed to carry these supplies
Many of these supplies were delivered via the Kerem Shalom crossing, which has been repeatedly attacked with barrages of Hamas rockets in order to prevent these aid shipments from entering the Gaza Strip. So even though Israel has been more than willing to give assistance to the people of Gaza, Hamas will not allow them to have it.
Given the force with which the United States carried out its strikes against terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq, there is no doubt that they would have responded in the same manner to a barrage of rockets raining down on the United States homeland. Additionally, the United States has renewed airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq and is being credited not only with further securing the homeland, but with saving the lives of civilians in Northern Iraq. These airstrikes serve the same purpose to the people of the Iraq as Operation Protective Edge does to the people of Israel: to protect the lives of civilians against terrorist attacks. Throughout history, there have been numerous cases of countries striking back at terrorists in order to secure the safety of their people. In the larger majority of these instances, civilians have died, as war is mayhem. No other country in the world is forced to live under the constant fear that Israel lives with day in and day out, and yet no other country in the world has faced the amount of backlash that Israel continues to receive in the name of self-defense.
When the mainstream media reports on ISIS, they waste no time calling them a dangerous terrorist organization that must be stopped. ISIS and Hamas are incredibly similar; they are both extremist groups perverting the beliefs of a peace-loving religion to further their cause. It is truly mind-boggling that the mainstream media is willing to ignore this fact, as is the United Nations. Both the media and the United Nations are willing to legitimize Hamas while reprimanding Israel for defending herself against an existential threat. At the end of the day, all Israel wants is to live in peace with her neighbors; this operation must continue so that Israel is able to do just that.
Ashley Friedman is a 2014 graduate of the University of Miami with a Bachelor of Science in Biology. She is a proud Zionist and dual Israeli-American citizen.
Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD)(pictured), Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Senator Mark Kirk (R-IL) issued a harsh denunciation of UNRWA’s role in the Gaza conflict and demanded an investigation.
Photo Credit: cspanvideo.org
At least some members of the U.S. congress finally realized that if weapons belonging to Hamas were found in UNRWA facilities, questions need to be asked of UNRWA employees as to how those weapons got there, who put them there, who observed them, what – if anything – was done to remove them (or to keep them there), along with other pertinent and essential lines of inquiry.
U.S. senators Mark Kirk (R-IL), Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Marco Rubio (R-FL), sent a letter last week to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, demanding an investigation into the actions of the United Nations Refugee and Works Agency (UNRWA) during the fighting in Gaza.
The senators used very strong language to condemn the agency on several different bases.
First, the discovery, on three different occasions, of Hamas weapons in UNRWA facilities, whereupon the weapons were returned to the terrorist organization, Hamas.
Second, UNRWA has repeatedly issued statements condemning Israel and ignoring the wrongdoing of Hamas.
And third, the senators pointed out the very troubling close affiliation between Hamas and UNRWA, the irrefutable proof of which was the election of 25 Hamas candidates were voted onto the 27 member UNRWA ‘s workers’ union board in 2012.
Next, the senators explained why they are convinced it is appropriate for them to demand such an investigation into UNRWA: we pay for it! The United States contributed $294 million in 2013. It is the single largest donor to UNRWA. Since 1950, more than $5 billion U.S. taxpayers’ dollars were funneled into UNRWA.
Senator Mark Kirk is a member of the Senate Appropriations sub-committee which has jurisdiction over the Department of State, as well as U.S. contributions to U.N. activities. Kirk said in a statement posted on his website:
I am demanding a credible and independent assessment of UNRWA’s actions during this crisis. Given UNRWA’s ties to terrorism in the past, U.S. taxpayers deserve immediate answers and full transparency regarding their intentions and actions. The State Department must make clear to the U.N. that it need to take all necessary steps to prevent Hamas from using taxpayer-funded property to launch attacks against our allies.
