Si vis pacem, para bellum

Posted on 06/24/2010 by Soccerdad

One of the memes coming out of the administration and eagerly parroted by the press is that Israel is a strategic liability for the United States. The reason, of course, is because Israel is too aggressive (and, thus, does not make peace with the Palestinians.) The advantage to this narrative is that it puts the onus of peacemaking on Israel. The disadvantage is that it isn’t true and it absolves the Palestinians and, more generally, the Arab world from coming to agreement with Israel.

Lee Smith takes a different tack. (via memeorandum)

Once regarded as a U.S. aircraft carrier in the Eastern Mediterranean, Israel is now perceived, correctly or not, as a strategic liability. Before the flotilla incident last month—an event that, yet again, earned Israel the opprobrium of the international community—there was the Gaza war in the winter of 2008 to 2009, an inconclusive battle that ended with Hamas still in control and with the Israelis ultimately having to face the Goldstone Report. In July 2006 there was the Second Lebanon War, popularly understood as a Hezbollah victory—or as its Secretary General, Hassan Nasrallah, describes it, a divine victory. But perhaps Israel’s largest strategic blunder was its 2000 withdrawal from Lebanon. Even while Defense Minister Ehud Barak continues to defend the decision he made as prime minister, the facts are clear: Israel abandoned its ally in the South Lebanese Army, made its citizens vulnerable to Hezbollah rockets, and effectively rewarded terrorism as a negotiating tool. Now Hezbollah has 40,000 missiles and rockets.

Smith’s interpretation is the opposite of the conventional wisdom. Israel, if it is a strategic liability, it is because it has been too passive. But here he lays blame for Israel’s failure on the West.

It is peculiar that most U.S. policymakers and bureaucrats do not believe that the United States has an interest in pushing back against an Iranian asset in the Eastern Mediterranean and going after a terrorist group that operates inside U.S. borders. But the fact is that if Israel has become a strategic liability, U.S. policymakers—from the Clinton Administration through the Bush and Obama Administrations—have helped make it one, forcing Jerusalem to accommodate terrorists and the states that support them, thereby putting our own interests and citizens under fire. Now, instead of asking how we can ensure that our ally wins its next war with the Shia militia, the question in Washington’s halls of power, its think tanks, and dining rooms is: How do we deter Israel from going to war against Hezbollah?

Barry Rubin makes a similar point in regards to Israel’s recent decision to allow more goods into Gaza.

With the accusatory headline Adviser to Israel’s Netanyahu questions Mideast peace effort, new Iran sanctions the Washington Post reports on a major factor this perverse state of affairs (via Daily Alert Blog):

“The creation of a Palestinian state remains the choice of many,” Arad said. “But in the process, have you failed to notice that the more we lend legitimacy to a Palestinian state, the more it comes at the expense of our own?”

Arad described the Palestinians as “major actors in the delegitimization of Israel” and questioned Israel’s decision to back talks on Palestinian statehood. “In trying to make peace” via the indirect U.S.-led talks, “we are embracing an adversary who is conducting a very effective battle against us internationally,” he said, though he added that Israel still aspires to peace with the Palestinians and Syria.

It really is quite astonishing that even after all the Israeli concessions of the past (nearly) 17 years, Israel’s is still considered every bit as much an occupier as it was in 1993.

It’s like the West has adopted a series of premises:
1) Peace is an absolute good.
2) The only way to achieve peace is through a peace process.
3) The only way for their to be a successful peace process is to keep the Palestinians happy.
4) Anything Israel does that makes the Palestinians unhappy upsets the peace process and threatens peace.

Of course what’s missing from this progession is that we have a Palestinian leadership that is committed to the peace process – as it yields them political and financial rewards – but not necessarily to peace which entails responsibilities they do not wish to assume.

Nearly two years ago the New York Times reported, A West Bank Ruin, Reborn as a Peace Beacon.

. In the article, the Times’s Jerusalem bureau chief, Ethan Bronner wrote about the renaissance going on Jenin. I noted at the time:

Do you notice what’s missing? Well how about Operation Defensive Shield that destroyed most of the terrorist infrastructure that existed in Jenin? Somehow acknowledging that killing terrorists helps bring peace seems to be beyond his understanding.

