Author: marvinsk

Coalition Capers; Obama’s Visit – TWTW … ending 9 March, 2013

On By marvinskLeave a comment
Shalom all,

The late Will Rogers was never without a statement that tended to reflect the times in which he lived. One of the most memorable is: “Everything is changing. People are taking their comedians seriously and the politicians as a joke.” Certainly, this is true of our time as well.

Coalition Capers
With all of the politicking going on this past week, we must, of necessity, relate to the attempts to form a coalition government. These attempts have gone like a roller coaster, sometimes up and sometimes down. Most of the time, they were waiting for someone to give them a push start.

Politicians make promises, lots of them. In most instances, they campaign and argue about the “issues” that affect their constituencies first and the nation second. Sometimes, they are charismatic enough to get away with simply throwing out nice, catchy slogans that people latch onto, when they have nothing else of substance to say. During the campaign for office, when dealing with the “issues”, the politicians tend to be direct. But, once elected, something happens and shades of grey cloud over what were once clearly defined goals and principles. In the final analysis, most of the “issues” could be dealt with, with the different players vying for the best government “jobs”.

The week started out with great expectations. The parties were talking to each other and attempts were made to bridge ideological and political gaps, so that a coalition government could be formed. As of this writing, less than a week remains to accomplish that task. In the early morning hours before dawn on Wednesday, negotiators for Yesh Atid’s Chairman, Yair Lapid, sent a text message to the negotiating team of Likud-Beytenu, saying that they were canceling the meeting scheduled for that day, because of the refusal of Likud to accept Yesh Atid’s demand to reduce 18 the number of cabinet ministers, which now stands at 27. However, this could hardly be acknowledged as Lapid’s primary concern. Apparently, the real reason for canceling the negotiations (which got back on track Thursday evening) was his desire to get the Foreign Ministry and his reluctance to accept the post of Finance Minister. 

By creating this almost last-minute negotiations crisis, which was made to appear as being ideological, Lapid has put himself in a difficult position. On the one hand, he campaigned vigorously against too much government spending. He is opposed to having a large cabinet, because of the financial waste that goes along with it. He is opposed to giving money to religious institutions when those who sit in the yeshivot do not serve in the military. His campaign emphasis was on protecting the middle class, who shoulders most of the financial burden of the country. This is not a last-minute concern. It was the thrust of his campaign for the better part of a year, which focused on almost every type of economic issue facing Israel today. If fiscal waste was such a burning issue for him, why wouldn’t he jump at the opportunity to become Finance Minister?

There are obvious reasons for this: The position of Foreign Minister is considerably more attractive than that of Finance Minister. The former travels a lot, gets to rub shoulders with heads of state and representatives of foreign governments, meets, greets and entertains foreign dignitaries and the like. The Finance portfolio, on the other hand, gets to deal with all of the economic ails that trouble this country. It is anything but glorious and can often end a political career, even of someone considerably more experienced in politics. It also requires a head for finance and an understanding of how government fiscal policy fits in with the different, and often conflicting, demands of government ministries. The Finance Minister often comes under fire for making decisions that affect one sector or another. He will never be able to please everyone and his major expectation is to move from that position to one that is less politically destructive. Interestingly enough, neither Lapid nor Naftali Bennett (the head of the Habayit Hayehudi party) has the economic background or experience in finance that such a position requires. If Lapid were to accept such a position, his constituency would expect widespread, economic reforms to take place in the economy, in line with his campaign speeches. This would require considerable curtailment of government spending almost across the board. It is a formidable challenge, even for someone with a doctorate in government economics, a challenge that would determine whether his voters will retain or lose confidence in him in any future election.

Still, unlike Lapid, Bennett would probably be willing to accept the Finance portfolio, notwithstanding his lack of experience with economics on a nationwide level. This is not because he considers the position to be glamorous, but rather, because it would be of tremendous benefit to his constituency, the national-religious sector. His willingness to accept such a position would smooth over a lot of sore feathers among those who put him into office. The reason is simple and straight-forward: As Finance Minister, he would be able to affect budgetary allotments primarily for settlement construction, as well as for religious institutions.

As of Thursday night, the offer of Finance Minister was said to be placed before Lapid. By Friday morning, it was denied by a member of Lapid’s party, who reported on Army Radio: “Lapid heard about Likud’s offer of the Finance Ministry through the media. No official offer has been made and that is why Lapid said that he is not ruling anything out”. If he says “no”, the likelihood is that the offer will, in fact, be made to Bennett and Lapid will be offered another portfolio that has an economic impact. 

