The recent Thursday 5 May 2005 “Perspectives” programme on Australian Broadcasting Commission (ABC) Radio National gave Paul Heywood - Smith QC, Chairperson of Australian Friends of Palestine Association, a platform to vent his virulent attack on Israel’s legitimacy as a state. The tone of his “comments’ can be exemplified by a single quote: “The real problem for apologists of Israel is that Israel is a racist state.” …and so it goes on…
Follow the link for a full Program Transcript.
The Ted Lapkin (AIJAC) programme to which Heywood-Smith refers is transcribed at http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/perspective/stories/s1342920.htm
Address your comments to Producer, Sue Clark at perspective@your.abc.net.au
Copy us on your letters to the ABC on this topic, at http://groups.google.com.au/group/wajiw
Tuesday, May 10, 2005
Tuesday, March 08, 2005
The right side of history
Mark Steyn admits that he’s been wrong about a lot in the past three years — but not about the big things
New Hampshire, 5 March 2005
The other day in the Guardian Martin Kettle wrote: ‘The war was a reckless, provocative, dangerous, lawless piece of unilateral arrogance. But it has nevertheless brought forth a desirable outcome which would not have been achieved at all, or so quickly, by the means that the critics advocated, right though they were in most respects.’
Very big of you, pal. And I guess that’s as close to a mea culpa as we’re going to get: even though Bush got everything wrong, it turned out right. Funny how that happens, isn’t it? In a few years’ time, they’ll have it down pat — just like they have with Eastern Europe. Oh, the Soviet bloc [the Middle East thugocracies] was bound to collapse anyway. Nothing to do with that simpleton Ronnie Raygun [Chimpy Bushitler]. In fact, all Raygun [Chimpy] did was delay the inevitable with his ridiculous arms build-up [illegal unprovoked Halliburton oil-grab], as many of us argued at the time: see my 1984 column ‘Yuri Andropov, The Young, Smart, Sexy New Face Of Soviet Communism’ [see the April 2004 Spectator column ‘Things Were Better Under Saddam: The coalition has destroyed Baathism, says Rod Liddle, and with it all hopes of the emergence of secular democracy’ — and yes, that really ran in these pages, on 17 April, not 1 April.]
By the way, when’s the next Not In Our Name rally? How about this Saturday? Millions of Nionists can flood into Trafalgar Square to proclaim to folks in Iraq and Lebanon and Egypt and Jordan and Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian Authority that all the changes under way in the region are most certainly Not In Their Name. Among the celebrity Nionists, Harold Pinter should be available to denounce Blair as a ‘war criminal’ and a ‘hired Christian thug’ one mo’ time. For as the Guardian reported this week, the great man announced that ‘he has decided to abandon his career as a playwright in order to concentrate exclusively on politics’.
That’s great news, isn’t it? One of the reasons Mr Pinter was right only ‘in most respects’ (as Martin Kettle would put it) is that he had to fit being right about everything in between composing 11-minute plays. Now he can devote his energies to it full time I’ve no doubt he’ll be right in all respects.
As for me, I got a lot of things wrong these last three years, but, looking at events in the Middle East this last week, I’m glad that, unlike the Nionist Entity, I got the big stuff right. On 8 May 2003, a couple of weeks after the fall of Saddam, I wrote in the Speccie’s then sister paper the Jerusalem Post:
‘You don’t invade Iraq in order to invade everywhere else, you invade Iraq so you don’t have to invade everywhere else.’
And so it’s turned out.
Some of the reasons for starting the remaking of the Middle East in Iraq were obvious within a day or two of 11 September. As I said back then, by his sheer survival, Saddam Hussein had become a symbol of America’s lack of will. As long as he was around, the message to Gaddafi, Arafat, Assad, Mubarak, the House of Saud and the rest of the gang was that we were still in a 10 September world. But the other reasons for starting in Iraq weren’t all so clear. After the liberation, the doom-mongers dusted down the old Bumper Boys’ Book of the British Empire and rattled off a zillion pseudo-authoritative backgrounders beginning, ‘Iraq was a new country cobbled together from several former Ottoman provinces, its lines drawn by the Europeans.’ That was Mark Mazower in the Independent. You get the cut of his jib: phony state, the slapdash creation of the Colonial Office, you can never make it work.
In fact, the artificially cobbled together country is one reason it’s worked so well. The Shia are the biggest group, but, even if they were utterly homogeneous, which they’re not, they’re not so big that they can impose their will easily on the Kurds and the Sunni. When the West’s headless chickens were running around squawking that there were more than a hundred parties on the ballot, it was all going to be one almighty mess, they failed to understand that the design flaw of Iraq is paradoxically its greatest strength: the traditional Arab solution — the local strongman — was not available. Instead, in the run-up to the election and in the month since, we’ve seen various groupings come together, hammer out areas of agreement, reach out to other coalitions, identify compromise positions, etc. — in a word, politics. The sight of eight million Iraqis going to the polls was profoundly moving to their neighbours in Syria, Lebanon, Egypt etc. But it was all the pluralist multi-party smoke-filled-room stuff that caught the fancy of the frustrated political class in those other countries. It would have been possible to find a friendly authoritarian Musharraf type and install him on one of Saddam’s solid gold toilets, but it would have been utterly uninspiring to the world beyond Iraq’s borders. It would have missed the point of the exercise.
I can understand why the transnational jet set — the EU, the UN, the NGO neo-imperialists, the foreign correspondents for CNN, the BBC and so forth — have a preference for strong, centralised states. The State Department was still in favour of keeping the Soviet Union together even after the Soviets had given up on it. It’s a pain in the neck to have to update your Rolodex every half-century or so, and when you do, you want to be able to write ‘President-for-Life Sy Kottik, also Defence Minister, Foreign Minister, Oil-for-Food Programme Director, Press Accreditation Supervisor, the one-stop shop for all your government-contacts needs — call Baghdad 001’. It’s a real nuisance to have to pencil in the Kurdish guy, and the Kurdish opposition guy, and the Sunni rejectionist, and the Sunni accommodationist and the secular Shiite and the theocrat Shiite; and that’s just for Kirkuk municipal council.
But it’s grossly condescending to assume that the Iraqi people would share your priorities. All through the worst moments of the insurgency — the real horrors in Fallujah, not the second-hand Nissan set alight on the edge of the Green Zone so the herd of foreign correspondents can film it from their hotel balconies — all through that darkest period, a few of us insisted that between two thirds and three quarters of Iraq was up and running smoothly with functioning government institutions and nascent political parties. And we were right. Don’t take my word for it — ask King Abdullah, who’s planning to duplicate some of Iraq’s political structures in Jordan.
A couple of years back, I went to hear Paul Wolfowitz. I knew him only by reputation — the most sinister of all the neocons, the big bad Wolfowitz, the man whose name started with a scary animal and ended Jewishly. In fact, he was a very soft-spoken chap, who compared the challenges of the Middle East with America’s experiments in democracy-spreading after the second world war. He said he thought it would take less time than Japan, and maybe something closer to the 1989 revolutions in Eastern Europe. I would have scoffed, but he knew so many Iraqis by name — not just Ahmed Chalabi, but a ton of others.
Around the same time, I bumped into Dominique de Villepin, the French foreign minister and man of letters. He was just back from Egypt, where he’d been profoundly moved when he’d been asked to convey the gratitude of the Arab people to President Chirac for working so tirelessly to prevent a tragic war between Christianity and Islam. You don’t say, I said. And, just as a matter of interest, who asked you to convey that? He hemmed and hawed and eventually said it was President Mubarak. Being a polite sort, I rolled my eyes only metaphorically, but decided as a long-term proposition I’d bet Wolfowitz’s address book of real people against Villepin’s hotline to over-the-hill dictators. The lesson of these last weeks is that it turns out Washington’s Zionists know the Arab people a lot better than Europe’s Arabists.
Islamism, with its plans to destroy America, take back Europe, colonise Australia and set you up with 72 virgins, may be bonkers but it’s a big idea. And you can’t beat it with a small, shrivelled idea like another decade or three of Mubarak or Assad or some such. The Bush administration decided that the only big idea they had to sell was liberty. The Europeans and the Europhile US media mostly scoffed. They’d been here before. Back in the Cold War, the Americans were able to use the phrase ‘the free world’ without irony; the French, Germans and even the British never were. This time round, the media assured us that what Iraqis wanted was not freedom but ‘security’. They didn’t all go as far as Rod Liddle, pining for the smack of firm Saddamite government, but they subscribed to the same general thesis: freedom is some airy-fairy illusion; in Saddam’s day, the streets were safe and there was no crime, apart from the ones he was committing. All wrong, as wrong as the ‘brutal Afghan winter’ and all the other media fictions. On 30 January, Bush’s big idea squared off against the head-hackers’ big idea — you vote, you die — and we know which one the Iraqi people chose, and which the rest of the region, to one degree or another, is following.
Here’s another line of mine that looks pretty good this week — my claim back in January that this is ‘the most important year in the region since Churchill drew the map of the modern Middle East in 1922’. I’ll stand on that one. But what I’d like to know is this: when Martin Kettle says he and the Nionists were right ‘in most respects’, which respects is he thinking of? What exactly did the Nionist Entity get right? That the seething ‘Arab street’ would rise up? Well, after three and a half years they finally did — in Beirut. There never was an ‘Arab street’: that’s part of the same reductive thinking that leads Dominique de Villepin to pass off some feeble schmoozing from Mubarak as the voice of the Muslim people. The entire concept of the ‘Arab street’ was lazy and condescending.
With hindsight, the fellow travellers were let off far too easily when the Iron Curtain fell like a discarded burka. Little more than a decade later, they barely hesitated a moment before jumping in on the wrong side of history yet again — and this time without the excuse that the ideological virtues of communism had merely gone awry in practice. It’s hard to make that argument about Islamism or Baathism, though Rod Liddle gamely gave the latter a whirl. But personally I hope if ever I find myself one of the unfortunate subjects of a totalitarian dictatorship, that it’s Bush and the Republicans who take up my cause rather than the Left.
The other day I found myself, for the umpteenth time, driving in Vermont behind a Kerry/Edwards supporter whose vehicle also bore the slogan ‘FREE TIBET’. It must be great to be the guy with the printing contract for the ‘FREE TIBET’ stickers. Not so good to be the guy back in Tibet wondering when the freeing thereof will actually get under way. For a while, my otherwise not terribly political wife got extremely irritated by these stickers, demanding to know at a pancake breakfast at the local church what precisely some harmless hippy-dippy old neighbour of ours meant by the slogan he’d been proudly displaying decade in, decade out: ‘But what exactly are you doing to free Tibet?’ she demanded. ‘You’re not doing anything, are you?’ ‘Give the guy a break,’ I said back home. ‘He’s advertising his moral virtue, not calling for action. If Rumsfeld were to say, “Free Tibet? Jiminy, what a swell idea! The Third Infantry Division go in on Thursday”, the bumper-sticker crowd would be aghast.’