The slavish devotion to the chimera of the peace process ignores one important component of peace: defeating those who oppose peace. It’s not something that the Palestinians have ever done. Israel did it and made it possible for there a limited level of success in Palestinian state building. So even as the world demands that Israel make more and more unproductive concessions to further the peace process, they fail to acknowledge the actions Israel took that made any chance of peace possible.

Oslo, instead of making peace, made it possible for Arafat to create a “suicide factory” in the areas under his jurisdiction.

Though few are willing to acknowledge it, the best way to peace in the Middle East is by allowing Israel to defeat its enemies and not by insisting that Israel strenghten them.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Israel, Israeli Double Standard Time | Tagged | Comments Off on Si vis pacem, para bellum

Anti-Semitism: On the rise again, but it’s Israel’s fault

Posted on 06/24/2010 by Meryl Yourish

A Jewish dance group was announced at a street festival in Germany, and promptly greeted with rocks and the old Nazi call of “Jews out!” by a number of “youths” of Muslim origin.

A Jewish dance group was attacked with stones by a group of children and teenagers during a performance at a street festival in the Germany city of Hannover, police said Thursday. One dancer suffered a leg injury and the group then canceled their performance.

The name of the dance group is “Chaverim,” which means “friends” in Hebrew. Here’s what their peaceful little Muslim friends did:

Youths in the northern city of Hanover threw rocks Saturday at the dancers from the group Chaverim (“Friends” in Hebrew) and shouted “Juden Raus!” (Jews Out), police said. Many of the assailants were reportedly of Arab origin.

But don’t worry, it’s not anti-Semitism. It’s anti-Israelism. For instance:

In mid-May, vandals mounted an arson attack against a synagogue in Worms, western Germany but the fire brigade was able to extinguish the blaze so the building was not damaged.

A letter in broken German claiming responsibility stated: “Until you leave the Palestinians alone, we won’t leave you alone.”

See? It’s all Israel’s fault that a Jewish dance group named “Friends” can’t participate in a German street festival without being stoned by Muslims and other anti-Semites.

Then again, it’s not like anti-Semitism is rare in Europe these days. Attacks on Jews doubled worldwide in 2009. It’s up in France, up sharply in Canada (from 13 to 138, a tenfold increase), and, well, let’s take a look:

‘Happy Holocaust’ was sprayed on Jewish school in Kiev.

Bikers shouted ‘Heil Hitler’ during a Shoah memorial in Holland.

Dutch police are going undercover as religious Jews to catch anti-Semitic attackers in Amsterdam.

Hugo Chavez’ attacks on Israel (and his state attacks on Jews under the flimsiest of excuses) are sparking Venezuelan attacks on Jews.

Jews are leaving Antwerp due to the anti-Semitic attacks.

And right here in America, high school students invented a cheerful little game called “Beat the Jew,” involving students playing Nazis kidnapping students playing Jews.

But just ask the experts, and they’ll tell you that if only Israel would stop oppressing the Palestinians, Jews around the world wouldn’t be attacked. It’s just like how every time Egypt’s Muslims attack the Christian Coptic population, Muslims around the world are attacked, stoned, beaten, and harassed by Christians. Oh, wait. My bad. That never happens. Only Jews get collective punishment across the globe.

But we already knew that.

Posted in Anti-Semitism | Tagged | 2 Comments

Israeli eye in the sky

Posted on 06/24/2010 by Meryl Yourish

This ought to give the Iranians headaches:

“With Ofek 9, Israel now has about 10 satellites working in a joint system – a commercial amount,” ISA Chairman Isaac Ben-Israel told Ynet on Wednesday night. “One of them completes a round every 90 minutes, then the second one comes along, then the third one, and so on. At a given moment, there is not one place which interests us in the Middle East and is not being shot.

“In fact, a country will not be able to conduct any secret operations in the Middle East without the area being covered by one of our satellites, as there are no longer such moments. Iran won’t be able to transfer different materials without us noticing,” Ben-Israel explained.