Senator Cardin, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, added:
When leaders and organizations of the United Nations blur the clear distinction between a nation-state defending itself and a terrorist organization attempting to murder civilians, Americans take note. When an organization funded in part by the U.S. suggests that the two are morally equivalent, U.S. taxpayers take note. Israel is undertaking extraordinary efforts to avoid civilian casualties while Hamas cynically uses other Palestinians as human shields and deliberately attempts to kill Israeli civilians. U.N. resources and personnel cannot be complicit in Hamas’ violent terrorist actions.
Senator Marco Rubio is also a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Rubio had the following to say:
As the U.N.’s leading source of funding, American taxpayers will not tolerate the use of U.N. facilities by terrorists to stage attacks against our allies. We know Hamas has been using civilians as human shields and stores its weapons and fighters in civilian buildings, but for the U.N. to stand idly by while Hamas attacks Israel from its facilities is an outrage. This is the latest example of why the U.S. needs to bring greater transparency and accountability to the U.N. by pursuing reform of its programs and institutions.
The text of the letter the senators sent to Secretary of State Kerry:
Dear Secretary Kerry,
We write to express our profound concern with the troubling role the United Nations Refugee and Work Agency (UNRWA) has played during the ongoing crisis in Gaza, including multiple instances of weapons found at UNRWA schools as well as one-sided statements from UNRWA leadership that unjustly condemn Israel. For instance, on July 14, UNRWA Commissioner General Pierre Krahenbuhl stated that Israeli security forces are acting “contrary to international humanitarian law” and also called Israel’s Gaza blockade “illegal.”
As you know, UNRWA admitted on July 17, July 22nd, and July 30th that it found rockets belonging to Hamas on its property. We commend UNRWA’s quick condemnation of these incidents, but are concerned with the ultimate fate of these rockets, which UNRWA claimed to have turned over to the “local authorities” or have gone missing. We fear that this means these rockets may have found their way back into Hamas’ hands.
We urge the State Department to launch an independent investigation into these incidents and to call on the United Nations leadership to hold UNRWA accountable, including by reprimanding or dismissing the UNRWA staff responsible as appropriate, as well as asking the U.N. to ensure that these incidents never take place again.
In the course of your investigation, we ask you to examine the fate of these rockets, what measures the U.N. took to secure UNRWA property, and how the U.S. intends to work with the U.N. to make sure incidents like these are never repeated.
As you know, the United States is the largest donor to UNRWA and has contributed almost $5 billion to the organization since 1950. The United States taxpayers deserve to know if UNRWA is fulfilling its mission or taking sides in this tragic conflict.
We look forward to your reply,
Sincerely,
Now that the strong statements have been made and a letter from three members of senate committees with jurisdiction over the State Department and the U.N. has been sent to the secretary of state, it behooves Israel’s supporters to demand follow-through.
Iraq crisis: ‘It is death valley. Up to 70 per cent of them are dead’On board Iraqi army helicopter delivering aid to the trapped Yazidis, Jonathan Krohn sees a hellish sight
Mount Sinjar stinks of death. The few Yazidis who have managed to escape its clutches can tell you why. “Dogs were eating the bodies of the dead,” said Haji Khedev Haydev, 65, who ran through the lines of Islamic State jihadists surrounding it.
On Sunday night, I became the first western journalist to reach the mountains where tens of thousands of Yazidis, a previously obscure Middle Eastern sect, have been taking refuge from the Islamic State forces that seized their largest town, Sinjar.
I was on board an Iraqi Army helicopter, and watched as hundreds of refugees ran towards it to receive one of the few deliveries of aid to make it to the mountain. The helicopter dropped water and food from its open gun bays to them as they waited below. General Ahmed Ithwany, who led the mission, told me: “It is death valley. Up to 70 per cent of them are dead.”
Two American aid flights have also made it to the mountain, where they have dropped off more than 36,000 meals and 7,000 gallons of drinking water to help the refugees, and last night two RAF C-130 transport planes were also on the way.
However, Iraqi officials said that much of the US aid had been “useless” because it was dropped from 15,000ft without parachutes and exploded on impact.