But for those of us on the arrogant unilateralist side of things, that’s not how it works. ‘FREE AFGHANISTAN’. Done. ‘FREE IRAQ’. Done. Given the paintwork I pull off every time I have to change the sticker, it might be easier for the remainder of the Bush presidency just to go around with ‘FREE [INSERT YOUR FETID TOTALITARIAN BASKET-CASE HERE]’. Not in your name? Don’t worry, it’s not.
New Hampshire, 5 March 2005
The other day in the Guardian Martin Kettle wrote: ‘The war was a reckless, provocative, dangerous, lawless piece of unilateral arrogance. But it has nevertheless brought forth a desirable outcome which would not have been achieved at all, or so quickly, by the means that the critics advocated, right though they were in most respects.’
Very big of you, pal. And I guess that’s as close to a mea culpa as we’re going to get: even though Bush got everything wrong, it turned out right. Funny how that happens, isn’t it? In a few years’ time, they’ll have it down pat — just like they have with Eastern Europe. Oh, the Soviet bloc [the Middle East thugocracies] was bound to collapse anyway. Nothing to do with that simpleton Ronnie Raygun [Chimpy Bushitler]. In fact, all Raygun [Chimpy] did was delay the inevitable with his ridiculous arms build-up [illegal unprovoked Halliburton oil-grab], as many of us argued at the time: see my 1984 column ‘Yuri Andropov, The Young, Smart, Sexy New Face Of Soviet Communism’ [see the April 2004 Spectator column ‘Things Were Better Under Saddam: The coalition has destroyed Baathism, says Rod Liddle, and with it all hopes of the emergence of secular democracy’ — and yes, that really ran in these pages, on 17 April, not 1 April.]
By the way, when’s the next Not In Our Name rally? How about this Saturday? Millions of Nionists can flood into Trafalgar Square to proclaim to folks in Iraq and Lebanon and Egypt and Jordan and Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian Authority that all the changes under way in the region are most certainly Not In Their Name. Among the celebrity Nionists, Harold Pinter should be available to denounce Blair as a ‘war criminal’ and a ‘hired Christian thug’ one mo’ time. For as the Guardian reported this week, the great man announced that ‘he has decided to abandon his career as a playwright in order to concentrate exclusively on politics’.
That’s great news, isn’t it? One of the reasons Mr Pinter was right only ‘in most respects’ (as Martin Kettle would put it) is that he had to fit being right about everything in between composing 11-minute plays. Now he can devote his energies to it full time I’ve no doubt he’ll be right in all respects.
As for me, I got a lot of things wrong these last three years, but, looking at events in the Middle East this last week, I’m glad that, unlike the Nionist Entity, I got the big stuff right. On 8 May 2003, a couple of weeks after the fall of Saddam, I wrote in the Speccie’s then sister paper the Jerusalem Post:
‘You don’t invade Iraq in order to invade everywhere else, you invade Iraq so you don’t have to invade everywhere else.’
And so it’s turned out.
Some of the reasons for starting the remaking of the Middle East in Iraq were obvious within a day or two of 11 September. As I said back then, by his sheer survival, Saddam Hussein had become a symbol of America’s lack of will. As long as he was around, the message to Gaddafi, Arafat, Assad, Mubarak, the House of Saud and the rest of the gang was that we were still in a 10 September world. But the other reasons for starting in Iraq weren’t all so clear. After the liberation, the doom-mongers dusted down the old Bumper Boys’ Book of the British Empire and rattled off a zillion pseudo-authoritative backgrounders beginning, ‘Iraq was a new country cobbled together from several former Ottoman provinces, its lines drawn by the Europeans.’ That was Mark Mazower in the Independent. You get the cut of his jib: phony state, the slapdash creation of the Colonial Office, you can never make it work.
In fact, the artificially cobbled together country is one reason it’s worked so well. The Shia are the biggest group, but, even if they were utterly homogeneous, which they’re not, they’re not so big that they can impose their will easily on the Kurds and the Sunni. When the West’s headless chickens were running around squawking that there were more than a hundred parties on the ballot, it was all going to be one almighty mess, they failed to understand that the design flaw of Iraq is paradoxically its greatest strength: the traditional Arab solution — the local strongman — was not available. Instead, in the run-up to the election and in the month since, we’ve seen various groupings come together, hammer out areas of agreement, reach out to other coalitions, identify compromise positions, etc. — in a word, politics. The sight of eight million Iraqis going to the polls was profoundly moving to their neighbours in Syria, Lebanon, Egypt etc. But it was all the pluralist multi-party smoke-filled-room stuff that caught the fancy of the frustrated political class in those other countries. It would have been possible to find a friendly authoritarian Musharraf type and install him on one of Saddam’s solid gold toilets, but it would have been utterly uninspiring to the world beyond Iraq’s borders. It would have missed the point of the exercise.
I can understand why the transnational jet set — the EU, the UN, the NGO neo-imperialists, the foreign correspondents for CNN, the BBC and so forth — have a preference for strong, centralised states. The State Department was still in favour of keeping the Soviet Union together even after the Soviets had given up on it. It’s a pain in the neck to have to update your Rolodex every half-century or so, and when you do, you want to be able to write ‘President-for-Life Sy Kottik, also Defence Minister, Foreign Minister, Oil-for-Food Programme Director, Press Accreditation Supervisor, the one-stop shop for all your government-contacts needs — call Baghdad 001’. It’s a real nuisance to have to pencil in the Kurdish guy, and the Kurdish opposition guy, and the Sunni rejectionist, and the Sunni accommodationist and the secular Shiite and the theocrat Shiite; and that’s just for Kirkuk municipal council.
But it’s grossly condescending to assume that the Iraqi people would share your priorities. All through the worst moments of the insurgency — the real horrors in Fallujah, not the second-hand Nissan set alight on the edge of the Green Zone so the herd of foreign correspondents can film it from their hotel balconies — all through that darkest period, a few of us insisted that between two thirds and three quarters of Iraq was up and running smoothly with functioning government institutions and nascent political parties. And we were right. Don’t take my word for it — ask King Abdullah, who’s planning to duplicate some of Iraq’s political structures in Jordan.
A couple of years back, I went to hear Paul Wolfowitz. I knew him only by reputation — the most sinister of all the neocons, the big bad Wolfowitz, the man whose name started with a scary animal and ended Jewishly. In fact, he was a very soft-spoken chap, who compared the challenges of the Middle East with America’s experiments in democracy-spreading after the second world war. He said he thought it would take less time than Japan, and maybe something closer to the 1989 revolutions in Eastern Europe. I would have scoffed, but he knew so many Iraqis by name — not just Ahmed Chalabi, but a ton of others.
Around the same time, I bumped into Dominique de Villepin, the French foreign minister and man of letters. He was just back from Egypt, where he’d been profoundly moved when he’d been asked to convey the gratitude of the Arab people to President Chirac for working so tirelessly to prevent a tragic war between Christianity and Islam. You don’t say, I said. And, just as a matter of interest, who asked you to convey that? He hemmed and hawed and eventually said it was President Mubarak. Being a polite sort, I rolled my eyes only metaphorically, but decided as a long-term proposition I’d bet Wolfowitz’s address book of real people against Villepin’s hotline to over-the-hill dictators. The lesson of these last weeks is that it turns out Washington’s Zionists know the Arab people a lot better than Europe’s Arabists.
Islamism, with its plans to destroy America, take back Europe, colonise Australia and set you up with 72 virgins, may be bonkers but it’s a big idea. And you can’t beat it with a small, shrivelled idea like another decade or three of Mubarak or Assad or some such. The Bush administration decided that the only big idea they had to sell was liberty. The Europeans and the Europhile US media mostly scoffed. They’d been here before. Back in the Cold War, the Americans were able to use the phrase ‘the free world’ without irony; the French, Germans and even the British never were. This time round, the media assured us that what Iraqis wanted was not freedom but ‘security’. They didn’t all go as far as Rod Liddle, pining for the smack of firm Saddamite government, but they subscribed to the same general thesis: freedom is some airy-fairy illusion; in Saddam’s day, the streets were safe and there was no crime, apart from the ones he was committing. All wrong, as wrong as the ‘brutal Afghan winter’ and all the other media fictions. On 30 January, Bush’s big idea squared off against the head-hackers’ big idea — you vote, you die — and we know which one the Iraqi people chose, and which the rest of the region, to one degree or another, is following.
Here’s another line of mine that looks pretty good this week — my claim back in January that this is ‘the most important year in the region since Churchill drew the map of the modern Middle East in 1922’. I’ll stand on that one. But what I’d like to know is this: when Martin Kettle says he and the Nionists were right ‘in most respects’, which respects is he thinking of? What exactly did the Nionist Entity get right? That the seething ‘Arab street’ would rise up? Well, after three and a half years they finally did — in Beirut. There never was an ‘Arab street’: that’s part of the same reductive thinking that leads Dominique de Villepin to pass off some feeble schmoozing from Mubarak as the voice of the Muslim people. The entire concept of the ‘Arab street’ was lazy and condescending.
With hindsight, the fellow travellers were let off far too easily when the Iron Curtain fell like a discarded burka. Little more than a decade later, they barely hesitated a moment before jumping in on the wrong side of history yet again — and this time without the excuse that the ideological virtues of communism had merely gone awry in practice. It’s hard to make that argument about Islamism or Baathism, though Rod Liddle gamely gave the latter a whirl. But personally I hope if ever I find myself one of the unfortunate subjects of a totalitarian dictatorship, that it’s Bush and the Republicans who take up my cause rather than the Left.
The other day I found myself, for the umpteenth time, driving in Vermont behind a Kerry/Edwards supporter whose vehicle also bore the slogan ‘FREE TIBET’. It must be great to be the guy with the printing contract for the ‘FREE TIBET’ stickers. Not so good to be the guy back in Tibet wondering when the freeing thereof will actually get under way. For a while, my otherwise not terribly political wife got extremely irritated by these stickers, demanding to know at a pancake breakfast at the local church what precisely some harmless hippy-dippy old neighbour of ours meant by the slogan he’d been proudly displaying decade in, decade out: ‘But what exactly are you doing to free Tibet?’ she demanded. ‘You’re not doing anything, are you?’ ‘Give the guy a break,’ I said back home. ‘He’s advertising his moral virtue, not calling for action. If Rumsfeld were to say, “Free Tibet? Jiminy, what a swell idea! The Third Infantry Division go in on Thursday”, the bumper-sticker crowd would be aghast.’
But for those of us on the arrogant unilateralist side of things, that’s not how it works. ‘FREE AFGHANISTAN’. Done. ‘FREE IRAQ’. Done. Given the paintwork I pull off every time I have to change the sticker, it might be easier for the remainder of the Bush presidency just to go around with ‘FREE [INSERT YOUR FETID TOTALITARIAN BASKET-CASE HERE]’. Not in your name? Don’t worry, it’s not.
Thursday, March 03, 2005
Kassam Rockets Discovered in Northern Samaria
From Israel National News 3/3/05
The IDF discovered a Kassam rocket factory near Jenin Wednesday night. The rockets were to be aimed at Afula, underscoring security experts' fears about the impending withdrawal from the Shomron.