The pessimist in me says that it doesn’t matter how much evidence Israel has, the world will still ignore the Iranian push to get nuclear weapons. But the realist in me says that when Israel presents the intel to other nations, they will be listened to. There is no longer a Korean-aided nuclear plant in the Syrian desert. You may remember that the IAF bombed the hell out of it, and the UN has confirmed there was radioactive material there—after harumphing at first that there was not. So the Ofek 9 comes out as a good thing in my scorecard. A successful launch, and within a couple of days, a gathering of more intel against Israel’s enemies. Win-win.

Posted in Iran, Israel | Tagged , | 5 Comments

Girl talk

Posted on 06/23/2010 by Meryl Yourish

Thought this one up the other day:

Menopause means never having to say, “Is it cold in here?”

(Actually, it’s perimenopause. I have to have no cyle for 12 months to be in full-blown menopause. And may I say: Not. Happy. Not. At. All.)

Actually, I’ve been calling it “F*CKING menopause” for months now. With extra special contempt on the adjective.

Gentlemen, if you don’t want to hear about things like this, then don’t read posts titled “Girl Talk.”

Have I mentioned lately that one of the things I’m experiencing is HulkMS? Where I get sudden rages so severe that I’m pretty sure I’m going to kill someone someday? (But I think s/he’ll deserve it. Like the self-checkout counter in the market that wouldn’t give me my credits for using my own bags. That thing would totally have deserved it if I’d destroyed it.)

Yeah, menopause is a hoot. The first man out there to EVER talk to me about “male menopause” again will lose an eye. Or at least a kneecap.

Posted in Girl Talk | 6 Comments

WaPo editors: we helped Hamas

Posted on 06/23/2010 by Soccerdad

The editors of the Washington Post sounded off about the recent Supreme Court ruling about providing assistance to terror groups:

WHICH OF the following is illegal under the law that bars providing “material support” to terrorists?:

1. Giving money to a terrorist organization.

2. Providing explosives training to terrorists.

3. Urging a terrorist group to put down its arms in favor of using lawful, peaceful means to achieve political goals.

After Monday’s Supreme Court ruling in Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project the answer is: all three.

The material support law prohibits U.S. citizens from providing “services,” “personnel” or “training, expert advice or assistance” to U.S.-designated terrorist groups. It has long been understood that funding and providing weapons training were off limits. What was less clear was how far the law could reach to punish activities with no link to terrorism.

I understand what’s bugging them, but I find it hard to sympathize with the editors’ outrage. Here’s the final paragraph in the editorial:

Congress was right to criminalize the donation of money and tangible goods to terrorist groups; such resources can be used to further violent ends even if donors mean them for legitimate purposes. The same cannot be said of the kind of services the Humanitarian Law Project intended to provide.

By the Post’s own definition then it has been providing material support for terror groups. Four years ago the Post gave an op-ed to Ismail Haniyeh. Apparently to skirt the provisions of the material support law, the article was ghost-written by an American.

At the time, the Post’s ombudsman Deborah Howell defended the op-ed:

Good editorial pages and commentators enlighten and provoke readers to broaden their thinking. Cohen’s and Haniyeh’s pieces indeed were provocative.

Why the Post gave space to someone who has no respect for freedom of the press is beyond me.

By the editor’s acknowledgment today, though, giving Haniyeh (even with ghost writers) a chance to promulgate his agenda freed Hamas up to use its resources elsewhere. Now that they are effectively admitting that they abetted a terrorist organization, do you think they’ll apologize? Apparently Jimmy Carter won’t.

Eugen Volokh has been blogging about this decision.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Hamas, Media Bias, Terrorism | Tagged | Comments Off on WaPo editors: we helped Hamas

My snarky briefs, not yours

Posted on 06/23/2010 by Meryl Yourish

Biased AP headline of the month: Parents say Israel abandoned son held in Gaza. Apparently, the headline was too long. So instead of writing, say, “Parents say Israel abandoned soldier abducted by Hamas,” we have the pap above, which does not reflect the kidnapping. Also, the “cross-border raid” killed several other soldiers; funny, when Israelis are killed, they aren’t constantly mentioned in news reports. Like, say, ones that call the flotilla battle “Israel’s deadly raid on a Gaza-bound flotilla.” Bias much? I think so.

They are the eye in the sky: Israel launched another spy satellite. You have to wonder, though: If intel about Iranian nukes falls on Obama’s desk, will he actually read it?