Handfuls of refugees have managed to escape on the helicopters but many are being left behind because the craft are unable to land on the rocky mountainside. There, they face thirst and starvation, as well as the crippling heat of midsummer.
Hundreds, if not more, have already died, including scores of children. A Yazidi Iraqi MP, Vian Dakhil, told reporters in Baghdad:
“We have one or two days left to help these people. After that they will start dying en masse.”
The Iraqi Army is running several aid missions every day, bringing supplies including water, flour, bread and shoes.
The helicopter flights aim to airlift out refugees on each flight, but the mountains are sometimes too rocky to land on, meaning they return empty.
Even when it can land, the single helicopter can take just over a dozen refugees at a time, and then only from the highest point of the mountain where it is out of range of jihadist missiles. Barely 100 have been rescued in this way.
Displaced Yazidi people rush towards an aid helicopter (RUDAW)
The flights have also dropped off at least 50 armed Peshmerga, Kurdish forces, on the mountain, according to Captain Ahmed Jabar.
Other refugees have made their way through Islamic State lines, evading the jihadists to reach safety, or travelling through
Kurdish-controlled sections of Syria to reach the town of Dohuk. So far the Yazidi refugees left behind have survived by hiding in old cave dwellings, drinking from natural springs and hunting small animals, but with families scattered across Mount Sinjar, a barren range stretching for around 35 miles near the border with Syria, there are fears aid will not reach them all unless the humanitarian relief operation is significantly stepped up .
Hundreds can now be seen making their way slowly across its expanse, carrying what few possessions they managed to flee with on their backs. Exhausted children lie listlessly in the arms of their parents, older ones trudging disconsolately alongside while the sun beats down overhead.
The small amount of relief the peshmerga militia can bring up into the mountain is not simply enough.
One pershmerga fighter, Faisal Elas Hasso, 40, said: “To be honest, there’s not enough for everyone,” he said. “It’s five people to one bottle.”
The refugees who made it out described desperate scenes as they awaited help from the outside world.
“There were about 200 of us, and about 20 of that number have died,” said Saydo Haji, 28. “We can live for two days, not more.”
Emad Edo, 27, who was rescued in an airlift on Friday at the mountain’s highest point explains how he had to leave his niece, who barely had enough strength to keep her eyes open, to her fate.
“She was about to die, so we left her there and she died,” he said.
Others shared similar stories. “Even the caves smell very bad,” Mr Edo added. According to several of the airlifted refugees, the Geliaji cave alone has become home to 50 dead bodies.
Saydo Kuti Naner, 35, who was one of 13 Yazidis who snuck through Islamic State lines on Thursday morning, said he travelled through Kurdish-controlled Syria to get to Kurdistan.
He left behind his mother and father, too old to make the rough trip, as well as 200 sheep. “We got lucky,” he said. “A girl was running [with us] and she got shot.” He added that this gave enough cover for the rest of them to get away.
Mikey Hassan said he, his two brothers and their families fled up into Mount Sinjar and then managed to escape to the Kurdish city of Dohuk after two days, by shooting their way past the jihadists. Mr Hassan said he and his family went for 17 hours with no food before getting their hands on some bread.
The Yazidis, an ethnically Kurdish community that has kept its religion alive for centuries in the face of persecution, are at particular threat from the Islamists, who regard them as ‘devil worshippers’, and drove them from their homes as the peshmerga fighters withdrew.
There have been repeated stories that the jihadists have seized hundreds of Yazidi women and are holding them in Mosul, either in schools or the prison. These cannot be confirmed, though they are widely believed and several Yazidi refugees said they had been unable to contact Yazidi women relatives who were living behind Islamic State lines.
Kamil Amin, of the Iraqi human rights ministry, said: “We think that the terrorists by now consider them slaves and they have vicious plans for them.”
Tens of thousands of Christians have also been forced to flee in the face of the advancing IS fighters, many cramming the roads east and north to Erbil and Dohuk. On Thursday alone, up to 100,000 Iraqi Christians fled their homes in the Plain of Ninevah around Mosul.