With regard to the pact of the dynamic duo – Yesh Atid and Habayit Hayehudi, the purportedly “unbreakable alliance” began to exhibit cracks. While negotiations were going on, a rumor was spread that Lapid was over-stepping his bounds and making demands that would upset the religious status quo, such as that the Israeli public transportation system would continue to operate on Shabbat (from Friday sundown until Saturday sundown), that restrictions on converting to Judaism be eased and that civil marriages should be allowed. These rumors turned out to be untrue, but they were enough for some members of Habayit Hayehudi to strongly speak out against them. The above showed that the agreement, while appearing to be strong, was actually fragile and that the ideological differences between them could easily upset their embracing one another politically.

By mid-week, an attempt was made to convince Netanyahu that Yesh Atid, Habayit Hayehudi and Kadima should be viewed by Likud-Beytenu as a single, voting group of 33 votes. This was not coordinated in advance with Habayit Hayehudi, who said that it was unacceptable, and created a further rift between it and Yesh Atid. Netanyahu didn’t bow to the threat of an internal alliance against his coalition government and continued to negotiate as if that potential, coalition threat was not made.

In the meantime, Habayit Hayehudi (Bennett) is demanding the Religious Services Ministry, as well as control over other religious institutions, such as rabbinical courts (now under the authority of the Justice Ministry), yeshivot (religious schools that are now under the Education Ministry), the Chief Rabbinate and the conversion to Judaism (both of which are, of all things, under the authority of the Prime Minister’s office). As stated, in part, by a representative of Habayit Hayehudi: “We are entering the government to change things and this is one of those things…We want the Religious Services Ministry to make it more efficient and to improve the issue of religion and state in the country. You can’t do that without these institutions.”

Of course, as in all matters affecting politics, the control over budgetary expenditures is one of the main issues that has the ultra-orthodox up in arms and they (Shas and United Torah Judaism – U.T.J.) are willing to sit in the opposition and take revenge on the government for leaving them out. As stated by Moshe Gafni (U.T.J.): “From Israel’s founding onward, the time haredi [ultra orthodox] parties spent in the opposition has always exceeded their tenure inside the coalition governments. This time around, something grave has occurred — people lied outright [referring to the alleged anti-haredi stance of Yesh Atid and Habayit Hayehudi]…Let’s say the Arab parties would one day announce that Israel should rule all the territory between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River and let’s say they announce that they would endorse whatever path the government pursues. Would anyone then reject them and veto their participation in the coalition simply because they are Arabs?! We are very reliable and loyal coalition partners, and no one has even bothered to ask us whether we would agree to this or that plan to reform the military draft law. Yair Lapid couldn’t even be bothered to ask us what plan would be acceptable for us; Habayit Hayehudi also had none of its members sit with us. They [Yesh Atid and Habayit Hayehudi] said that even if an agreement was reached on a certain national service mechanism, they would have then insisted that haredim study the core curriculum [like in state-run schools], until finally the cat was out of the bag – they said they would not agree to haredim serving in the government just because they were haredim. This is unforgivable behavior. Today it is the haredim who are boycotted; tomorrow it will be the settlers’ turn, and two days from now it will be the Arabs’ turn – this is a self-destructing society.”

The ultra-orthodox threaten to make the lives of the new government ministers miserable, a pay-back for leaving Shas and U.T.J. out of the government. Yitzhak Cohen (of Shas), serving as Deputy Finance Minister for four years, said that the settlements are costing the government a lot of money: “They keep saying the burden [of national service] should be shared equally, but they are responsible for all this burden when it comes to defense, foreign affairs and the economy. Migron [the largest illegal outpost until its dismantling last year] is a burden; [the illegally constructed Beit El neighborhood] Givat Ha’ulpana, where houses are now being taken apart, costs the state millions; this is both an economic and security burden…There is no such thing as a sacred outpost; there is such a thing as a holy yeshiva.” It is amazing that the for past 4 years, as long as the ultra-religious were getting their extraordinary funding, no complaint was made by them about the settlements. Now, all of a sudden, there seems to be a realization that settlements need finances to exist.