But how many would have shown up for an anti- Israel rally? 10,000 people showed up at a rally for Gilad Shalit in Paris. See title.

That “humanitarian” crisis in Gaza? Pound sand. So if there’s such a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, howcome people are shelling out bucks for private beach houses with big-screen TV and waiters? Oh, of course. That last class is made up of Hamas bigwigs. The average joes just pay the beach fees and rent cabins.

Mubarak to Israel: You’re shirking responsibility for the Egyptians I refused to take back these past 43 years. Well, it’s true. Gazans are basically Egyptians. They’re your problem, Hosni, not Israel’s. I think the shirking is coming from the Egyptian side.

Posted in AP Media Bias, Gaza, Israel | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

The founder of Jews for Jesus is dead?

Posted on 06/22/2010 by Meryl Yourish

I missed this in the news last month. Moishe Rosen, former Orthodox Jew who founded Jews for Jesus, is dead.

I hear the Mormons posthumously baptized him.

Posted in Evil Meryl, Religion | 12 Comments

It’s all in the translation

Posted on 06/22/2010 by Meryl Yourish

Awesome translation in a Ynet article today:

It was also reported that an Israeli manless drone located Nasrallah near the Hezbollah security headquarters in the Dahiya quarter of south Beirut.

A manless drone for the manless leader of Hezballah. Hey, manless, unmanned—either one fits Mr. Dickless, who is still hiding in his secure location for fear of being martyred by the IDF.

Posted in Juvenile Scorn, Lebanon | 2 Comments

Why is israel isolated Janine? Why don’t you take a bow for your efforts to help the cause?

Posted on 06/22/2010 by Soccerdad

Today the Washington Post reports Israel’s feeling of isolation is becoming more pronounced:

Israel is no stranger to feelings of isolation. It weathered years of Cold War-era Arab and Soviet hostility. Books have been written about the United Nations’ perceived antagonism toward the Jewish state. A well-known decades-old song, “The Whole World Is Against Us,” is invoked today by Israelis who argue that no matter what the country does, it will be shunned.

The feeling has become more pronounced in recent weeks. With the peace process stalled, the international community turning a skeptical eye toward Israeli shows of force and pro-Palestinian groups eager to jump on the nation’s missteps, the stage was set for a furious reaction when commandos killed nine activists aboard a Turkish aid ship heading for Gaza on May 31. Since then, Israelis have engaged in a heated national conversation about how and why the country has become so isolated.

First of all, if after all that is known, Janine Zacharia still refers to those killed on the Mavi Marmara as “activists,” that demonstrates a significant part of the problem. They were an organized group who had decided to throw the Jews into the sea. I think, by now, that referring to the “activists” as “terrorists” is fully justified. The failure to do so is an act of willful misrepresentation.

So too is this:

U.S. diplomats worked with special envoy Tony Blair to pressure Israel to revamp its Gaza policy and limit its blockade to weapons and related material. The United States also lobbied to allow more construction materials into the territory, which is ruled by the Islamist Hamas group. Rather than parrot the Israeli language that there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza, U.S. officials described the situation there as “unsustainable and unacceptable.”

But when my eyes tell me that there’s plenty of food in Gaza and it’s been reported that even during the full blockade that the price of cement fell, the “unsustainable and unacceptable” description of the situation is willful misrepresentation.

Rather that “parroting the Israeli language” U.S. officials adopted the propaganda of Hamas.

So yes, Israelis have good reason for feeling isolated. It’s been nearly seventeen years since Israel legitimized the PLO and signed the Oslo Accords. Israel has withdrawn from most Palestinian population areas in Judea and Samaria and totally from Gaza. For its troubles Israel has suffered several organized terror campaigns (in early 1996, from 2000 – 2003, including one from Hezbollah in the north and in 2008), and yet continued to seek peace. The Palestinians, to this day, even the moderates, still refuse to acknowledge Israel’s legitimacy and yet the Western world finds fault primarily with Israel as Shelby Steele wrote yesterday (via memeorandum)

In other words, my hatred is my self-esteem. This must have much to do with why Yasser Arafat rejected Ehud Barak’s famous Camp David offer of 2000 in which Israel offered more than 90% of what the Palestinians had demanded. To have accepted that offer would have been to forgo hatred as consolation and meaning. Thus it would have plunged the Palestinians—and by implication the broader Muslim world—into a confrontation with their inferiority relative to modernity. Arafat knew that without the Jews to hate an all-defining cohesion would leave the Muslim world. So he said no to peace.