Refugees said the American air strikes on IS positions outside Erbil were too little, too late. They said they felt abandoned by everyone – the central government in Baghdad, the Americans and British, who invaded in 2003, and now the Kurds, who had promised to protect them.
“When the Americans withdrew from Iraq they didn’t protect the Christians,” said Jenan Yousef, an Assyrian Catholic who fled Qaraqosh, Iraq’s largest Christian town, in the early hours of
Thursday. “The Christians became the scapegoats. Everyone has been killing us.”
The situation in Sinjar has irreparably damaged the notion of home for the Yazidis. For a large portion of them, the unique culture of the area will never return, and they will therefore have nothing to go back for.
“We can’t go back to Sinjar mountain because Sinjar is surrounded by Arabs,” said Aydo Khudida Qasim, 34, who said that Sunni Arab villagers around Sinjar helped Islamic State take the area. Now he as well as many of his friends and relatives want to get out of Iraq
altogether. “We want to be refugees in other countries, not our own,” he said.
Report: Palestinians accept new 3-day cease-fire offer
AP, Al Arabiya claim that despite days of threats to leave Cairo talks, Palestinian delegations accepts 72-hour lull, after Netanyahu said the operation would continue until rocket fire stops.
Palestinian negotiators in Cairo say they have accepted an Egyptian proposal for a new, three-day cease-fire with Israel, the Associated Press and Al Araibya reported.
The comments came after Israel said on Sunday it was prepared for protracted military action in Gaza and would not return to Egyptian-mediated ceasefire talks as long as Palestinians kept up cross-border rocket and mortar fire.
The Palestinian decision aims to clear the way for renewed negotiations with Israel on a long-term truce arrangement in the Gaza Strip. The officials, representing various Palestinian factions, spoke on condition of anonymity because they were discussing sensitive negotiations.
A Hamas spokesman was more cautious, saying “There is a proposal for another 72-hour truce which would allow negotiations to continue. This proposal is under consideration,” Sami Abu Zuhri said, stating that the decision of the Palestinian delegation depended on the “seriousness” of Israel’s position in regards to the groups demands.
IN DEPTH: What does Hamas want, and what it may get?
Earlier the head of the Palestinian delegation in Cairo had said it would leave unless Israeli negotiators, who flew home on Friday hours before a three-day truce expired, came back to the talks. But Egypt’s state news agency, MENA, said the Palestinians would remain for an urgent meeting with the Arab League on Monday. A source told Ynet that senior Palestinian official Saeb Erekat could also join the meeting.
Israeli air strikes and shelling killed three Palestinians in Gaza on Sunday, including a boy of 14 and a woman, medics said, in a third day of renewed fighting that has jeopardised international efforts to end a more-than-month-old conflict.
Ceasefire efforts
Palestinian negotiators say their team will quit Egyptian-brokered talks on ending the Gaza fighting unless Israeli negotiators return to Cairo.
Izzat al-Rishq, a member of Hamas’ political bureau participating in the Cairo talks, said that the chances to reach an agreement are low and that the delegation may leave Cairo at any minute. “The possibility of negotiations to succeed is weak. It is possible that the Palestinian delegation will leave to consult its leaders any minute,” he said
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Sunday “Operation Protective Edge continues… Israel will not conduct negotiations under fire,” indicating Israel is not shifting from its position.
Begining hours before Friday’s ceasefire was set to expire, Gaza militants renewed rocket fire, demanding talks continue, and have since fired dozens of rockets and mortar shells at Israel over the weekend, including two on Sunday morning.
Bassam Salhi, a Palestinian negotiator from Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ PLO movement, says his team met with Egyptian mediators late Saturday.
He said Sunday: “We told the Egyptians that if the Israelis are not coming and if there is no significant development, we are leaving today.”