The weapons factory was discovered by IDF forces during an operation in the Arab-populated town of Yamoun, northwest of Jenin. The factory was hidden in a secret room 15 feet below a metal works shop and contained seven pipe bombs, chemicals and explosives, as well as parts for building rifles.The most alarming aspect of the discovery, however, was the find of a completed Kassam rocket, as well as others in various stages of preparation. Such rockets in that region would place the nearby city of Afula and the major Afula-Hadera highway within striking range of terrorists. Security experts have warned that Prime Minister Sharon's disengagement from the northern Shomron is likely to be even more dangerous than that from Gaza. The Shomron area slated to come under full PA control is some 700 square kilometers (270 square miles), approximately double that of the entire Gaza Strip. General Security Service Chief Avi Dichter has said that the area will become "Fatah-land," and it is warned that the withdrawal will even impair Israel's water economy.Territorial contiguity over such a large area, which will connect cities such as Jenin, Shechem and Tubas, will allow the terrorists to freely manufacture and transport Kassam rockets. As Gush Katif communities are endangered by terrorist rockets today, so will be Beit She'an, Afula and the Jezre'el Valley in the near future, experts warn.Yamoun and Arab towns in the Jenin/Shechem region are slated to be handed over to Palestinian Authority control under the terms of the unilateral withdrawal. The four Jewish communities in the region are scheduled for uprooting, along with 21 communities in Gaza, this coming summer.On Monday, IDF troops intercepted a truck-bomb containing nearly half a ton of explosives in the same region.It was released for publication Tuesday that a Hamas cell in northern Samaria has been planning to carry out numerous rocket and mortar shell attacks on cities in northern Israel.
The IDF discovered a Kassam rocket factory near Jenin Wednesday night. The rockets were to be aimed at Afula, underscoring security experts' fears about the impending withdrawal from the Shomron.
The weapons factory was discovered by IDF forces during an operation in the Arab-populated town of Yamoun, northwest of Jenin. The factory was hidden in a secret room 15 feet below a metal works shop and contained seven pipe bombs, chemicals and explosives, as well as parts for building rifles.The most alarming aspect of the discovery, however, was the find of a completed Kassam rocket, as well as others in various stages of preparation. Such rockets in that region would place the nearby city of Afula and the major Afula-Hadera highway within striking range of terrorists. Security experts have warned that Prime Minister Sharon's disengagement from the northern Shomron is likely to be even more dangerous than that from Gaza. The Shomron area slated to come under full PA control is some 700 square kilometers (270 square miles), approximately double that of the entire Gaza Strip. General Security Service Chief Avi Dichter has said that the area will become "Fatah-land," and it is warned that the withdrawal will even impair Israel's water economy.Territorial contiguity over such a large area, which will connect cities such as Jenin, Shechem and Tubas, will allow the terrorists to freely manufacture and transport Kassam rockets. As Gush Katif communities are endangered by terrorist rockets today, so will be Beit She'an, Afula and the Jezre'el Valley in the near future, experts warn.Yamoun and Arab towns in the Jenin/Shechem region are slated to be handed over to Palestinian Authority control under the terms of the unilateral withdrawal. The four Jewish communities in the region are scheduled for uprooting, along with 21 communities in Gaza, this coming summer.On Monday, IDF troops intercepted a truck-bomb containing nearly half a ton of explosives in the same region.It was released for publication Tuesday that a Hamas cell in northern Samaria has been planning to carry out numerous rocket and mortar shell attacks on cities in northern Israel.
World Jewry Celebrates Talmud Study
From Israel National News 3/3/05
Untold numbers of people around the world, up to hundreds of thousands, celebrated the completion of the daily study of the Babylonian Talmud this week. Another 7.5-year cycle is beginning today.
The Babylonian Talmud, 2,711 pages long and divided into 36 books, or tractates, makes up the base of Judaism's Oral Law. In 1923, Rabbi Meir Shapira initiated the idea of study groups around the world studying the same daily page, known as the Daf Yomi – the Daily Page (or Folio; the page comprises both sides). Last night, the 11th such round was completed, and was celebrated in Yad Eliyahu Stadium in Tel Aviv, the Binyanei HaUmah Convention Center in Jerusalem, Madison Square Garden in New York, and in many large and small forums around the world. Another celebration, in English and Russian, will be held in at Binyanei HaUmah tonight.Overhead screens in Madison Square Garden flashed the names of some of the cities in which similar celebrations were taking place, including around the U.S., Canada, South America, Europe and elsewhere. The event in New York, which, like all the others, featured an explanation of the last passage of the last page of the Talmud, was broadcast by satellite to 70 North American cities. In Hevron this week, dozens of men gathered at the Machpelah Cave of the Patriarchs to complete the Talmud. A daily Daf Yomi class has been held there for several years. A similar event was held in Beit El – where six different Daf Yomi classes are given throughout the day – with the participation of Rabbi Avigdor Nebenzahl of the Old City.Another Daf Yomi concluding event will be held in N'vei Dekalim in Gush Katif tomorrow night, with the participation of rabbis and amateur scholars from all over the country.The 73rd and final volume of a complete English translation of the entire Talmud is being published this month by Mesorah; it is known as the Schottenstein Artscroll edition. Artscroll is also about halfway through a new Hebrew edition of its commentary, seven volumes into a French translation and commentary, and is getting started on a similar English work on the Jerusalem Talmud.The Jerusalem Talmud has its own study cycle. Currently nearing the end of its seventh round, this shorter Talmud is also studied around the world in rounds that take only 4.5 years. Interest in studying the Jerusalem Talmud is on the upswing in Israel, and a new edition of the tractate of Taanit was recently published by the Institute for Study of the Yerushalmi of the Harry Fischel-Ariel Institute in Jerusalem. The work includes both a line-by-line explanation and a more in-depth commentary.
Untold numbers of people around the world, up to hundreds of thousands, celebrated the completion of the daily study of the Babylonian Talmud this week. Another 7.5-year cycle is beginning today.
The Babylonian Talmud, 2,711 pages long and divided into 36 books, or tractates, makes up the base of Judaism's Oral Law. In 1923, Rabbi Meir Shapira initiated the idea of study groups around the world studying the same daily page, known as the Daf Yomi – the Daily Page (or Folio; the page comprises both sides). Last night, the 11th such round was completed, and was celebrated in Yad Eliyahu Stadium in Tel Aviv, the Binyanei HaUmah Convention Center in Jerusalem, Madison Square Garden in New York, and in many large and small forums around the world. Another celebration, in English and Russian, will be held in at Binyanei HaUmah tonight.Overhead screens in Madison Square Garden flashed the names of some of the cities in which similar celebrations were taking place, including around the U.S., Canada, South America, Europe and elsewhere. The event in New York, which, like all the others, featured an explanation of the last passage of the last page of the Talmud, was broadcast by satellite to 70 North American cities. In Hevron this week, dozens of men gathered at the Machpelah Cave of the Patriarchs to complete the Talmud. A daily Daf Yomi class has been held there for several years. A similar event was held in Beit El – where six different Daf Yomi classes are given throughout the day – with the participation of Rabbi Avigdor Nebenzahl of the Old City.Another Daf Yomi concluding event will be held in N'vei Dekalim in Gush Katif tomorrow night, with the participation of rabbis and amateur scholars from all over the country.The 73rd and final volume of a complete English translation of the entire Talmud is being published this month by Mesorah; it is known as the Schottenstein Artscroll edition. Artscroll is also about halfway through a new Hebrew edition of its commentary, seven volumes into a French translation and commentary, and is getting started on a similar English work on the Jerusalem Talmud.The Jerusalem Talmud has its own study cycle. Currently nearing the end of its seventh round, this shorter Talmud is also studied around the world in rounds that take only 4.5 years. Interest in studying the Jerusalem Talmud is on the upswing in Israel, and a new edition of the tractate of Taanit was recently published by the Institute for Study of the Yerushalmi of the Harry Fischel-Ariel Institute in Jerusalem. The work includes both a line-by-line explanation and a more in-depth commentary.
Wednesday, March 02, 2005
The Arabs' Berlin Wall has crumbled
By Mark Steyn
(Filed: 01/03/2005)
Three years ago - April 6 2002, if you want to rummage through the old Spectators in the attic - I wrote: "The stability junkies in the EU, UN and elsewhere have, as usual, missed the point. The Middle East is too stable. So, if you had to pick only one regime to topple, why not Iraq? Once you've got rid of the ruling gang, it's the West's best shot at incubating a reasonably non-insane polity. That's why the unravelling of the Middle East has to start not in the West Bank but in Baghdad."
I don't like to say I told you so. But, actually, I do like to say I told you so. What I don't like to do is the obligatory false self-deprecatory thing to mitigate against the insufferableness of my saying I told you so. But nevertheless I did.
Consider just the past couple of days' news: not the ever more desperate depravity of the floundering "insurgency", but the real popular Arab resistance the car-bombers and the head-hackers are flailing against: the Saudi foreign minister, who by remarkable coincidence goes by the name of Prince Saud, told Newsweek that women would be voting in the next Saudi election. "That is going to be good for the election," he said, "because I think women are more sensible voters than men."
Four-time Egyptian election winner - and with 90 per cent of the vote! - President Mubarak announced that next polling day he wouldn't mind an opponent. Ordering his stenographer to change the constitution to permit the first multi-choice presidential elections in Egyptian history, His Excellency said the country would benefit from "more freedom and democracy". The state-run TV network hailed the president's speech as a "historical decision in the nation's 7,000-year-old march toward democracy". After 7,000 years on the march, they're barely out of the parking lot, so Mubarak's move is, as they say, a step in the right direction.
Meanwhile in Damascus, Boy Assad, having badly overplayed his hand in Lebanon and after months of denying that he was harbouring any refugee Saddamites, suddenly discovered that - wouldja believe it? - Saddam's brother and 29 other bigshot Baghdad Baathists were holed up in north-eastern Syria, and promptly handed them over to the Iraqi government.
And, for perhaps the most remarkable development, consider this report from Mohammed Ballas of Associated Press: "Palestinians expressed anger on Saturday at an overnight suicide bombing in Tel Aviv that killed four Israelis and threatened a fragile truce, a departure from former times when they welcomed attacks on their Israeli foes."
No disrespect to Associated Press, but I was disinclined to take their word for it. However, Charles Johnson, whose Little Green Footballs website has done an invaluable job these past three years presenting the ugly truth about Palestinian death-cultism, reported that he went hunting around the internet for the usual photographs of deliriously happy Gazans dancing in the street and handing out sweets to celebrate the latest addition to the pile of Jew corpses - and, to his surprise, couldn't find any.
Why is all this happening? Answer: January 30. Don't take my word for it, listen to Walid Jumblatt, big-time Lebanese Druze leader and a man of impeccable anti-American credentials: "I was cynical about Iraq. But when I saw the Iraqi people voting three weeks ago, eight million of them, it was the start of a new Arab world. The Berlin Wall has fallen."
