Shalom all,
A new Knesset was sworn in this past week, after which Arab Members of Knesset walked out before the singing of HaTikva. Another Iron Dome anti-missile battery was set up in my neck-of-the-woods (the north now has 3 out of the 5 that exist) and orders were given to clear Haifa’s airport of aircraft. And, as if we didn’t have enough to deal with, guess who is coming for a visit.
President Obama’s tactical visit to Israel
It’s official: U.S. President Barack Hussein Obama is planning a visit to Israel and other places in the Middle East next month. Some here are happy, some are worried. But mostly, Israelis are skeptical. The last time Obama visited our region, in 2009, he chose to bypass Israel and ended up bowing to King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, a “gesture” that generated much criticism in the U.S. and elsewhere.
Does President Obama’s visit here indicate a change of his policy towards Israel, or a means of furthering his first-term policy with different players from the U.S., namely Secretary of State, John Kerry, Pentagon chief, Chuck Hagel and CIA head, John Brennan? The earlier visit to this region reflected a worldview that focused on the “Palestinian” issue as being the cause of the Arab-Israeli conflict and of all of the literally explosive problems associated with that conflict. At best, Israel was considered as an ally, but not a primary one. At worst, Israel was viewed as an on-going nuisance that needed to be tolerated, at least for the then immediately foreseeable future. Now, four years later, it is clear that none of Mr. Obama’s Middle East perspectives have panned out. And, if he was paying attention, he would have come to the realization that, despite all the talk and Arab propaganda, the primary concern of leaders in the few relatively “stable” Arab countries in this area is the Iranian nuclear threat and not the “Palestinian” issue. Most of them well understand the mentality of the players in this region and recognize that the sand is about to run out on the Iranian time clock. This, coupled with the added reality of the fading Arab Spring and steadily increasing Islamic Winter, must lead the U.S. to the conclusion that the only genuine, democratic, military, economic and industrial ally of the U.S. in the Middle East is Israel. The only “win-win” scenario for both the U.S. and Israel is a recognition that mutual regional, as well as global, threats should unite both countries in strategic cooperation. The U.S. should also see Israel as a friend and primary ally, who, from a worldly point of view, has the knowledge, experience and ability to deal with threats and intimidation from the likes of Iran, Hamas and the Hizb’allah, as well as other growing power sources in the Middle East – a reality that should facilitate a desire on the part of the U.S. for closer, mutually-beneficial strategic cooperation with Israel. Such cooperation would also act as somewhat of a deterrent, however slight it might be, to Iran’s fanatical desire to bring about Islamic world domination through nuclear threat and military might.
So, the question of the day is whether Mr. Obama will continue with his failed perception and perspective of the Middle East, or whether he will embark on a new endeavor to strengthen the ties between our two countries. Both Obama and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu were both successful in the recent elections held in their respective countries. If Netanyahu succeeds in putting together a coalition government, both men will be stuck with each other for the next four years, a sobering reality that should lead them to strengthen their relationship with one another.
From theory to reality
It is much easier to believe what politicians do than what they say. Campaign promises do not always find fulfillment in legislative enactments. Gestures of strengthening friendships could turn into veiled intimidation and blatant efforts to exert pressure on one’s friends, to accomplish a one-sided objective. This is a reality of politics and power. Much depends on who has it and desires to exercise it.
In view of the efforts if various U.S. administrations, including the one just concluded, there is a realistic concern on the part of the Israeli “Right” that the real purpose of this visit is to pressure Israel to stop building settlements and to get derailed “peace talks back on track. If, in fact, their understanding is correct, then part of that pressure would be demand, as opposed to request, that P.M. Netanyahu agree to the pre-conditions for a resumption of talks laid down by the “Palestinians”, namely that Israel stop building over the Green Line, at least while “peace talks” are going on. This is not a new demand on the part of the “Palestinians”. It will be recalled that Netanyahu had agreed to a 10-month construction freeze, but that gesture did not result in the “Palestinian Authority” agreeing to renew negotiations and Netanyahu rightfully refused to agree to another construction freeze in areas of Judea and Samaria that the P.A. wants for an independent state. An article in leftist Israeli daily this week hinted that there might be a change in Israel’s policy regarding settlement construction, but the government denied that there was any change in its policy, which it has maintained for the last two years.