And this recalcitrance in the Muslim world, this attraction to the consolations of hatred, is one of the world’s great problems today—whether in the suburbs of Paris and London, or in Kabul and Karachi, or in Queens, N.Y., and Gaza. The fervor for hatred as deliverance may not define the Muslim world, but it has become a drug that consoles elements of that world in the larger competition with the West. This is the problem we in the West have no easy solution to, and we scapegoat Israel—admonish it to behave better—so as not to feel helpless. We see our own vulnerability there.

And the West – as described by Mr. Steele – is abetted by reporters like Janine Zacharia who are willing to suppress Israel’s goodness and present Israel as flawed if not as the root cause of the violence and suffering in the Middle East.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Israel, Israel Derangement Syndrome, Media Bias | Tagged | Comments Off on Why is israel isolated Janine? Why don’t you take a bow for your efforts to help the cause?

The media anti-Israel narrative strikes again

Posted on 06/22/2010 by Meryl Yourish

There’s a new AP boilerplate on the Mavi Marmara incident. It used to be two-sided. At least, in some stories, the AP put the fact that Israeli commandos were attacked halfway down the story, like this:

Israel has sought to portray the nine activists killed as militants, saying they prepared for the fight before boarding the flotilla. The military Monday released the names of five of the activists it said have long ties to terror organizations.

And later, the AP managed to water that down a bit:

The decision reflected the intense pressure Israeli leaders felt after an international outcry over the May 31 raid on a blockade-busting flotilla. Israeli commandos killed nine pro-Palestinian activists and both sides claimed they acted in self-defense.

And then there was this:

Naval commandos clashed with activists on board one of the ships, killing nine Turks, and drawing widespread condemnations. Both sides have said they acted in self-defense.

And now, the new AP boilerplate doesn’t even pretend to be even-handed:

Israeli commandos killed nine pro-Palestinian activists on May 31 when they intercepted a blockade-busting flotilla bound for Gaza organized in part by a Turkish group.

This happens to be in direct violation of their own news values and priniciples :

It means we must be fair. Whenever we portray someone in a negative light, we must make a real effort to obtain a response from that person. When mistakes are made, they must be corrected – fully, quickly and ungrudgingly.

Time for another letter to the AP.

Don’t get me wrong. The rest of the media is just as biased. Even the Wall Street Journal.

Israel had also been quietly and gradually easing the restrictions on some civilian goods long before its naval commandoes killed nine passengers aboard the Mavi Marmara aid ship on May 31.

You know, publishing op-eds and editorials on Israel’s right to defend itself is utterly ruined when your news stories call the terrorists “passengers.” These were the ones wielding knives, clubs, slingshots, chains, metal pipes, and chanting anti-Jewish Islamic slogans and declaring their intent to become martyrs. Maybe they had to pay extra for the privilege of being in martyr class.

The New York Times uncritically passes along lies from the Turkish “activists” on board the ship.

The third soldier, however, suffered a cut in his stomach that reached his stomach membrane but not the organ itself. It was nothing fatal. As a doctor, I wouldn’t want to guess the nature of this injury but it could have been caused by either landing on a sharp pole from the helicopter or a blow from a pipe with a sharp edge. I couldn’t tell.

Right. He fell on a pipe. It couldn’t be that he was, oh, I don’t know, stabbed in the stomach?

And most world media are ignoring all of the video evidence proving they were militants. When the AP did mention it, they always added that they couldn’t verify the video. (Can’t find that link again, dammit.)

So of course the world cries out against Israel. The media feeds the beast by constantly refusing to present Israel’s side of the story in all but a brusque, get-it-over-with, lip-service kind of way. All Israeli evidence is challenged. No anti-Israeli claims are verified. And Israel’s image in the world continues to fall. Not that most people need a reason to hate Israel. If the press were completely even-handed, I suspect there would still be as negative an image of Israel in the world’s collective mind. The world, as I have said before, does not like the Jews.