Just so. Left to their own devices, the House of Saud - which demanded all US female air-traffic controllers be stood down for Crown Prince Abdullah's flight to the Bush ranch in Crawford - would stick to their traditional line that Wahhabi women have no place in a voting booth; instead, they have to dress like a voting booth - a big black impenetrable curtain with a little slot to drop your ballot through. Likewise, Hosni Mubarak has no desire to take part in campaign debates with Hosno Name-Recognition. Boy Assad has no desire to hand over his co-Baathists to the Great Satan's puppets in Baghdad.
But none of them has much of a choice. In the space of a month, the Iraq election has become the prism through which all other events in the region are seen.
Assad's regime knocks off a troublemaker in Lebanon. Big deal. They've done it a gazillion times. But this time the streets are full of demonstrators demanding an end to Syrian occupation.
A suicide bomber kills four Jews. So what's new? But this time the Palestinians decline to celebrate. And some even question whether being a delivery system for plastic explosives is really all life has to offer, even on the West Bank.
Mubarak announces the arrest of an opposition leader. Like, who cares? The jails are full of 'em. But this time Condi Rice cancels her visit and the Egyptian government notices that its annual cheque from Washington is a month late.
Three years ago, those of us in favour of destabilising the Middle East didn't have to be far-sighted geniuses: it was a win/win proposition. As Sam Goldwyn said, I'm sick of the old clichés, bring me some new clichés. The old clichés - Pan-Arabism, Baathism, Islamism, Arafatism - brought us the sewer that led to September 11. The new clichés could hardly be worse. Even if the old thug-for-life had merely been replaced by a new thug-for-life, the latter would come to power in the wake of the cautionary tale of the former.
But some of us - notably US deputy defence secretary Paul Wolfowitz - thought things would go a lot better than that. Wolfowitz was right, and so was Bush, and the Left, who were wrong about the Berlin Wall, were wrong again, the only difference being that this time they were joined in the dunce's corner of history by far too many British Tories. No surprise there. The EU's political establishment doesn't trust its own people, so why would they trust anybody else's? Bush trusts the American people, and he's happy to extend the same courtesy to the Iraqi people, the Syrian people, the Iranian people, etc.
Prof Glenn Reynolds, America's Instapundit, observes that "democratisation is a process, not an event". Far too often, it's treated like an event: ship in the monitors, hold the election, get it approved by Jimmy Carter and the UN, and that's it. Doesn't work like that. What's happening in the Middle East is the start of a long-delayed process. Eight million Iraqis did more for the Arab world on January 30 than 7,000 years of Mubarak-pace marching.
(Filed: 01/03/2005)
Three years ago - April 6 2002, if you want to rummage through the old Spectators in the attic - I wrote: "The stability junkies in the EU, UN and elsewhere have, as usual, missed the point. The Middle East is too stable. So, if you had to pick only one regime to topple, why not Iraq? Once you've got rid of the ruling gang, it's the West's best shot at incubating a reasonably non-insane polity. That's why the unravelling of the Middle East has to start not in the West Bank but in Baghdad."
I don't like to say I told you so. But, actually, I do like to say I told you so. What I don't like to do is the obligatory false self-deprecatory thing to mitigate against the insufferableness of my saying I told you so. But nevertheless I did.
Consider just the past couple of days' news: not the ever more desperate depravity of the floundering "insurgency", but the real popular Arab resistance the car-bombers and the head-hackers are flailing against: the Saudi foreign minister, who by remarkable coincidence goes by the name of Prince Saud, told Newsweek that women would be voting in the next Saudi election. "That is going to be good for the election," he said, "because I think women are more sensible voters than men."
Four-time Egyptian election winner - and with 90 per cent of the vote! - President Mubarak announced that next polling day he wouldn't mind an opponent. Ordering his stenographer to change the constitution to permit the first multi-choice presidential elections in Egyptian history, His Excellency said the country would benefit from "more freedom and democracy". The state-run TV network hailed the president's speech as a "historical decision in the nation's 7,000-year-old march toward democracy". After 7,000 years on the march, they're barely out of the parking lot, so Mubarak's move is, as they say, a step in the right direction.
Meanwhile in Damascus, Boy Assad, having badly overplayed his hand in Lebanon and after months of denying that he was harbouring any refugee Saddamites, suddenly discovered that - wouldja believe it? - Saddam's brother and 29 other bigshot Baghdad Baathists were holed up in north-eastern Syria, and promptly handed them over to the Iraqi government.
And, for perhaps the most remarkable development, consider this report from Mohammed Ballas of Associated Press: "Palestinians expressed anger on Saturday at an overnight suicide bombing in Tel Aviv that killed four Israelis and threatened a fragile truce, a departure from former times when they welcomed attacks on their Israeli foes."
No disrespect to Associated Press, but I was disinclined to take their word for it. However, Charles Johnson, whose Little Green Footballs website has done an invaluable job these past three years presenting the ugly truth about Palestinian death-cultism, reported that he went hunting around the internet for the usual photographs of deliriously happy Gazans dancing in the street and handing out sweets to celebrate the latest addition to the pile of Jew corpses - and, to his surprise, couldn't find any.
Why is all this happening? Answer: January 30. Don't take my word for it, listen to Walid Jumblatt, big-time Lebanese Druze leader and a man of impeccable anti-American credentials: "I was cynical about Iraq. But when I saw the Iraqi people voting three weeks ago, eight million of them, it was the start of a new Arab world. The Berlin Wall has fallen."
Just so. Left to their own devices, the House of Saud - which demanded all US female air-traffic controllers be stood down for Crown Prince Abdullah's flight to the Bush ranch in Crawford - would stick to their traditional line that Wahhabi women have no place in a voting booth; instead, they have to dress like a voting booth - a big black impenetrable curtain with a little slot to drop your ballot through. Likewise, Hosni Mubarak has no desire to take part in campaign debates with Hosno Name-Recognition. Boy Assad has no desire to hand over his co-Baathists to the Great Satan's puppets in Baghdad.
But none of them has much of a choice. In the space of a month, the Iraq election has become the prism through which all other events in the region are seen.
Assad's regime knocks off a troublemaker in Lebanon. Big deal. They've done it a gazillion times. But this time the streets are full of demonstrators demanding an end to Syrian occupation.
A suicide bomber kills four Jews. So what's new? But this time the Palestinians decline to celebrate. And some even question whether being a delivery system for plastic explosives is really all life has to offer, even on the West Bank.
Mubarak announces the arrest of an opposition leader. Like, who cares? The jails are full of 'em. But this time Condi Rice cancels her visit and the Egyptian government notices that its annual cheque from Washington is a month late.
Three years ago, those of us in favour of destabilising the Middle East didn't have to be far-sighted geniuses: it was a win/win proposition. As Sam Goldwyn said, I'm sick of the old clichés, bring me some new clichés. The old clichés - Pan-Arabism, Baathism, Islamism, Arafatism - brought us the sewer that led to September 11. The new clichés could hardly be worse. Even if the old thug-for-life had merely been replaced by a new thug-for-life, the latter would come to power in the wake of the cautionary tale of the former.
But some of us - notably US deputy defence secretary Paul Wolfowitz - thought things would go a lot better than that. Wolfowitz was right, and so was Bush, and the Left, who were wrong about the Berlin Wall, were wrong again, the only difference being that this time they were joined in the dunce's corner of history by far too many British Tories. No surprise there. The EU's political establishment doesn't trust its own people, so why would they trust anybody else's? Bush trusts the American people, and he's happy to extend the same courtesy to the Iraqi people, the Syrian people, the Iranian people, etc.
Prof Glenn Reynolds, America's Instapundit, observes that "democratisation is a process, not an event". Far too often, it's treated like an event: ship in the monitors, hold the election, get it approved by Jimmy Carter and the UN, and that's it. Doesn't work like that. What's happening in the Middle East is the start of a long-delayed process. Eight million Iraqis did more for the Arab world on January 30 than 7,000 years of Mubarak-pace marching.
Tuesday, March 01, 2005
Fifth Victim of Tel Aviv Terror Attack Dies of Wounds
From Israel National News, 1/3/05
26-year-old Odelia Hubara from Jerusalem succumbed to her wounds last night, becoming the fifth person killed by the Arab terror attack in Tel Aviv Friday night.
Odelia suffered serious head, chest and internal injuries in the bomb attack at the Stage nightclub just off the Tel Aviv beachfront and never regained consciousness. She will be buried in Jerusalem on Tuesday at 4 PM.Of the more than 50 people wounded in the attack, 22 are still hospitalized, including one in serious condition.The four others murdered in the attack - Yitzhak Buzaglo, 40, of Mishmar HaYarden, Aryeh Nagar, 37, of Kfar Saba, Ronen Rubinov, 30, of Tel Aviv, and Yael Auerbach, 28, of Rehovot - were laid to rest yesterday. Yael's father, Yisrael Auerbach, said at his daughter's funeral that he had served in the same elite Ramon reconnaissance unit of the IDF with Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Mossad chief Meir Dagan. He called upon them to avenge his daughter's death. “If her blood is not avenged, I will do it myself,” Auerbach declared, “in a way not yet seen." Yael's father said that she was a direct descendent of King David from both her father and mother. She was about to hand out invitations to her upcoming wedding when the Arab terrorist blew himself up. Her fiancי is being treated at the Sheba Medical center in Tel Aviv for moderate to serious injuries suffered in the attack.Twenty-five Israelis have been murdered since Yasser Arafat died, an average of approximately one every four days. Last night, Arab attackers threw stones at Jews praying at the ancient tomb of Simon the Just (Shimon HaTzaddik) in Jerusalem, injuring a 14-year-old boy. The youth was treated on the spot and transported to a hospital, where his condition was reported as light. Border Guardsmen conducted a search for the attackers with the assistance of some of the worshippers. No arrests were reported. Israeli motorists were targeted by gunfire on the trans-Samaria highway last night. Though cars were struck by bullets and damaged, nobody was injured.IDF sappers discovered a 100-pound bomb in a greenhouse near the Gush Katif community of Netzer Hazani this morning. It was disarmed without injury. A barrage of stones was hurled at the vehicles of residents of the northern Samarian community of Homesh this morning, as well. No injuries were reported, but the vehicles were damaged.
26-year-old Odelia Hubara from Jerusalem succumbed to her wounds last night, becoming the fifth person killed by the Arab terror attack in Tel Aviv Friday night.