On the one hand, Washington says that President Obama will not make any demands on Netanyahu. But, the U.S. Ambassador to Israel indicated that the President wants peace negotiations to start up “as soon as possible”. This is political double-talk. Netanyahu is willing to renew talks, with no pre-conditions. The P.A.’s pre-conditions, as it repeatedly expressed, are settlement construction freeze and discussions that will lead to the establishment of a “Palestinian” state, with Jerusalem as its capital according to the 1967 borders (prior to the Six-Day War) and the right of return for “Palestinian” refugees. This situation is a non-starter, particularly if Netanyahu wants to get Naftali Bennett and the Habayit Hayehudi party into his coalition government.
Mr. Obama also needs to understand the mindset of the Israeli populace in the wake of the elections held here almost 3 weeks ago. On the whole, there is only one major, national, security concern, namely the nuclear threat from Iran. The “Palestinian” ploy to upgrade its status at the U.N. did not win points with our citizenry who, on the whole, do not trust either the P.A. or its head, Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas). Nor are we enchanted by the “peace process” and the “land-for-peace” rhetoric. So, if Obama does try to pressure Israel in this regard, it will not go well with most of us (except for extreme leftists), nor with Netanyahu’s right-wing government, if he succeeds in establishing the coalition. Actually, there is a realistic expectation that Obama’s visit will help Netanyahu form his right-wing government more quickly. But, it may also result in more demands from the political opposition, as the price to be paid for joining the coalition.
From the perspective of the “Palestinians”, Obama is the only one who can put pressure on Israel and they are hoping that he will do so. Maybe he will learn not to repeat the mistakes of other American Presidents, who pressured Israel to act or not act. Former President Eisenhower, for example, admitted: “I should never have pressured Israel to evacuate the Sinai” (as quoted in Max Fisher’s biography, “Quiet Diplomat”), an act which contributed to the anti-American radicalism of Egypt’s then President, Nasser. In 1981, then President Reagan pressured then Prime Minister Menachem Begin not to bomb Iraq’s nuclear reactor, for fear that it would trigger a regional war. But, after the First Gulf War in 1991, the U.S. Israel thanked Israel for doing what it believed was right, an act which ended up preventing a nuclear response to the American-led invasion of Iraq. And, of course, there are other instances of pressure applied by different administrations, which have backfired and fueled resistance not only against Israel, but against the U.S. as well. It will be interesting to see whether Mr. Obama plans to pressure Israel, to accomplish the goals of the U.S. only, or to encourage Israel to pursue what is right for Israel, an act that will end up being beneficial also for the U.S. and other countries.
At least the resumption of “peace talks” is not the only reason for Obama’s visit. There are a few other, more pressing, issues that need attention, namely, Iran, Syria, Egypt and even Turkey. The U.S. has promised to keep Iran from becoming a nuclear power. In fact, so has Netanyahu. It would be interesting to see how, and when, they intend to keep their promises.
It is reasonable to anticipate that Obama will want to coordinate a meeting that will include himself, Netanyahu and Abbas, to try to jump start negotiations relating to the “Palestinians”. This would be important for the U.S., as it would restore Obama to a position of leadership in the “peace process”. But, more so, getting Netanyahu and Abbas back to talking with each other would act as a catalyst to enable the newly-installed Secretary of State, John Kerry, to “follow up” with both sides after the President leaves. In this regard, Kerry already spoke with Netanyahu and Abbas, as well as with Israeli President Shimon Peres. Referring to Kerry’s conversations, U.S. State Department spokeswoman, Victoria Nuland, said: “Turning to Middle East peace, the secretary underscored his personal commitment and that of President [Barack] Obama to support Israel’s security and to pursue a lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians.” That doesn’t leave much room for doubt over what Obama’s intentions are. For his part, Netanyahu is playing with fire by making comments such as the following: “The next government that I will form will be committed to peace. I call on Abu Mazen (Abbas) to return to the negotiating table. Every day that passes without us talking to jointly find a way to create peace for our peoples is a day wasted.” With statements like that emanating from our Prime Minister, if Obama’s visit doesn’t produce results, there will inevitably be much criticism and accusations leveled, mostly against Israel.
Developments regarding Obama’s visit will give everyone a fair indication which way the wind is blowing. We should make sure to have a change of clothes with us. Things could get very hot or turn very cold relatively quickly.