Posted in Gaza, Israel, Media Bias | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Potato power

Posted on 06/21/2010 by Soccerdad

I’ve argued in the past that Israel’s portrayal in the media is extremely unfair given the aid it provides to nations suffering from disasters. But there are other ways that Israel helps less developed nations. Engadget tells us (via memeorandum):

Researchers in Jerusalem have just announced they’ve developed super simple, sustainable, organic electric batteries which are powered by treated potatoes. Their findings have just been published in the Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy, and detail uses of the batteries in the developing world where infrastructure is lacking. The apparently highly efficient battery is made from zinc and copper electrodes and a potato slice which has been boiled.

Yissum, the organization charged with licensing out technology developed at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem is making this technology available at no charge to the developing world.

Elder of Ziyon suggests another benefit:

“Electric Potato” would be a great name for a ’60s cover band.

I can’t wait to hear “Incense and melted butter.” :-)

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Israel | Tagged | 2 Comments

Yachting, Golf, and the Oil Crisis

Posted on 06/21/2010 by Rabbi Kaufman

There is quite some furor over the fact that the CEO of BP, formerly BRITISH Petroleum and now simply BP, just as KFC, once actually had something to do with Kentucky and FRIED Chicken, went yachting and Pres. Obama played golf. I believe that this is highly dangerous, much less misguided. In any job in which you can work 24 hours a day, seven days a week, it is VITAL to take time off. If you do not take time off, you can burn out and will definitely become less and less effective over time. That people are furious over the fact that they are taking such breaks is a sign of public ignorance and that the media seems to be amplifying this sentiment is making it much more difficult for two vitally important people to function properly. We can discuss whether or not the President plays golf TOO MUCH, TOO OFTEN, but to act as if NEVER should be the appropriate amount is detrimental to the health of our President and all future Presidents going forward.

Now, let’s get to to the CEO of BP. He SHOULD take a break. Do we really expect him to work for 60 days straight, 24 hours a day, without any breaks? How about an additional 30 days? 60 days? 120 days? Some have said, “He should take his yacht and go skim oil in the Gulf.” Well friends, THAT is part of the problem. US LAW, specifically the Jones Act, functionally PROHIBITS foreign vessels from helping out in the efforts to contain the leak in the Gulf. BP has sought to bring in foreign flagged vessels to help and some congressmen, senators, and governors have sought to have the Jones Act waived for this specific event, but the government has REFUSED. Sen. Kay Bailey-Hutchinson  wrote that:

The Jones Act is currently preventing resources, however, from being used in the massive cleanup in the Gulf of Mexico. This legislation that has been on the books since 1920 is hindering foreign vessels from assisting Gulf communities, as they work to prevent oil from reaching their shores. Currently, foreign vessels need to obtain a Jones Act waiver from the federal government in order to help with the cleanup efforts. For many of the vessels wishing to respond, this request needs to be reviewed by three separate agencies: The coast guard, the maritime administration and customs and border protection. That is three layers of bureaucracy when time is of the essence. During this crisis, we need to cut through the red tape we must get all available assets on the scene as quickly as possible. I think everyone agrees – and other countries have offered their services; they’ve offered to help. There are European countries that also drill in the oceans and waters on their shores, and they’ve offered to send ships to help to try to absorb the oil and skim it off. There are volunteers waiting with the right equipment, and they’re willing to come to our aid.

Some argue that it is NOT the case that the Jones Act is harming the clean up effort, particularly those whose jobs are protected by it. Another excellent argument as to how and why it should be done may be found here.

It seems to me that it is unconscionable for the administration to take the position that it seems to be taking. The Jones Act must be waived immediately, the necessary resources must be brought to bear as soon as possible from any port under any flag. Clearly current efforts are FAILING to prevent oil from washing ashore and therefore one must strongly question the contention that the Jones act is NOT hindering efforts especially in the face of arguments to the contrary by leaders of all of the states directly involved and by those in the oil industry. Might we want to utilize vessels designed to clean up oil spills that hail from other nations? I think that the obvious answer is “Yes” and that those opposed to waiving the Jones Act in this instance need to explain why the answer is “No.”