Odelia suffered serious head, chest and internal injuries in the bomb attack at the Stage nightclub just off the Tel Aviv beachfront and never regained consciousness. She will be buried in Jerusalem on Tuesday at 4 PM.Of the more than 50 people wounded in the attack, 22 are still hospitalized, including one in serious condition.The four others murdered in the attack - Yitzhak Buzaglo, 40, of Mishmar HaYarden, Aryeh Nagar, 37, of Kfar Saba, Ronen Rubinov, 30, of Tel Aviv, and Yael Auerbach, 28, of Rehovot - were laid to rest yesterday. Yael's father, Yisrael Auerbach, said at his daughter's funeral that he had served in the same elite Ramon reconnaissance unit of the IDF with Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Mossad chief Meir Dagan. He called upon them to avenge his daughter's death. “If her blood is not avenged, I will do it myself,” Auerbach declared, “in a way not yet seen." Yael's father said that she was a direct descendent of King David from both her father and mother. She was about to hand out invitations to her upcoming wedding when the Arab terrorist blew himself up. Her fiancי is being treated at the Sheba Medical center in Tel Aviv for moderate to serious injuries suffered in the attack.Twenty-five Israelis have been murdered since Yasser Arafat died, an average of approximately one every four days. Last night, Arab attackers threw stones at Jews praying at the ancient tomb of Simon the Just (Shimon HaTzaddik) in Jerusalem, injuring a 14-year-old boy. The youth was treated on the spot and transported to a hospital, where his condition was reported as light. Border Guardsmen conducted a search for the attackers with the assistance of some of the worshippers. No arrests were reported. Israeli motorists were targeted by gunfire on the trans-Samaria highway last night. Though cars were struck by bullets and damaged, nobody was injured.IDF sappers discovered a 100-pound bomb in a greenhouse near the Gush Katif community of Netzer Hazani this morning. It was disarmed without injury. A barrage of stones was hurled at the vehicles of residents of the northern Samarian community of Homesh this morning, as well. No injuries were reported, but the vehicles were damaged.
Monday, February 28, 2005
Following Murderous Attack, Sharon Warns PA
from Israel National News
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said this morning that there would be no diplomatic progress unless the Palestinian Authority begins taking firm action against terrorism.
"The attack [on Friday night] was committed by Islamic Jihad," Sharon said in his introductory remarks at this morning's Cabinet meeting. "The orders were given by Islamic Jihad elements in Syria. We know this with certainty. But this fact does not at all exempt the Palestinian Authority from its responsibility for allowing the terrorist to leave on his mission, nor from its responsibility to take action against his accomplices. The PA's immediate test will be whether it takes firm action against the Islamic Jihad."Regarding the diplomatic front, Sharon said, "Israel is interested in making progress towards an agreement with the Palestinians, but there will be no diplomatic progress – I repeat, no diplomatic progress – until they take firm action to liquidate the terror organizations and their infrastructures. Of late, Israel has acted with restraint, in order to enable progress, but it's clear that if a firm Palestinian action against terrorism is not undertaken, Israel will have to intensify its military actions to protect itself." On Aug. 14, 2003, Arutz-7 reported: "Defense Ministry officials said today that Israel will not be continuing with any further diplomatic gestures towards the Palestinian Authority, at least until such time as the PA takes action against terrorist organizations operating from its jurisdiction. Prisoner releases will cease, and the PA will not be given control over any additional territories in Judea, Samaria and Gaza (Yesha), according to the officials." On Dec. 4, 2001, Minister Tzippy Livni told Arutz-7: "Until now, we said that the PA has to take action against terrorism, or we would declare it a terror-supporting entity. Now we have said that we do consider it a terror-supporting entity - unless it in fact takes action. The burden of proof is upon them." Israel's response thus far has included an announcement that preparations to transfer security control in cities such as Tul Karem and Jericho will be frozen – though they were mired in any event - and a ban on an Islamic Jihad representative from traveling to Egypt to meet with other terrorist leaders two days from now. The police in most of Israel are on the second-highest level of alert today.In addition, the IDF resumed arresting wanted terrorists in Judea and Samaria last night. Israel also plans to stop its "cease-fire" vis-a-vis the Islamic Jihad. Israel arrested two of the terrorist's brothers and four neighbors - including a Musleim cleric - in their village near Tul Karem. The PA said it arrested two terrorists in connection with the attack.PA chairman Abu Mazen, said to be very angry, called the attack an act of sabotage. "We will follow and track down those responsible and they will be punished accordingly," according to a statement he issued to reporters.Likud MK Yuval Shteinitz (pictured above), Chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, said today, "Abu Mazen is actually Arafat – maybe not the Arafat of the last few years who openly encouraged terrorism, but certainly the Arafat of the first years of Oslo – because though he is adhering to the hudna [temporary ceasefire], he has taken no forcible action to dismantle the terrorist infrastructures, to collect illegal weapons and to significantly punish those who organize terrorism."Shteinitz said that it doesn't matter whether the orders for the attack were given in Syria or in Ramallah. "The infrastructures are in Palestinian Authority territory," he said, "and it's the PA's responsibility to dismantle them."U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice demanded that Palestinian leaders find the culprits and "send a clear message that terror will not be tolerated." Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat expressed concerns that Israel would retaliate. "We are asking the international community to move immediately to ensure that Israel does not use this kind of operation as an excuse for aggressions against the Palestinian people," he said.Hamas terrorists blamed the attack on Israel, explaining that "Israeli aggressions and crimes are continuing even we as are observing this period of quiet."
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said this morning that there would be no diplomatic progress unless the Palestinian Authority begins taking firm action against terrorism.
"The attack [on Friday night] was committed by Islamic Jihad," Sharon said in his introductory remarks at this morning's Cabinet meeting. "The orders were given by Islamic Jihad elements in Syria. We know this with certainty. But this fact does not at all exempt the Palestinian Authority from its responsibility for allowing the terrorist to leave on his mission, nor from its responsibility to take action against his accomplices. The PA's immediate test will be whether it takes firm action against the Islamic Jihad."Regarding the diplomatic front, Sharon said, "Israel is interested in making progress towards an agreement with the Palestinians, but there will be no diplomatic progress – I repeat, no diplomatic progress – until they take firm action to liquidate the terror organizations and their infrastructures. Of late, Israel has acted with restraint, in order to enable progress, but it's clear that if a firm Palestinian action against terrorism is not undertaken, Israel will have to intensify its military actions to protect itself." On Aug. 14, 2003, Arutz-7 reported: "Defense Ministry officials said today that Israel will not be continuing with any further diplomatic gestures towards the Palestinian Authority, at least until such time as the PA takes action against terrorist organizations operating from its jurisdiction. Prisoner releases will cease, and the PA will not be given control over any additional territories in Judea, Samaria and Gaza (Yesha), according to the officials." On Dec. 4, 2001, Minister Tzippy Livni told Arutz-7: "Until now, we said that the PA has to take action against terrorism, or we would declare it a terror-supporting entity. Now we have said that we do consider it a terror-supporting entity - unless it in fact takes action. The burden of proof is upon them." Israel's response thus far has included an announcement that preparations to transfer security control in cities such as Tul Karem and Jericho will be frozen – though they were mired in any event - and a ban on an Islamic Jihad representative from traveling to Egypt to meet with other terrorist leaders two days from now. The police in most of Israel are on the second-highest level of alert today.In addition, the IDF resumed arresting wanted terrorists in Judea and Samaria last night. Israel also plans to stop its "cease-fire" vis-a-vis the Islamic Jihad. Israel arrested two of the terrorist's brothers and four neighbors - including a Musleim cleric - in their village near Tul Karem. The PA said it arrested two terrorists in connection with the attack.PA chairman Abu Mazen, said to be very angry, called the attack an act of sabotage. "We will follow and track down those responsible and they will be punished accordingly," according to a statement he issued to reporters.Likud MK Yuval Shteinitz (pictured above), Chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, said today, "Abu Mazen is actually Arafat – maybe not the Arafat of the last few years who openly encouraged terrorism, but certainly the Arafat of the first years of Oslo – because though he is adhering to the hudna [temporary ceasefire], he has taken no forcible action to dismantle the terrorist infrastructures, to collect illegal weapons and to significantly punish those who organize terrorism."Shteinitz said that it doesn't matter whether the orders for the attack were given in Syria or in Ramallah. "The infrastructures are in Palestinian Authority territory," he said, "and it's the PA's responsibility to dismantle them."U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice demanded that Palestinian leaders find the culprits and "send a clear message that terror will not be tolerated." Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat expressed concerns that Israel would retaliate. "We are asking the international community to move immediately to ensure that Israel does not use this kind of operation as an excuse for aggressions against the Palestinian people," he said.Hamas terrorists blamed the attack on Israel, explaining that "Israeli aggressions and crimes are continuing even we as are observing this period of quiet."
Terrorists Kill Four in Tel Aviv Bomb Blast
from Israel National News
An Islamic Jihad suicide bomber Friday night killed three men and a woman and wounded more than 50 others at a Tel Aviv nightclub near the beach.
The four who were killed were to be buried in their hometowns today. They are: * Yitzchak Buzaglo, 40, from Moshav Mishmar HaYarden, whose wife Linda was hospitalized in serious condition; they have a 9-year-old son and a 3-year-old daughter.* Aryeh Nagar, 37, of Kfar Saba; never married, he is survived by his parents and five siblings.* Ronen Reuvenov, 30, of Tel Aviv; and * Yael Auerbach, 28 from Rehovot, who was to have been married in two weeks; her fiance is hospitalized in moderate condition. The attack occurred when a suicide terrorist blew himself up at the entrance to the Stage Club on the Tel Aviv boardwalk. The terrorist was killed in the blast, and police are searching for a second man seen with him before the attack. The Palestinian Authority (PA) blamed the attack on Hizbullah terrorists allied with Iran, but Israeli security sources said the terrorists came from an Islamic Jihad gang backed by Syrian terrorists. Islamic Jihad, in fact, claimed responsiblity, airing a video tape prepared before the attack and boasting that it was trying to derail the PA.Three of the wounded were initially listed in serious condition. Of the more than 50 people who were wounded, 29 are still hospitalized in four Tel Aviv hospitals – Sheba, Ichilov, Wolfson and Beilinson – including one in very critical condition and one in serious condition.Most of the victims belonged to an Israeli army reserve unit that was planning to celebrate the birthday of one of its officers at the nightclub. "It was a surprise party for our sergeant-major," said Eitan Hait, one if the reservists. "We were all standing outside laughing and smiling when suddenly I felt darkness sweep over me." Many unit members described themselves as a close "family" that would often get together socially. They were to have received wedding invitations to Ophir and Yael's wedding on Friday night."We're a small and very 'together' unit," later said Yaron Greivsky, whose 30th birthday was the reason for the suprise gathering. "We're the kind who smile when we're called up for reserve service. All of us have been in dangerous places, we've been in Lebanon, Gaza, Hevron, all over. No one was ever hurt. And then a terrorist comes to the middle of Tel Aviv, where it's supposed to be the safest, and destroys everything."The managers of the Stage Club said that they plan to be closed for the week of mourning, and will then resume their program of "Israeli music sing-alongs." "We will not cave in to terrorism," said owner Tzachi Cohen.The murderer was a 21-year-old terrorist from an area near Tul Karem, about five miles east of Tel Aviv. Tul Karem was slated to be one of the first cities whose security responsibility was to be handed over to the PA in the coming days. In reaction to the suicide bombing, Israel announced last night, among other things, that it was freezing the plan. Some analysts said that this was largely an announcement to calm the Israeli public, as the plan was mired in any event.