A New Knesset
|
Last Tuesday saw the swearing in of the 19th Knesset. As expected, it was accompanied by plenty of media coverage. But, somewhere along the line, as the day’s events were coming to a close with the traditional playing and singing of “HaTikva”, Israel’s national anthem, most of the media failed to cover one very significant event, namely, that Arab MKs had already walked out of the hall, so as not to be present for “HaTikva”. How can the media “miss” such an event? It is not difficult when the media is leftist and fails to see the national insult behind such a move. If they don’t want to sing, OK. That is palatable. They do not associate with the yearning expressed in the anthem. But, they areIsraeli nationals and members of the government and as such, they should, at the very least, stand.
The “HaTikva” (meaning “The Hope”) expresses the longing of the Jewish people to return to their ancient homeland after 2,000 years in exile and to be a free people in the land of Zion, in Jerusalem. One of the more controversial Arab MKs, who left after being sworn in, said that as an Arab who was born here, “the anthem oppresses me and humiliates me.” One Jewish, Israeli journalist and former Member of Knesset, writing a column for Arab News, stated, in part: “All the Arab members left immediately after being sworn in … before Hatikvah, the national anthem, was intoned.” This could only happen here. Try to imagine what would happen if a Jewish member of an Arab government would have made such a statement or walked out of an official ceremony before the anthem of such country (if there would be one) was intoned. Israel not only claims to be a democracy, it demonstrates it, even to those who would like to see this nation come to an end. Sometimes, we are overly permissive and suffer the consequences of failing to draw proper behavioral and other boundaries.
Being a Member of Knesset is not so bad.
There were a record number if new Knesset Members sworn in last week, 48 of them to be exact. Many are relatively young and most are politically inexperienced. But, there are some benefits to becoming a “lawmaker” here:
Starting salary: 38,250 NIS (New Israeli Sheqels – about US $10,391) per month
A leased car (a choice from 6 different models)
An annual budget of 68,000 NIS (around US $18,500) so they can be in contact with the people and open a “parliamentary” office outside of the Knesset, buy laptop computers, furniture and other “necessities”.
Reimbursement for clothing expenses (not exactly clear about what that means): NIS 4,250 (about US $1,155) per year.
Reimbursement for foreign language studies: same as for clothing.
Annual operating budget of NIS 27,500 (about US $7,500), which includes reimbursement for a cellphone, 2 newspaper subscriptions, a telephone line and a fax line and a daily food and lodging allowance, and mailing expenses.
Each MK has 2 assistants (3, if he/she is the head of a committee), whose salary is paid by the government. This requires office space (2 rooms, plus basic services, including a shower), that is furnished and supplied with 3 computers (desk top models), a printer and a small refrigerator, along with a 32-inch TV, in case they get bored with politics.
There are also bodyguards and more.
Not bad. And MKs are constantly voting to improve their conditions!
|
Coalition Update
Technically, Prime Minister Netanyahu heads up a “lame duck” government, at least until he is able to put together a solid coalition, following which the government will have credibility, as well as clout.
The politicians are showing considerable irresponsibility to the people of Israel, by prolonging the formation of a government. We need to take action in a lot of areas, which could be severely affected if the government doesn’t take shape quickly. Not the least of these concerns has to do with the upcoming visit of President Obama. Israel needs to present itself as unified and able to make decisions that will have strategic consequences for the country, as well as the entire region. The time to form a government under Israeli law (another month-33 more days to be exact) could result in getting it established only days before Obama’s visit, hardly enough time to establish working relationships that are in the national interest. It behooves Netanyahu and the heads of the other parties, with the exception of the Arab parties, to get moving and get it done.
Realistically, a coalition can be formed even this week. Even Yair Lapid’s “Yesh Atid”, who was firmly in favor of pursuing negotiations with the “Palestinians”, has cooled off a bit, after PA President Mahmoud Abbas flatly rejected Netanyahu’s offer to renew negotiations without pre-conditions and insisted not only on a settlement construction freeze, but a freeze in construction of housing even in Jewish neighborhoods of Jerusalem. To those demands, Abbas added that all imprisoned terrorists be released. That’s enough to open the eyes of anyone who thinks that we should continue to run after Abbas and try to get him to sit down and “negotiate”. Netanyahu and Lapid would appear to be closer now on the “negotiation” issue than ever before and the P.M. should take advantage of this before something else happens to change the situation and cause them to distance each other again.
The “hot” domestic issue that needs to be resolved to get a broad-based coalition started relates to the “equalization of the burden”, as it has come to be known. This, of course, has to do with getting the ultra-orthodox to serve ether in the military, or to do equivalent time in national service. A related issue focuses on the desire to get the ultra-orthodox off of the welfare rolls and into the general workforce – an economic issue. There are other matters related to dealing with the ultra-orthodox that also need to be resolved, but these are the primary ones.