Just my two cents.

-David

Posted in Israel | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Eroding Israel’s position; shoring up Hamas

Posted on 06/21/2010 by Soccerdad

The New York Times reports:

Bowing to worldwide pressure and condemnation, Israel on Sunday formally announced an eased blockade of Gaza that could significantly expand the flow of goods overland into the impoverished coastal Palestinian enclave, isolated by the Israelis for three years.
…
While Mr. Netanyahu did not signal an end to the naval blockade of Gaza or specify precisely what goods would be allowed, his action earned unusual praise from the Obama administration, which has been critical of Israel over the past year and has called the Gaza situation unsustainable.

The praise may have been unusual but it was not unqualified as the reporters were able to find several anonymous administration officials who were willing to express that this still wasn’t enough:

Still, Israel did not agree to all American demands. Senior American officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly, said the administration had been pressing Israel to open more land crossings, but that the Israelis were resisting, at least for now.

Both the White House and Mr. Blair signaled that Israel had not gone as far as they wished. “Plainly, there are still issues to be addressed,” said Mr. Blair, the former British prime minister, “and the test of course will not be what is said, but what is done.”

One senior American official echoed him. “We think this is a good move, but obviously implementation is key,” he said. But he added: “Everything that we’d like to see is on there.”

The administration’s complete statement isn’t yet up but Fox News quotes Robert Gibbs:

“Today, the United States welcomes the new policy towards Gaza announced by the government of Israel, which responds to the calls of many in the international community. Once implemented, we believe these arrangements should significantly improve conditions for Palestinians in Gaza, while preventing the entry of weapons,” Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said in a statement.

While, of course, the administration hails the move, Barry Rubin argues that it is a disaster in the making.

So, this is the future: A revolutionary Islamist statelet, an outpost of Iran, a base for spreading terrorism and subversion, a source for genocidal antisemitic propaganda has been established for the long term on the shores of the Mediterranean. For all practical purposes, one could have made this declaration tentatively two or four years ago. Now it is clear.

Some people might find the above paragraph to be controversial. But it is all obvious. Hamas will be in power in the Gaza Strip for a long time. Who is going to remove it? It is a client of Iran. Certainly it is under embargo for arms but it does function a lot like an independent state for daily practical purposes. It will return to war against Israel at the first opportunity. It teaches its people to kill Jews and wipe Israel off the map and to be terrorists. That doesn’t mean all Gazans support it, but those who don’t can do nothing about it. Moreover, the Hamas regime receives indirect aid due to the Palestinian Authority paying much of its civil service and Western projects designed to help its people.

Yes, of course there are limits on what it can do given its size and the pressure still put on by Egypt and Israel. But indeed the above paragraph is an accurate description. Putting it bluntly sounds harsh, but the reality is harsh indeed.

And what could be more ironic than the fact that Western governments frantic for an Israeli-Palestinian peace have just helped put one more gigantic roadblock in the way of such an outcome? Even without Hamas ruling almost half of those under Palestinian rule, the Palestinian Authority probably wouldn’t be able to make peace. The consolidation of a Hamas state makes that inability a certainty.

While a change in Israeli policy can be said to mark this new era, the outcome should not be blamed on the Israeli government since the situation was already in place and made inevitable by Western policy. The world has no idea what it has done, how many bad things and how much bloodshed will arise from this failure. In future, it will become very familiar with this reality. People will write about this being true in five or ten years. You are reading about it right now.

In addition Turkey, which has lately been aligning itself with Iran attacked Kurdish territories in Iraq and Iran hanged a Sunni “rebel” leader.

Iran hanged a Sunni rebel leader, Abdul-Malik Rigi, on Sunday morning after a revolutionary court found him guilty of 79 criminal charges, the ISNA news agency reported.

(The last sentence is interesting:

His younger brother, Abdul-Hamid Rigi, was captured in Pakistan in 2008 and executed in Iran last month.

It doesn’t say he was extradited from Pakistan, suggesting that it was Iran who captured him.)

So Israel’s retreat seemingly encourages an Iranian client. Is there any positive here?