In similar fashion, the Religious Services Minister, Yakov Margi (of Shas), stated: “Lapid asked [throughout his campaign] ‘Where is the money?’ So we will tell them exactly where the money is; it is in the housing projects that are run by national religious activists in far-flung communities, which get double the funding other projects get even though these projects are pure fantasy and never really materialize; there is no good reason to funnel funds to these projects, and they deserve no budget; we are going to apply extra scrutiny to all the funds that go to communities beyond the Green Line [in Judea and Samaria] and we are going to look very carefully at the budgets Yair Lapid takes from the have-nots to fund culture in Tel Aviv and curry favor with the social elite.”
Some influential figures in the haredi world went so far as to call for a boycott of products that originate from communities that lie beyond the Green Line and accuse Naftali Bennett of whining about how mothers in the settlements don’t sleep at night, while accusing him of being the cause of that sleeplessness, because he wants those outposts to be protected. What the ultra-orthodox refuse to acknowledge, at least at this juncture, is that the existence of those settlements allows their families to live in relative peace and allows their sons to sit in a yeshiva, while someone else is on the front line to protect them.
In response to these statements and calls for boycotts, Habayit Hayehudi Member of Knesset, Rabbi Eli Ben-Dahan, who may be considered for the position of Minister of Religious Services, said: “I really don’t get it; this can all turn upside down in the course of one hour; let’s say Labor Chairwoman MK Shelly Yachimovich agrees to enter the coalition and we are left out, are we going to say we are being boycotted?! Are we going to stop buying [Shas spiritual leader] Rabbi Ovadia Yosef’s books?! What’s been taking place is all part of the political game. The haredim are pro-Land of Israel only if they are in the coalition? If it is important, then it must be important from the outside, too.”
The most telling statement came from Moshe Gafni [U.T.J.]: “As the chairman of the Finance Committee, I helped everyone: the settlements and the hesder yeshivot. If we are all in agreement that everyone should get by in these tough economic times and that everyone should lend a helping hand to the other, that is a good thing; but if Habayit Hayehudi, which represents the settlers and the [hesder] yeshivot, targets our budgets, then everything will be on the table, and we will use all of our might.”
With less than one week to go, there is progress and optimism, but nothing concrete, other than Tzippi Livni bringing her left-wing politics into the coalition. Despite all of his efforts, it is still possible that Netanyahu may fail to put together a coalition, if neither Lapid nor Bennett comes on board. In that case, Netanyahu can try to add Shaul Mofaz (Kadima) and the religious parties (Shas and United Torah Judaism) and would end up with about 55 coalition members. He could try to ask for more time from President Shimon Peres. Of course, that would put us into the situation where there is no formal government in place when the President of the U.S. comes for dinner. Who will have the authority to approve the payment for his visit? On the other hand, the cracks between Habayit Hayehudi and Yesh Atid could worsen and the wall could come crumbling down, allowing for Bennett to join the coalition without Lapid, which would also re-open the door for the ultra-orthodox to come back into the fold. The other possibility, far-fetched as it may be and fairly dangerous to a Likud-Beytenu led coalition, is to have the Labor party (headed up by Shelly Yachimovich) join the coalition, a move which would also enable the ultra-orthodox to come in. 
While late in the game, it is still too early to call the shots on who will get what position [other than the Ministry of Justice, which was promised to Tzippi Livni], if and when a coalition government comes into existence. What is reasonably certain, however, is that if the present, expected coalition composition is Likud-Beytenu, Yesh Atid, Habayit Hayehudi, Tnuah (Tzippi Livni) and Kadima (Shaul Mofaz), Netanyahu’s government will be forever teetering on the brink of collapse. It is also clear that Netanyahu’s coalition-making deals will leave some of the people in his own party very unhappy. A reduction in the number of cabinet ministers will remove some now serving as Ministers and will reduce some to deputy positions or even some lower ministerial job. This could create internal troubles far beyond those of the convoluted coalition politics that have taken place up to this point. His own people could rebel against him when it comes time for a vote on certain issues, aligning themselves with the opposition, or simply failing to vote in favor. This would be their “internal revenge” against him for their ouster or non-appointment to ministerial posts and weaken his own authority within the coalition.
And so, as the saying goes – the plot thickens. It appears to be almost over,  but it won’t be over until it’s over. And then it will all begin again.

Boycott “Settlement Goods”? The Ultra-Orthodox Will Not Be Alone.

It’s one thing for those outside the country to want to institute measures that will hurt us. It’s another thing when those who, up until now, have been loyal supporters of the government and of the settlements to do so. I won’t add to what has already been said about the “revenge” of the ultra-orthodox vis-a-vis the settlements. But, if they do take action, they won’t be alone.