Lapid is again showing determination, but this time also with a degree of understanding, by proposing a graduated draft of the ultra-orthodox that would extend over a period of five years. Many overlook the fact that the ultra-orthodox already serve in the military and that more are voluntarily joining. Still, some think that Lapid’s proposal is far too lenient and prolonged. But, even this progressive draft is not acceptable to the ultra-orthodox leadership, who have threatened that if there is compulsory conscription, there will be serious consequences. As stated by Interior Minister, Eli Yishai, who also serves as deputy prime minister: “There will be marches and processions of thousands, tens of thousands, in the streets…Thousands of yeshiva students will fill up the jail cells. Military Police officers will be running around aimlessly in Bnei Brak. You’ll have a civilian uprising, pandemonium. Worst of all, those who are enlisting today will refuse. to enlist en masse.” This should not be viewed as an idle threat. There is genuine concern in the ultra-orthodox community over what appears to be a growing alliance being formed between Lapid and Naftali Bennett, the head of Habayit Hayehudi party, which is a religious Zionist faction, that is highly nationalistic and right of center politically. The head of the Haredi Shas party referred to Bennett’s party as “goyim” (non Jews) and “infidels”, not exactly terms of endearment. The concern is based on the fear that Bennett’s religiosity will give way to his nationalism. This even prompted senior members within the ultra-orthodox community to appeal to the senior rabbis within the religious Zionist camp, to remind Bennett that the religious values are stronger and of greater validity than secularist ties, hoping to get Bennett To soften his position regarding conscripting the ultra-orthodox. If they succeed, Bennett and his party would be discredited and the attempt to restore religious Zionism in Israel will suffer a major setback. Netanyahu is not helping matters in this regard. By his consulting with almost every other party before meeting with Bennett, Netanyahu was publicly humiliating him, an act that ultimately belittles Netanyahu as well. He needs to get beyond personal antagonism and move forward.
Netanyahu, Lapid and Bennett should stop making a mountain out of a molehill and get down to the business of setting up a government. If a widespread, compulsory recruitment law is passed, Shas may afterwards make overtures to join the government. Whether or not the United Torah Judaism party would also later seek to join remains an open issue, but it will probably opt to remain outside and be part of the opposition. The alternative is to form a very narrow government, which includes the orthodox and which will be forever teetering on the brink of collapse. If that happens, Netanyahu’s chances of again succeeding at the polls will be considerably lessened and he will, in essence, be punished by the voters for his failure to form a broad-based coalition when he had the chance.
Neighborhood Watch
Iran
The big 3, Iran, Syria and Egypt, continue to keep our security people on their toes and awake at night. Leading the list of concerns is, of course, the possibility of a nuclear Iran. Ever since “talks” between the West and Iran began in 2003, there has been no substantive progress to curtail Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The constant claim coming out of Tehran is that its nuclear program is intended for peaceful purposes. Those who seek to pursue a peaceful future do not continue to threaten the destruction of another country and the latter’s removal from the face of the earth.
What is clear is that the imposition of supposedly “harsh” sanctions against Iran have failed to achieve its goals. Efforts at “diplomacy” have failed and even though more “talks” are slated later in the month, there is an increasing recognition that push is coming to shove and it won’t be long before the exerted pressure from different countries will necessitate military intervention to prevent Tehran’s nuclear ambitions. Neither side is willing to be the first to blink.
According to Mark Fitzpatrick, a non-proliferation expert and former senior official at the U.S. State Department: “The situation has changed for the worse for both sides since last summer”, referring to the fact that Iran has enough low-enriched uranium that with a little more, it can produce an additional weapon. Based on information presently available, the best “guesstimate” is that Iran could enrich enough uranium in six months to arm one weapon. Israel is committed to preventing even the production of one weapon and if Tehran crosses Jerusalem’s “red line” in this regard, a decision will have to be made, not only by Israel, but by the U.S. and other concerned countries, namely, allow an Iranian bomb or bomb Iran. Iran is not Iraq and this is not 1981. An Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear installations, in all likelihood, would be coordinated with the U.S. But, the latter’s “red lines” are different from Israel, who may, in the final analysis, have to go it alone.