Similar comments were made by lead negotiator Azzam al-Ahmed to AFP: “We have a meeting tomorrow with Egyptian (mediators). If we confirm that the Israeli delegation is placing conditions for its return, we will not accept any conditions,” he said.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is set to convene the Cabinet at 10:30 am Sunday, at the Defense Ministry in Tel Aviv, where the issue will likely be discussed, however since Hamas decided to renew rocket fire instead of unconditionally extending the ceasefire, Israel’s position has been that it refuses to talk while violence continues.
One of Hamas’ central demands has been an end of the Egyptian-Israeli siege on Gaza, a demand both Egypt and Israel have rejected, but indicated willingness to ease some restrictions.
Qais Abu Laila, a member of the Palestinian negotiations team in Cairo, said that “Israel wants to regulate and not lift the siege. It is has rejected most of the Palestinian demands.”
According to Abu Laila, Israel wants to renew restrictions over materials entered into Gaza and the movement of people into the Strip.
Hamas has said it wants assurances by Israel that it is willing to lift the blockade on Gaza before observing another ceasefire. Israel has said it will not open Gaza’s borders unless militant groups, including Hamas, disarm. Hamas has said handing over its weapons arsenal, which is believed to include several thousand remaining rockets, is inconceivable.
Instead, one proposal circulated by the Egyptian mediators over the weekend offered a minor easing of some of the restrictions, according to Palestinian negotiators who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not allowed to discuss internal deliberations with journalists. It was not clear if this was an Egyptian or an Israeli proposal.
The Palestinian negotiators said they rejected the ideas, insisting on a complete end to the blockade.
A Palestinian official in Cairo said on Sunday that Turkey and Norway have expressed their willingness to operate the seaport the Palestinians have been seeking to open in the Gaza Strip.
The source also added that Israel would respond to the demands of the Palestinian delegation on Sunday. During the day, the Palestinian delegation is expected to meet with the Egyptian mediators and receive the answers in writing.
Hamas: Israel wasting our time
Accusing Israel of stalling on ceasefire negotiations, Hamas has threatened on Saturday to quit the talks if Israel doesn’t start negotiating in earnest in the next 24 hours.
“There’s no real seriousness from Israel. The Israeli side is intentionally stalling on his response to the Palestinian demands,” Hamas spokesman in Cairo, Moussa Abu Marzouk, said.
“We won’t stay for long in the talks without a serious negotiation. The next 24 hours will determine the fate of the talks,” he added. “We’re not interested in an escalation, but we won’t accept that there’s no response to our demands.”
Update
Palestinians agree to 3-day truce, but rocket fire continues unabated
he notion that truth is the first casualty of war has found expression in the ongoing fog of the current Israel-Hamas conflict – where truth is obscured or masked by oft-repeated clichés such as “cycle of violence,” false moral equivalences, or unconscionable allegations of Israeli “genocide.” If we want to prevent further tragedies in this conflict — let alone frame the basis for its resolution — then we have to go behind the daily headlines that cloud if not corrupt understanding, probe the real root causes of conflict, and finally travel the road not yet taken to its just resolution.
While the deliberate – and indiscriminate – bombardment of Israeli civilians, and the threat of abductions and mass killings from the terror tunnels, have been the trigger for this latest war, there is a longer and underlying proximate cause: the Hamas Terrorist War of Attrition against Israel since 2000.
Simply put, from 2000 to 2004, Hamas suicide bombers murdered over 1,000 Israelis – wounding some 3,000 – in a horrific and sustained terrorist assault that was defeated in part by the Israeli “Operation Defensive Shield” in 2002, and in part by the building of a security barrier, which dramatically reduced penetration by Hamas suicide bombers. In 2005, with the Hamas terrorist onslaught defeated, Israel moved to unilaterally disengage from Gaza. Accordingly, Israel withdrew all its soldiers and citizens, uprooted all its settlements and synagogues, but left behind 3,000 operating greenhouses and related agricultural assets, the whole as the basis for industrial and agricultural growth and development in Gaza.