Well at least the administration has taken a first step to making Al Qaeda happy (via memeorandum):

Adam Gadahn called on President Barack Obama to withdraw his troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, end support for Israel, stop intervening in the affairs of Muslims, and free Muslim prisoners.

One last point I see (via memeorandum) that an Israel hating leftist sees this as not enough, but a good starting point:

But I also think that the Gaza Flotilla episode has undermined something crucial in the united-we-stand wall that the US and Israeli have presented to the world. Such crises will come easier and can be smaller now, garnering positive publicity gradually through events that will not all be as shocking as the Flotilla attack. By forcing this small retreat, future Israeli and U.S. retreats will come easier and faster. Thus, although it sticks in my craw to countenance a lack of legal accountability for the Flotilla assault, I’ll reluctantly take the product, if that leads to a wall being tore down, instead.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Israel, The One | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Eroding Israel’s position; shoring up Hamas

More Single State Delusions

Posted on 06/21/2010 by Rabbi Kaufman

Why is the Israeli left obsessed with a single bi-national state? Akiva Eldar argued for the inevitability of one today in Haaretz. It is not only NOT inevitable, it is IMPOSSIBLE. This is NOT what would happen if a two state solution fails. Israel would not end its existence as a Jewish state in order to maintain Gaza. While some are certainly willing for it to cease to be a democracy in order to be a Jewish state and others are more than willing for it to be a democracy and not a Jewish state, most Israelis certainly would opt for neither extreme and there are simple measures to avoid that such as abandoning Gaza and letting it be open to the sea. Having its border open with Israel is not a requirement. Gaza’s border with Egypt and its sea border would be reasonable. Israel could also, in a worst case scenario, abandon the West Bank’s Eastern border and allow free access to Jordan, abandoning most of the territory. In this worst case scenario ( do not tell me how stupid this scenario would be-it is better than a single state solution for Jews), Israel would still control some areas of the West Bank including Jerusalem and the Palestinians there would either be independent or connected to Jordan.

But before it would come to that, Israel could simply define the borders it is willing to accept and it only needs one nation, the United States, to recognize them for it to be a fait accompli. Additionally, the US could well recognize them and then allow Israeli defense of those borders until the Palestinians demonstrate the willingness and ability to do so while providing for Israel against foreign attack, allowing Israel to maintain security control. This is the more likely result of the failure of negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians, not a single bi-national state. That is a idealistic delusion.

Posted in Israel | Tagged , , | 4 Comments

Monday morning Israel scorecard

Posted on 06/21/2010 by Meryl Yourish

Hamas wins: The Islamists are gloating. Even Barry Rubin says that Hamas won this round. And Israel’s enemies are encouraged and emboldened by this victory. Watch for worse to come.

Lebanon is back in the game: The Lebanese “aid” flotilla is on its way. In order to bypass UNSCR 1701, they’re going to stop in Cyprus first. Why? Well, I’m not really sure. I believe this is what they call “the cover story.” UNIFIL has been contacted about the ship, but seriously—UNIFIL? Stop the Lebanese from doing anything? Shyeah—because it’s not like Hezballah hasn’t rearmed right under UNIFIL’s nose or anything.

The AP whitewashes: I told you yesterday that the AP would whitewash the man behind the Lebanese “aid” flotilla. Well, they did. Here’s what they call him: “Yasser Kashlak, a Syrian of Palestinian origin who heads the group organizing the trip- the Free Palestine Movement.”

Here’s what Kashlak said this weekend:

‘Get on the ships we are sending you and go back to your lands. Don’t let the moderate Arab leaders delude you, [you] cannot make peace with us. Our children will return to Palestine, you have no reason for coexistence. Even if our leaders will sign a peace agreement, we will not sign.’”

The AP doesn’t seem to have asked Kashlak about that in its interview with him. Color me unsurprised.

Iran beats the inspectors, again: Iran refuses to let IAEA inspectors in the country again. Why would a nation that is pursuing peaceful nuclear power keep on trying to confound nuclear inspections? Hm. Let’s think. So it can speed up work on the nuclear bomb it wants to drop on Israel?

Yeah, this week is a definite loser for Israel.

Posted in Gaza, Hamas, Israel, Lebanon, Media Bias | Tagged , , , | 3 Comments