Iran and Syria and … The Hizb’allah
Iran is not only threatening to destroy Israel, it is also moving soldiers into the heart of the Middle East arena. According to the Washington Post, which quoted both U.S. and Arab sources, Iran and its offspring in Lebanon, the Hizb’allah, have established a network of militia throughout Syria, with some 50,000 troops, purportedly to bolster the army of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. But, with the growing anticipation that Assad’s Presidency may soon come to an abrupt end, the presence of such troops is intended to provide a solid foothold in Syria when Assad’s house falls down. It is a given that anarchy will rule the day in Syria when Assad is deposed and Iran wants to be firmly established there when that happens. Of course, our main concern is the chemical weapons arsenal that Syria has built up over the years and into whose hands such weapons will fall. Having Shiite Persians on our northeast border, along with the Hizb’allah on our direct northern border, does not exactly warm the cockles of my heart. It’s at times like these that we need to remember that “greater is He Who is in [us] than he who us in the world”. (1 John 4:4)
It is to be remembered that following the attack on the convoy in Syria that was reported to be moving chemical weapons, threats of reprisal came from Syria, Iran and other neighbors. Israel did not directly respond to such threats. But, last Wednesday, the Israeli Airports Authority directed all civilian aircraft that made use of Haifa’s airport to use other landing strips. According to the IDF’s Spokesperson’s Unit, “security needs relating to the air space in the area have been addressed.” The Lebanese Ministry of Information website claimed that “Israeli warplanes were conducting mock raids over the area of Nabatiyeh”. The closure of Haifa’s airport took place the day after the IDF set up its third Iron Dome anti-rocket battery in the north, following the deployment of one in Haifa and one in Safed (Tsfat). So, now we have 3 out of the 5 operational Iron Dome batteries in the north of Israel. Maybe the Hizb’allah is preparing some fireworks for Obama’s arrival.
Egypt
The recent round of violence in Egypt, the most serious since the June, 2012, election of President Mohammed Morsi, reflects the extreme tension that developed between the ruling Muslim Brotherhood government and the opposition that was generated against it over the language of the new constitution and the absolute powers that Morsi implemented.
However, the street demonstrations reflect widespread disappointment in the performance of the government and represent a protest against the failure of the new government to address the economic and social needs of the nation. This will continue to destabilize the country, as long as Morsi continues to spend most of his time trying to reinforce the regime of the Muslim Brotherhood, rather than trying to find a way to work with the opposition to address Egypt’s internal, nationwide problems. Efforts to quell the violence and curb the massive demonstrations might result in the use of military force, which could throw Egypt back into a true dictatorship, similar to the regime of Hosni Mubarak, who was deposed two years ago, as part of the early Arab Spring. The nation cannot afford another violent overthrow of the government, but it is doubtful that the Muslim Brotherhood government will agree to quietly disband. Still, from what is happening in these days there, the likelihood is that many more violent demonstrations will take place before a period of calm can be introduced. To be sure, Ahmedinejad’s recent meeting with Morsi in Egypt was not a casual discussion over a cup of coffee to see how the two leaders can help to introduce measures that will lead to the calm and quiet of the region.
Tunisia
The Arab Spring began there. But, after the revolution was successful and the repressive rule of the government was done away with, the first elections that took place thereafter brought an Islamist party to power. It waited for the right moment and then “stole the revolution” – the same charge leveled against the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. When the leader of the opposition spoke out strongly against the Muslim Brotherhood, as well as against the ultra-conservative Sunni Moslems, he was assassinated. At the funeral of the slain opposition leader, a large portion of the population spoke out against the radical Islam that has taken over the country. Tunisia is a relatively modern Arab country that had allowed Israeli diplomats to visit and was also respectful towards Jews. Today, it is at a crossroads, as it faces two very different options: either to reject Islamic fundamentalism and continue as a modern, secular country, or continue in the path of Muslim Brotherhood extremism. Apparently, its younger generation, who are socially active in the media, will have the final word there.
And THAT was The Week That Was.
“Behold, days are coming,” declares the LORD, “when the plowman will overtake the reaper and the treader of grapes him who sows seed; when the mountains will drip sweet wine and all the hills will be dissolved. Also, I will restore the captivity of My people Israel, and they will rebuild the ruined cities and live in them; they will also plant vineyards and drink their wine, and make gardens and eat their fruit. I will also plant them on their land, and they will not again be rooted out from their land which I have given them,” says the LORD your God. (Amos 9:13-15)
With prayers for a truly blessed week.
Marvin
The Week That Was 