An Islamic Jihad suicide bomber Friday night killed three men and a woman and wounded more than 50 others at a Tel Aviv nightclub near the beach.
The four who were killed were to be buried in their hometowns today. They are: * Yitzchak Buzaglo, 40, from Moshav Mishmar HaYarden, whose wife Linda was hospitalized in serious condition; they have a 9-year-old son and a 3-year-old daughter.* Aryeh Nagar, 37, of Kfar Saba; never married, he is survived by his parents and five siblings.* Ronen Reuvenov, 30, of Tel Aviv; and * Yael Auerbach, 28 from Rehovot, who was to have been married in two weeks; her fiance is hospitalized in moderate condition. The attack occurred when a suicide terrorist blew himself up at the entrance to the Stage Club on the Tel Aviv boardwalk. The terrorist was killed in the blast, and police are searching for a second man seen with him before the attack. The Palestinian Authority (PA) blamed the attack on Hizbullah terrorists allied with Iran, but Israeli security sources said the terrorists came from an Islamic Jihad gang backed by Syrian terrorists. Islamic Jihad, in fact, claimed responsiblity, airing a video tape prepared before the attack and boasting that it was trying to derail the PA.Three of the wounded were initially listed in serious condition. Of the more than 50 people who were wounded, 29 are still hospitalized in four Tel Aviv hospitals – Sheba, Ichilov, Wolfson and Beilinson – including one in very critical condition and one in serious condition.Most of the victims belonged to an Israeli army reserve unit that was planning to celebrate the birthday of one of its officers at the nightclub. "It was a surprise party for our sergeant-major," said Eitan Hait, one if the reservists. "We were all standing outside laughing and smiling when suddenly I felt darkness sweep over me." Many unit members described themselves as a close "family" that would often get together socially. They were to have received wedding invitations to Ophir and Yael's wedding on Friday night."We're a small and very 'together' unit," later said Yaron Greivsky, whose 30th birthday was the reason for the suprise gathering. "We're the kind who smile when we're called up for reserve service. All of us have been in dangerous places, we've been in Lebanon, Gaza, Hevron, all over. No one was ever hurt. And then a terrorist comes to the middle of Tel Aviv, where it's supposed to be the safest, and destroys everything."The managers of the Stage Club said that they plan to be closed for the week of mourning, and will then resume their program of "Israeli music sing-alongs." "We will not cave in to terrorism," said owner Tzachi Cohen.The murderer was a 21-year-old terrorist from an area near Tul Karem, about five miles east of Tel Aviv. Tul Karem was slated to be one of the first cities whose security responsibility was to be handed over to the PA in the coming days. In reaction to the suicide bombing, Israel announced last night, among other things, that it was freezing the plan. Some analysts said that this was largely an announcement to calm the Israeli public, as the plan was mired in any event.
Saturday, February 26, 2005
Poll: Sharon Implementing Labor's Platform
From Israel National News
A recent poll shows a majority of voters believe Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is acting contrary to the platform upon which he was elected.
The poll, carried out by "Brain Base" ["Ma'agar Mohot"] via telephone conversations with a representative sample of 568 adult Israelis (including Israeli Arabs), was broadcast on Israel Radio's "Another Matter" program Tuesday. Asked whether the Labor Party ministers who claim that Ariel Sharon is implementing the election platform of Labor Party are correct, 55% answered yes. Whereas only 44% of Likud voters answered in the affirmative, 92% of Labor voters agreed.Sharon ran against Labor candidate Amram Mitzna last election. Mitzna’s central campaign issue was a unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, whereas, while Sharon spoke about “painful concessions for peace,” he spoke out strongly against Mitzna’s ideas. The Likud platform reads: “The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting.”With regard to the creation of a PA state it says: “The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river. The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs.”
A recent poll shows a majority of voters believe Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is acting contrary to the platform upon which he was elected.
The poll, carried out by "Brain Base" ["Ma'agar Mohot"] via telephone conversations with a representative sample of 568 adult Israelis (including Israeli Arabs), was broadcast on Israel Radio's "Another Matter" program Tuesday. Asked whether the Labor Party ministers who claim that Ariel Sharon is implementing the election platform of Labor Party are correct, 55% answered yes. Whereas only 44% of Likud voters answered in the affirmative, 92% of Labor voters agreed.Sharon ran against Labor candidate Amram Mitzna last election. Mitzna’s central campaign issue was a unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, whereas, while Sharon spoke about “painful concessions for peace,” he spoke out strongly against Mitzna’s ideas. The Likud platform reads: “The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting.”With regard to the creation of a PA state it says: “The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river. The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs.”
Europe decides that Bush may be right after all
From the Wall Street Journal, Friday, February 25, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST
Visits by U.S. Presidents to Europe tend to have a template-making quality: Wilson, the peace maker, in Paris, 1919; Truman, the victor, at Potsdam, 1945; Kennedy, the stalwart, in Berlin, 1963; Reagan, the visionary, in Berlin, 1987. If President Bush's trip this week has some kind of new theme, the word for it is probably conciliation. But our sense is that Mr. Bush is really following in Reagan's footsteps.
Admittedly, this thought is not original: Der Spiegel beat us to it. Still, it says something that the leftish German newsweekly, which two years ago devoted an entire cover story to advancing the "Blood for Oil" thesis about U.S. ambitions in the Middle East, has gingerly raised the question, "Could Bush Be Right?"
"The Germany Reagan was traveling in, much like today's Germany, was very skeptical of the American president and his foreign policy," Der Spiegel writes. "When Reagan stood before the Brandenburg Gate--and the Berlin Wall--and demanded that Gorbachev 'tear down this Wall,' he was lampooned the next day on the editorial pages. He is a dreamer, wrote commentators. . . . But history has shown that it wasn't Reagan who was the dreamer as he voiced his demand. Rather, it was German politicans who were lacking in imagination--a group who in 1987 couldn't imagine that there might be an alternative to a divided Germany."
It is doubtful that Der Spiegel would have made these observations had Mr. Bush's visit taken place just before Iraq's election rather than just after. And we suspect most of the magazine's editors would dearly have preferred to see a President Kerry.
But events have a way of imposing both discipline and clarity. For much of Europe, the idea that President Bush is the real and legitimate face of America came a few years late. But it has come, as has the realization that a hopeful era is dawning in the Middle East thanks to U.S. "unilateralism" and force of arms. In this sense, the purpose of Mr. Bush's trip isn't to present himself anew to Europe. It is to allow European leaders--France's Jacques Chirac, Germany's Gerhard Schroeder and Russia's Vladimir Putin--to present themselves anew to Mr. Bush.
Partly this reflects political facts: Contrary to expectation a year ago (and with the qualified exception of Spain), the leaders who supported the war in Iraq have all been returned to office, while Messrs. Chirac, Putin and Schroeder languish in polls.
Partly, too, it reflects the realities of power. Europe, collectively and in its several parts, requires a functioning relationship with the U.S. to secure its vital interests. The same cannot be said of America's requirements of Europe. President Bush was gracious when he acknowledged the willingness of Germany and France to contribute to the training of Iraqi policemen. But the one (yes, one) French officer now detailed to the task will probably not turn the tide of war.
Probably the most important component is that President Bush's vision of spreading democracy--of getting to the "tipping point" where tyrannies start to crumble--seems not only to be working but also winning some unexpected converts. Just ask the Lebanese who are suddenly restive under Syrian occupation. As a result, European politicians are in a poorer position to lecture this President about the true ways of the world.
This isn't to say that Mr. Bush can or should be indifferent to the attitudes of his European counterparts. They have agreed to put differences about Iraq behind them, which is good. The U.S., France and Germany also seem to be reasonably united in their concern about Russia's imperial pretensions and attenuated civil liberties. But potentially larger differences loom before them, above all over the nuclearization of Iran and the lifting of the post-Tiananmen arms embargo to China.
In each case, fundamental U.S. strategic interests--the security of Taiwan and Israel; the sovereignty of Iraq; naval supremacy in the Persian Gulf--stand at odds either with European commercial interests or ideological hobbyhorses (the French infatuation with "multipolarity"). If smoother diplomacy, both public and private, can avert another Iraq-style eruption without compromising U.S. interests, so much the better.
Then again, if Europe continues to demand a high price for its political favors, the Bush Administration would do well to shop for partners and ad hoc coalitions elsewhere. America's cultural links to Europe may be precious, but there is no law of nature or history that requires both sides of the Atlantic to act in concert. To the extent that Europeans continue to value the relationship, it is up to them to demonstrate it, chiefly by not acting as freelancers or spoilers in areas of vital U.S. concern.
Still, there are reasons to be sanguine about the future of trans-Atlantic relations. We are in no doubt that most European hearts thrilled to the sight of Iraqi voters going to the polls last month, suggesting that, whatever Europe and America's political or ideological differences, we remain alike in our innermost values and aspirations. Nor do we believe our world views are so divided that persuasion and compromise are impossible. Pundits may differ as to whether Mr. Bush and his European counterparts planted the seeds for a better relationship. What's sure is that they were planting on fertile soil.
Visits by U.S. Presidents to Europe tend to have a template-making quality: Wilson, the peace maker, in Paris, 1919; Truman, the victor, at Potsdam, 1945; Kennedy, the stalwart, in Berlin, 1963; Reagan, the visionary, in Berlin, 1987. If President Bush's trip this week has some kind of new theme, the word for it is probably conciliation. But our sense is that Mr. Bush is really following in Reagan's footsteps.
Admittedly, this thought is not original: Der Spiegel beat us to it. Still, it says something that the leftish German newsweekly, which two years ago devoted an entire cover story to advancing the "Blood for Oil" thesis about U.S. ambitions in the Middle East, has gingerly raised the question, "Could Bush Be Right?"
"The Germany Reagan was traveling in, much like today's Germany, was very skeptical of the American president and his foreign policy," Der Spiegel writes. "When Reagan stood before the Brandenburg Gate--and the Berlin Wall--and demanded that Gorbachev 'tear down this Wall,' he was lampooned the next day on the editorial pages. He is a dreamer, wrote commentators. . . . But history has shown that it wasn't Reagan who was the dreamer as he voiced his demand. Rather, it was German politicans who were lacking in imagination--a group who in 1987 couldn't imagine that there might be an alternative to a divided Germany."
It is doubtful that Der Spiegel would have made these observations had Mr. Bush's visit taken place just before Iraq's election rather than just after. And we suspect most of the magazine's editors would dearly have preferred to see a President Kerry.
But events have a way of imposing both discipline and clarity. For much of Europe, the idea that President Bush is the real and legitimate face of America came a few years late. But it has come, as has the realization that a hopeful era is dawning in the Middle East thanks to U.S. "unilateralism" and force of arms. In this sense, the purpose of Mr. Bush's trip isn't to present himself anew to Europe. It is to allow European leaders--France's Jacques Chirac, Germany's Gerhard Schroeder and Russia's Vladimir Putin--to present themselves anew to Mr. Bush.
Partly this reflects political facts: Contrary to expectation a year ago (and with the qualified exception of Spain), the leaders who supported the war in Iraq have all been returned to office, while Messrs. Chirac, Putin and Schroeder languish in polls.