How did Hamas respond? They destroyed the greenhouses, brutalized the Fatah opposition, effectively instituted a theocratic dictatorship in 2007, repressed its own people, and began the launching of more than 14,000 rockets and missiles targeting Israeli population centers. In effect, then, Hamas squandered the opportunity offered by Israel to live in peace, to utilize the industrial and agricultural assets, to engage in state-building; rather, Hamas preferred to divert resources for the building of a terrorist infrastructure that would punish its own people while threatening Israel.
In effect, then, this is the third Israel-Hamas war since the 2005 disengagement, with each prior truce or ceasefire only providing a basis and incipient trigger for the next war. In this latest conflagration, Hamas has repeatedly repudiated, yet again, a series of ceasefires arrangements and “humanitarian” pauses – while launching more than 3,000 rockets and missiles in the last month alone.
But while these unceasing terror attacks – and ongoing threats – have once again forced Israel to take action in self-defense and to target the terrorist infrastructure in Gaza, this ongoing proximate trigger does not tell the whole story. Rather, it is a symptom, or proxy, for the root cause – the unwillingness of Hamas to recognize Israel’s existence within any boundaries. And more: the public call in the Hamas Charter – and in its declarations – for the destruction of Israel and the killing of Jews wherever they may be.
Let there be no mistake about it, Hamas is a unique – and evil – manifestation of genocidal anti-Semitism. These are not words that I use lightly or easily, but there are no other words to describe the toxic convergence of the advocacy by Hamas of the most horrific of crimes – namely genocide – anchored in the most enduring of hatreds – namely antisemitism – with state-orchestrated terrorism as the instrumentality to pursue these goals.
UN Secretary General Ban ki-Moon said that one must seek the “root cause” of the Israel-Hamas conflict so as to enable us to resolve it. However politically incorrect it may be to say so, this culture of hatred – this genocidal anti-Semitism – is the root cause and has fueled the ongoing Hamas terrorist war of attrition.
Accordingly, what is so necessary now is not another ceasefire or humanitarian pause, but a ceasefire that is enduring and comprehensive, that will put an end to the Hamas Terrorist War of Attrition that has targeted Israel’s population and engulfed its own, and that will be protective of both Israeli and Palestinian civilians, as President Obama and other leaders have called for. Such a ceasefire will hopefully be the basis for an Israeli-Palestinian peace, anchored in two states for two peoples living side by side in peace and security. This will require traveling on the road not yet taken – an agreed upon, and guaranteed, set of international, legal, diplomatic, political, security, economic, and humanitarian undertakings and initiatives as follows:
A comprehensive — and enduring — ceasefire framework not only to halt but to end hostilities must be put in place. For such a ceasefire to endure, the casus belli that triggered these latest hostilities – that has underpinned the Hamas War of Attrition – must be addressed and redressed. Simply put, Hamas must cease and desist from its policy and practice of targeting Israeli civilians and terrorizing Israeli civilian populations.
The ceasefire must be accompanied by massive humanitarian and medical relief, the delivery of some of which has thus far been hindered by Hamas itself, as with Hamas’ refusal to allow Gazans to avail themselves of an Israeli field hospital. Clearly, after the tragic death and destruction, there must be mandated and comprehensive international humanitarian assistance.
Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and other terrorist militias must be disarmed, as called for by EU Foreign Ministers, as a sine qua non for the cessation of hostilities.
The Hamas military infrastructure – and related military and terrorist assets – rockets, missiles, launchers, mortars, munitions, and the like must be dismantled.
There must be a complete closure – and destruction – of the Hamas terror tunnels – the standing instrument of terror and incipient mass murder. Indeed, captured Hamas battle plans reveal that Hamas was planning a mass terror attack during the Jewish New Year that would have threatened the lives of thousands. Even during the latest ceasefire, Hamas continued to threaten to deploy these terror tunnels.
An end must be put to the Hamas capacity to manufacture rockets and other military assets. Simply put, there must be a supervised monitoring of the importation of building materials – like cement and steel – that have been used for the manufacture of weapons and tunnels, rather than the building of hospitals, schools, and mosques for which they were intended.