Partly, too, it reflects the realities of power. Europe, collectively and in its several parts, requires a functioning relationship with the U.S. to secure its vital interests. The same cannot be said of America's requirements of Europe. President Bush was gracious when he acknowledged the willingness of Germany and France to contribute to the training of Iraqi policemen. But the one (yes, one) French officer now detailed to the task will probably not turn the tide of war.
Probably the most important component is that President Bush's vision of spreading democracy--of getting to the "tipping point" where tyrannies start to crumble--seems not only to be working but also winning some unexpected converts. Just ask the Lebanese who are suddenly restive under Syrian occupation. As a result, European politicians are in a poorer position to lecture this President about the true ways of the world.
This isn't to say that Mr. Bush can or should be indifferent to the attitudes of his European counterparts. They have agreed to put differences about Iraq behind them, which is good. The U.S., France and Germany also seem to be reasonably united in their concern about Russia's imperial pretensions and attenuated civil liberties. But potentially larger differences loom before them, above all over the nuclearization of Iran and the lifting of the post-Tiananmen arms embargo to China.
In each case, fundamental U.S. strategic interests--the security of Taiwan and Israel; the sovereignty of Iraq; naval supremacy in the Persian Gulf--stand at odds either with European commercial interests or ideological hobbyhorses (the French infatuation with "multipolarity"). If smoother diplomacy, both public and private, can avert another Iraq-style eruption without compromising U.S. interests, so much the better.
Then again, if Europe continues to demand a high price for its political favors, the Bush Administration would do well to shop for partners and ad hoc coalitions elsewhere. America's cultural links to Europe may be precious, but there is no law of nature or history that requires both sides of the Atlantic to act in concert. To the extent that Europeans continue to value the relationship, it is up to them to demonstrate it, chiefly by not acting as freelancers or spoilers in areas of vital U.S. concern.
Still, there are reasons to be sanguine about the future of trans-Atlantic relations. We are in no doubt that most European hearts thrilled to the sight of Iraqi voters going to the polls last month, suggesting that, whatever Europe and America's political or ideological differences, we remain alike in our innermost values and aspirations. Nor do we believe our world views are so divided that persuasion and compromise are impossible. Pundits may differ as to whether Mr. Bush and his European counterparts planted the seeds for a better relationship. What's sure is that they were planting on fertile soil.
Tuesday, February 22, 2005
Since 'Cease Fire' - A Bomb Every Day
As Israel finalizes plans to give away Gaza to Palestinian Authority control in light of the non-declared ceasefire, attempted terror attacks against Israeli targets are on the upswing.
"In the past three weeks," IDF sources reported, "we have discovered an explosive device on the average of one a day. This indicates a potentially dangerous method that terrorists have employed since the beginning of the ceasefire: They are simply filling the land with explosives.""At least some of the [bombs] have been planted under the noses of PA policemen," the sources said. Palestinian terrorists fired a Kassam rocket yesterday at the Gush Katif town of N'vei Dekalim, opened fire on soldiers in at least two instances, and fired a mortar shell towards Gadid. No one was injured and no damage was reported.Israeli soldiers discovered four bombs planted near Jewish towns in northern and southern Gaza yesterday. The bombs weighed a total of over 200 kilograms (440 pounds). Two of the bombs were found near the town of Rafiah, which straddles the Egyptian border. One of the devices was of the type used by Hizbullah terrorists in southern Lebanon. Two other bombs were discovered near Kibbutz Alumim, a religious kibbutz within Israel's pre-1967 borders.Military sources explained the dangers of the hidden explosive devices, which often look like rocks and are usually detonated through hidden wires: "Each explosive device is equal to several explosive belts, and it's clear that if an army vehicle trips a device, there will be injuries. But since we are talking about a roadside bomb attack, it is considered a 'passive act' without anyone even taking responsibility. This is considered legitimate by terrorist organizations."This morning (Sunday), IDF forces saw a terrorist cell trying to smuggle weapons across the Israeli-Egyptian border. The soldiers opened fire, killing two terrorists and wounding a third, who was apprehended by the Israelis. IDF officials were scratching their heads last week, asking themselves if there is something the PA knows that the Israelis don't. PA forces discovered no fewer than 12 arms-smuggling tunnels in the first four days of last week. By contrast, Israel discovered eight arms-smuggling tunnels in the past eight months. Yesterday, over 20 Gazan Arabs arrived at the gate of an IDF outpost near the N'vei Dekalim industrial zone. The soldiers did not respond, however, in keeping with new orders not to shoot without prior permission from the highest military echelons. Local residents who saw the incident reported that when security forces arrived on the scene, the Arabs left – but not before taking several boxes from the outpost entrance.On the other hand, in the framework of the goodwill gestures Israel is making to Abu Mazen, 16 terrorists who were transferred to Gaza during the past four years of warfare were allowed to return to their homes today. The Supreme Court, responding today to a petition against the intended release of 500 Palestinian terrorist, refused to intervene in the case.
"In the past three weeks," IDF sources reported, "we have discovered an explosive device on the average of one a day. This indicates a potentially dangerous method that terrorists have employed since the beginning of the ceasefire: They are simply filling the land with explosives.""At least some of the [bombs] have been planted under the noses of PA policemen," the sources said. Palestinian terrorists fired a Kassam rocket yesterday at the Gush Katif town of N'vei Dekalim, opened fire on soldiers in at least two instances, and fired a mortar shell towards Gadid. No one was injured and no damage was reported.Israeli soldiers discovered four bombs planted near Jewish towns in northern and southern Gaza yesterday. The bombs weighed a total of over 200 kilograms (440 pounds). Two of the bombs were found near the town of Rafiah, which straddles the Egyptian border. One of the devices was of the type used by Hizbullah terrorists in southern Lebanon. Two other bombs were discovered near Kibbutz Alumim, a religious kibbutz within Israel's pre-1967 borders.Military sources explained the dangers of the hidden explosive devices, which often look like rocks and are usually detonated through hidden wires: "Each explosive device is equal to several explosive belts, and it's clear that if an army vehicle trips a device, there will be injuries. But since we are talking about a roadside bomb attack, it is considered a 'passive act' without anyone even taking responsibility. This is considered legitimate by terrorist organizations."This morning (Sunday), IDF forces saw a terrorist cell trying to smuggle weapons across the Israeli-Egyptian border. The soldiers opened fire, killing two terrorists and wounding a third, who was apprehended by the Israelis. IDF officials were scratching their heads last week, asking themselves if there is something the PA knows that the Israelis don't. PA forces discovered no fewer than 12 arms-smuggling tunnels in the first four days of last week. By contrast, Israel discovered eight arms-smuggling tunnels in the past eight months. Yesterday, over 20 Gazan Arabs arrived at the gate of an IDF outpost near the N'vei Dekalim industrial zone. The soldiers did not respond, however, in keeping with new orders not to shoot without prior permission from the highest military echelons. Local residents who saw the incident reported that when security forces arrived on the scene, the Arabs left – but not before taking several boxes from the outpost entrance.On the other hand, in the framework of the goodwill gestures Israel is making to Abu Mazen, 16 terrorists who were transferred to Gaza during the past four years of warfare were allowed to return to their homes today. The Supreme Court, responding today to a petition against the intended release of 500 Palestinian terrorist, refused to intervene in the case.
Monday, February 21, 2005
Time Out for Terror?
Ehud Ya'ari's article in the Jerusalem Report today credits Mahmud Abbas (Abu Mazen) for putting a stop to the bloodletting of the last 52 months...
"The question now is what will be the nature of this truce, if it in fact stabilizes? What will be its political structure? Are we witnessing a hudna that reflects genuine recognition that the terror campaign boomeranged into failure? Or will it emerge as a mere opportunity for the armed factions to use the truce to make gains, something that Hamas and its ilk are stubbornly pressing for?"
"These are the three most important assets that these factions hope to acquire during the hudna:
* A time-out ...during which they can recover and regroup
* Participation in the PA's decision-making process
* Immunity against Israeli attacks, and the legitimisation of ...(terror)"
"The question now is what will be the nature of this truce, if it in fact stabilizes? What will be its political structure? Are we witnessing a hudna that reflects genuine recognition that the terror campaign boomeranged into failure? Or will it emerge as a mere opportunity for the armed factions to use the truce to make gains, something that Hamas and its ilk are stubbornly pressing for?"
"These are the three most important assets that these factions hope to acquire during the hudna:
* A time-out ...during which they can recover and regroup
* Participation in the PA's decision-making process
* Immunity against Israeli attacks, and the legitimisation of ...(terror)"
Tuesday, February 15, 2005
Time Out for Terror?
Will Hamas use the cease-fire to become another Hizballah?
From Ehud Ya'ari, The Jerusalem Report
Whether it's called a hudna or by any other name, as of the end of January the cease-fire between Israel and the Palestinian Authority was worthy of applause. Putting a stop to the bloodletting of the last 52 months is no mean achievement, and Mahmud Abbas (Abu Mazen) deserves credit for having the strength to part ways with the strategy of his predecessor, just as he had promised to do during his election campaign.
After a little teetering during his first days as ra'is of the PA, he demonstrated determination and perseverance, and all of a sudden it became clear - to those who had never realized it before - that it had indeed been none other than Yasser Arafat who stood in the way of ending the violence. Palestinian security forces, as if brought to life by the wave of a wand, deployed along the lines of engagement, and brought about a dramatic reduction in the volume of terrorism of all kinds.
The question now is what will be the nature of this truce, if it in fact stabilizes? What will be its political structure? Are we witnessing a hudna that reflects genuine recognition that the terror campaign boomeranged into failure? Or will it emerge as a mere opportunity for the armed factions to use the truce to make gains, something that Hamas and its ilk are stubbornly pressing for?
These are the three most important assets that these factions hope to acquire during the hudna:
* A time-out for an unspecified period, during which they can recover and regroup, after the blows they have sustained at the hands of the Israeli army and the Shin Bet. Their main aim will be to upgrade their rockets so that they can threaten Ashkelon.
* Participation in the PA's decision-making process, in a manner that could tie Abu Mazen's hands to a certain extent. This would happen first within a leadership framework in which Hamas and its cohorts would sit with Abu Mazen's people and oversee negotiations with Israel, and second, through the elections for the Palestinian Legislative Council, on July 17, which, after an anticipated change in the election law, should see these factions gaining substantial parliamentary representation. Hamas's landslide victory in Gaza's latest round of municipal elections demonstrates the scope of the threat.
* Immunity against Israeli attacks, and the legitimation of a "resistance" movement within the PA, by means of guarantees from Sharon to discontinue the attacks, and assurances from Abu Mazen that he'll refrain from disarming Hamas.
There is a risk that along with the instant short-term advantages expected to accrue as a result of the cease-fire, in the long term, a "cohabitation" arrangement will emerge between the PA and the unholy alliance of terrorist gangs. Under such an arrangement the cease-fire would entail - even implicitly - Israeli reconciliation to the existence of armed groups outside of the PA's legitimate security apparatus. These forces would have an agenda differing from that of Abu Mazen and the capability of conducting an independent military policy.
This would amount to a copy of the Lebanese model, where Hizballah exists alongside the legitimate government as an armed movement, equipped with thousands of long-range rockets. Hizballah, just as in the scenario envisaged for itself by Hamas, is represented in the parliament in Beirut and takes part in all the elections, but maintains an independent policy along the border with Israel, and initiates incidents without recourse to the approval of the central government.
Becoming a Palestinian version of Hizballah is exactly what Khaled Mashal, the head of the Hamas political bureau is aiming for. Like the Lebanese movement's Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, he too would try to avoid confrontations with the authorities and to adapt his activities to the sensitivities of the government. But, whenever he deemed it necessary, when changing circumstances required it, he would open fire and launch attacks. Hamas, like Hizballah, wants to reserve the right to decide when this or that Israeli action calls for a violent response.
Israel at the moment has no choice but to show understanding for Abu Mazen's reluctance to enter a confrontation with the armed organizations, but this does not mean that Prime Minister Sharon can accept a system that preserves the terrorist power of Hamas and allows it a role in the decision-making process. In order to avert the dangers that such a system would represent, it is vital to enlist international support for the position that the hudna is only a stage in the removal of the terrorist threat, and not a means of strengthening it. For if this is not made clear, Hamas and its satellites will have it in their power to decide if and when the time has come for intifada No. 3.
From Ehud Ya'ari, The Jerusalem Report
Whether it's called a hudna or by any other name, as of the end of January the cease-fire between Israel and the Palestinian Authority was worthy of applause. Putting a stop to the bloodletting of the last 52 months is no mean achievement, and Mahmud Abbas (Abu Mazen) deserves credit for having the strength to part ways with the strategy of his predecessor, just as he had promised to do during his election campaign.
After a little teetering during his first days as ra'is of the PA, he demonstrated determination and perseverance, and all of a sudden it became clear - to those who had never realized it before - that it had indeed been none other than Yasser Arafat who stood in the way of ending the violence. Palestinian security forces, as if brought to life by the wave of a wand, deployed along the lines of engagement, and brought about a dramatic reduction in the volume of terrorism of all kinds.
The question now is what will be the nature of this truce, if it in fact stabilizes? What will be its political structure? Are we witnessing a hudna that reflects genuine recognition that the terror campaign boomeranged into failure? Or will it emerge as a mere opportunity for the armed factions to use the truce to make gains, something that Hamas and its ilk are stubbornly pressing for?
These are the three most important assets that these factions hope to acquire during the hudna:
* A time-out for an unspecified period, during which they can recover and regroup, after the blows they have sustained at the hands of the Israeli army and the Shin Bet. Their main aim will be to upgrade their rockets so that they can threaten Ashkelon.
* Participation in the PA's decision-making process, in a manner that could tie Abu Mazen's hands to a certain extent. This would happen first within a leadership framework in which Hamas and its cohorts would sit with Abu Mazen's people and oversee negotiations with Israel, and second, through the elections for the Palestinian Legislative Council, on July 17, which, after an anticipated change in the election law, should see these factions gaining substantial parliamentary representation. Hamas's landslide victory in Gaza's latest round of municipal elections demonstrates the scope of the threat.
* Immunity against Israeli attacks, and the legitimation of a "resistance" movement within the PA, by means of guarantees from Sharon to discontinue the attacks, and assurances from Abu Mazen that he'll refrain from disarming Hamas.
There is a risk that along with the instant short-term advantages expected to accrue as a result of the cease-fire, in the long term, a "cohabitation" arrangement will emerge between the PA and the unholy alliance of terrorist gangs. Under such an arrangement the cease-fire would entail - even implicitly - Israeli reconciliation to the existence of armed groups outside of the PA's legitimate security apparatus. These forces would have an agenda differing from that of Abu Mazen and the capability of conducting an independent military policy.
This would amount to a copy of the Lebanese model, where Hizballah exists alongside the legitimate government as an armed movement, equipped with thousands of long-range rockets. Hizballah, just as in the scenario envisaged for itself by Hamas, is represented in the parliament in Beirut and takes part in all the elections, but maintains an independent policy along the border with Israel, and initiates incidents without recourse to the approval of the central government.
Becoming a Palestinian version of Hizballah is exactly what Khaled Mashal, the head of the Hamas political bureau is aiming for. Like the Lebanese movement's Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, he too would try to avoid confrontations with the authorities and to adapt his activities to the sensitivities of the government. But, whenever he deemed it necessary, when changing circumstances required it, he would open fire and launch attacks. Hamas, like Hizballah, wants to reserve the right to decide when this or that Israeli action calls for a violent response.
Israel at the moment has no choice but to show understanding for Abu Mazen's reluctance to enter a confrontation with the armed organizations, but this does not mean that Prime Minister Sharon can accept a system that preserves the terrorist power of Hamas and allows it a role in the decision-making process. In order to avert the dangers that such a system would represent, it is vital to enlist international support for the position that the hudna is only a stage in the removal of the terrorist threat, and not a means of strengthening it. For if this is not made clear, Hamas and its satellites will have it in their power to decide if and when the time has come for intifada No. 3.
Monday, January 17, 2005
What Israel did to help in the tsunami
israelinsider: diplomacy:
By Israeli Foreign Ministry January 17, 2005
Follow this link for an official summary of assistance to tsunami disaster victims given by Israel, Israeli groups, and individuals giving in Israel's name to tsunami disaster victims in Sri Lanka, Thailand and Indonesia.
By Israeli Foreign Ministry January 17, 2005
Follow this link for an official summary of assistance to tsunami disaster victims given by Israel, Israeli groups, and individuals giving in Israel's name to tsunami disaster victims in Sri Lanka, Thailand and Indonesia.
Monday, January 03, 2005
Israeli Teams at Tsunami sites
From Arutz Sheva 2/1/05, about Israeli reaction to tsunami....
"Finding and identifying four bodies out of thousands of bodies lying here is something no one else was able to do." So says Yehuda Meshi-Zahav, head of the Zaka rescue-and-recovery organization.
"The Israeli delegation [in southeast Asia] has become famous," Meshi-Zahav told Yediot Acharonot. "All the other countries are looking for us, a small country with our relatively small delegation, to get advice."
The Israeli delegation, headed by Police Identification Department Head Shalom Tzarum, together with the Zaka volunteers, managed to do what no other country came close to doing. "We're the only national delegation here among the bodies," Meshi-Zahav said. "No other country has shown such concern for its citizens."
While Israel's Foreign Ministry offices were manned 24 hours a day last week fielding phone calls and trying to locate 1,700 Israelis vacationing in Thailand and the vicinity, one of the first things Swedish Foreign Minister Laila Freivalds did upon learning of the tsunami was to go to the opera. She did not show up for work until 31 hours after the earthquake. The Swedish government estimates that more than 20,000 of its citizens were in Thailand when the tidal wave struck. In addition to the 60 confirmed dead, 3,559 Swedes were still missing as of last night.
Four Israelis have been confirmed dead in the tsunami disaster. In addition to the previously identified victims Hemda Cohen and Sharon Haliel, two more have been added to the list of confirmed dead: Zohar Aloni, 24, from Rehovot, and Esther Levy, 58, from Raanana. Three of the four will be buried in Israel today. Of the five Israelis who remained missing as of last night, two were located safe and sound this morning.
Many volunteer organizations in Israel are banding together to collect donations of goods, funds and other aid for the tsunami-stricken areas. The National Council for Volunteerism, with the cooperation of other organizations including Magen David Adom, the Kibbutz Movement and Latet (To Give), will send a shipment of tons of humanitarian aid and food in the coming days. Donations can be made (in Israel) by calling 057-740-0030.
The government of Sri Lanka, the island country south of India whose death toll is nearing 30,000, sent a letter of thanks to Israel for its help. The Sri Lankan ambassador in the United Nations, sent a letter to his Israeli counterpart Danny Gillerman denying that his country had refused Israeli help for political reasons. "The Sri Lankan government and people," he wrote, "greatly appreciate the help that Israel granted us in this time of distress, in the form of food, medical equipment and rescue forces." He explained that the reason his government asked Israel to "temporarily delay the arrival of the 150-man team" was because the tsunami had destroyed the country's ability to host foreigners, including hotels, and had closed off the vicinity of the airport. "The Sri Lankan authorities are interested in leaving the door open for the arrival of additional Israeli experts when necessary," the ambassador wrote.
"Finding and identifying four bodies out of thousands of bodies lying here is something no one else was able to do." So says Yehuda Meshi-Zahav, head of the Zaka rescue-and-recovery organization.
"The Israeli delegation [in southeast Asia] has become famous," Meshi-Zahav told Yediot Acharonot. "All the other countries are looking for us, a small country with our relatively small delegation, to get advice."
The Israeli delegation, headed by Police Identification Department Head Shalom Tzarum, together with the Zaka volunteers, managed to do what no other country came close to doing. "We're the only national delegation here among the bodies," Meshi-Zahav said. "No other country has shown such concern for its citizens."
While Israel's Foreign Ministry offices were manned 24 hours a day last week fielding phone calls and trying to locate 1,700 Israelis vacationing in Thailand and the vicinity, one of the first things Swedish Foreign Minister Laila Freivalds did upon learning of the tsunami was to go to the opera. She did not show up for work until 31 hours after the earthquake. The Swedish government estimates that more than 20,000 of its citizens were in Thailand when the tidal wave struck. In addition to the 60 confirmed dead, 3,559 Swedes were still missing as of last night.
Four Israelis have been confirmed dead in the tsunami disaster. In addition to the previously identified victims Hemda Cohen and Sharon Haliel, two more have been added to the list of confirmed dead: Zohar Aloni, 24, from Rehovot, and Esther Levy, 58, from Raanana. Three of the four will be buried in Israel today. Of the five Israelis who remained missing as of last night, two were located safe and sound this morning.
Many volunteer organizations in Israel are banding together to collect donations of goods, funds and other aid for the tsunami-stricken areas. The National Council for Volunteerism, with the cooperation of other organizations including Magen David Adom, the Kibbutz Movement and Latet (To Give), will send a shipment of tons of humanitarian aid and food in the coming days. Donations can be made (in Israel) by calling 057-740-0030.
The government of Sri Lanka, the island country south of India whose death toll is nearing 30,000, sent a letter of thanks to Israel for its help. The Sri Lankan ambassador in the United Nations, sent a letter to his Israeli counterpart Danny Gillerman denying that his country had refused Israeli help for political reasons. "The Sri Lankan government and people," he wrote, "greatly appreciate the help that Israel granted us in this time of distress, in the form of food, medical equipment and rescue forces." He explained that the reason his government asked Israel to "temporarily delay the arrival of the 150-man team" was because the tsunami had destroyed the country's ability to host foreigners, including hotels, and had closed off the vicinity of the airport. "The Sri Lankan authorities are interested in leaving the door open for the arrival of additional Israeli experts when necessary," the ambassador wrote.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)