The prohibition of the transfer or smuggling of weapons, like those advanced missiles from Iran, which both Hamas and Iran have boasted about, and with which Iran has threatened to re-supply Hamas in recent days. As senior Iranian official Mohsen Rezaei said this week “Palestinian resistance missiles are the blessing of Iran’s transfer of technology.”
A robust international stabilization and protection force – with the necessary mandate, mission, and numbers – should be deployed to ensure that the ceasefire is respected; that Hamas and other terrorist militias are disarmed; that the military terrorist infrastructure is dismantled; that the terror tunnels are closed and destroyed – the whole to protect against the targeting of Israeli civilians and the use of Palestinian civilians as human shields. Indeed, while Israel has been forced to use weapons to protect civilians, Hamas has been using its captive civilian population to protect its weapons.
This international protection force must also be empowered to secure a total interdiction of the transfer, import, or smuggling of weapons into Gaza – which is what triggered the blockade of Gaza in the first place after Hamas assumed power in 2007.
An international framework – one of the most important initiatives of the road not yet travelled – will be necessary to secure and maintain the demilitarization of Gaza, while supervising the entry of people and goods into Gaza.
The deployment of this international protection force – and the demilitarization of Gaza – can provide a basis for the reciprocal opening of border-crossings, the commensurate easing of the blockades, and the development of a Gaza sea port. Indeed, the movement of people, goods, commerce, trade, development, and evolving economic prosperity were precisely what was contemplated – and was clearly possible – when Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005. There was then no occupation, no blockade, no Israeli presence – only the potential for Gaza to freely develop and help usher in a nascent peace with Israel and self-determination for its people.
In particular, the dismantling of Hamas’ extensive military and terrorist infrastructure – which is embedded amongst Gaza’s civilian population – and the demilitarization of Gaza – can ultimately lead to a “Marshall Plan” for Gaza with the ultimate goal of securing economic growth, development, and a sustainable peace.
With order restored, an international governing authority – possibly led by the PA, but including European, American, Canadian, and Egyptian representation – should be the mandated trusteeship authority for Gaza. This can serve as a state-building authority that can be the basis for the emergence of a peaceful, rights-protecting, Rule of Law Gaza that can ultimately travel the road not yet taken to a peaceful and democratic Palestinian State.
The direct financing of Hamas which was put to military and terrorist purposes must end. The internationally mandated authority should ensure that banks in China, Turkey, and Qatar do not continue to finance Hamas, and that governments such as Qatar and Iran do not finance Hamas’ war crimes.
A crucial point oft ignored: Palestinian society in Gaza must be freed from the cynical and oppressive culture of hate and incitement. This not only constitutes a standing threat to Israel, but undermines the development of authentic Palestinian self-determination, as in the cruel deployment of Palestinian child labour in the terror tunnels. No peaceful solution will be possible if massive resources continue to be poured into state-controlled media, mosques, refugee camps, training camps, and educational systems that serve the sole purpose of demonizing Israel and the Jewish people, and inciting to war against them.
Indeed, Hamas’ militant rejectionism of Israel’s right to exist –its public call for Israel’s destruction and the killing of Jews wherever they may be – have threatened the safety and security not only of Israelis but of Palestinians too. Regrettably, the Gazan people’s desire – and right – to live in peace and security cannot be realized so long as Hamas continues to hold its own people hostage, and to pursue a strategy of terror and incitement. Indeed, this war in Gaza is not only one of self-defense for the Israeli people, but should lead to the securing of the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people, who deserve better than to be held hostage by a terrorist regime.
Admittedly, these initiatives, undertakings, and objectives may be difficult to secure. But the time has come – indeed it is long past time – to realize that if we want to protect the lives of both Israelis and Palestinians, this is the road we must travel now.
anneinpt
artaxes
danmillerinpanama
davidking1530
Peter Hofman
Joseph Wouk
Peter
Louisiana Steve
WarSclerotic 
Recent Comments