Holland just joined other European Union countries, such as Britain and Denmark, as well as South Africa, in recommending that Dutch retailers label products that were made beyond the “Green Line” (in Judea and Samaria, east Jerusalem and the Golan Heights), so as to distinguish them from products “made in Israel”. It it not illegal to import products from the settlements and retailers who fail to comply with the government’s recommendation will not be punished. 
Israel reacted sharply to such a move and said that Euope should be even-handed in its claimed efforts to inform consumers, as Yigal Palmor, spokesman for the Foreign Ministry, said: “If the Europeans claim that labeling products made in the settlements is intended only to inform the consumer that the product comes from a disputed area, they should also be consistent and mark any product from disputed territories in Europe and around the world. But if the move denigrates Israel, and only Israel, it is clearly a manifestation of blatant discrimination and thus inherently wrong.” He was joined by Eli Yishai, Minister of the Interior, who said that “products from the settlements beyond the Green Line, just like those made within the Green Line, are proud blue and white products. The State of Israel will stand as one entity against any attempt to boycott its products.”
The “P.A.” Wants ‘Confidence-Building Measures’  from Israel.
The pot is again calling the kettle “black”. In anticipation of President Barack Hussein Obama’s planned visit to Israel and its environs, U.S. Secretary of State, John Kerry, met last week with “Palestinian” Authority President, Mahmoud Abbas (known here as “Abu Mazen”), when they met in Saudi Arabia. The latter reportedly gave to Kerry a document containing a list of “trust-building steps” to be taken by Israel, that would allow the resumption of “peace negotiations” in a “positive atmosphere”. 
It is reported by a political adviser to Abbas that the list contains, among other things, renewal of VIP identification cards for “Palestinian” officials that were cancelled, release of “Palestinian” funds frozen by Israel, transfer of security control of so-called “Palestinian areas” to “Palestinian” police, providing ammunition to “Palestinian” security forces, removal of checkpoints and the release of “Palestinian” prisoners arrested before 1994. It is further reported that Kerry spoke with Netanyahu about these “trust-building steps” and P.M. Netanyahu did not rule them out. As I read the news report, I was looking for the part where Netanyahu demanded “trust-building steps” from the “Palestinians” in return. Alas, I found none. Silence should not be taken as assent. It’s only when we open our mouths and allow words to come out that we get into trouble. Maybe, when a coalition is finally formed and approved by the Knesset, Netanyahu will find the time to remember that the State of Israel is at stake in all of these negotiations, including his upcoming discussions with B.H.O.
Speaking of President Obama’s Visit…
Last Thursday, President Obama met with American Jewish leaders and told them that even though prospects for Middle-East peace may not be strong right now, the only way for Israel to achieve long-term security is to make a deal with the “Palestinians”. Yet, along with this, Obama said that he does not plan to present a “grand peace plan” when he comes here on March 20th, adding that he could make such an effort in the “next six, nine or twelve months”.
The full contents of the two-hour meeting were not reported, but Obama did repeat to them his “unshakable support” for Israel and indicated that he wanted to speak directly to the Israeli public while he was here, hoping to gain our trust and urging us to work for peace with the “Palestinians”. Doesn’t there seem to be an imbalance here? Why are “we” being asked, again and again and again, to do that which we have been doing for the past umpteenth time, namely, work towards peace? Where is the reciprocity on the part of the “Palestinians”? The writer of Proverbs says that the leech has two daughters, “Give”, “Give” (Prov. 30:15). To that should be added a third daughter, “Palestinians” who say “Give us more”.
If his visit is to win the hearts and minds of Israelis, and not to necessarily convince our government of what kind of action should be taken vis-a-vis the “Palestinians” or Iran, he will need not only all the “charm” that he can muster, but he’ll have to talk with an understanding of Middle-East realities, which favor neither a “Palestinian” state in the heart of Israel, nor a nuclear Iran. He will have to address the chaos taking place in Syria and the potential movement of weapons of mass destruction from Syria to the Hizb’allah. If Obama really understood how things work here, he would seek to genuinely strengthen ties and relations with Israel. This would take the wind out of the sails of the “Palestinians” and many of our neighbors, who think that they can continue to demand and pressure Israel and the U.S. to cause Israel to commit national suicide by agreeing to the establishment of a “Palestinian” state in our midst. Any position short of a statement of absolute, unwavering support for Israel, would only serve to strengthen the resolve of the “Palestinians” to continue in their opposition to Israel and failure to recognize our existence. U.S. Vice-President, Joe Biden, made the point very clearly when he attended the AIPAC conference last week: “We’ve always disagreed at some point or another on tactic…But, ladies and gentlemen, we have never disagreed on the strategic imperative that Israel must be able to protect its own, must be able to do it on its own, and we must always stand with Israel to be sure that can happen…We especially understand that if we make a mistake, it’s not a threat to our existence…But if Israel makes a mistake, it could be a threat to its very existence.” May it be that President Obama will gain this understanding before he comes and that he, along with P.M. Netanyahu, will both affirm that whatever decisions will be made will be with a view to “the strategic imperative that Israel must be able to protect its own”.
Are you interested in being present when the President makes his speech here? Well, the U.S. Embassy in Tel-Aviv (not in Jerusalem) is holding a competition that will allow 20 people to be invited to the speech, even though it will be reported on the news and then appear over the Internet. The competition relates to “liking” the Facebook page of the embassy and explaining why the competitor should be selected to attend, along with a host of other guests. I shouldnwarn you though, if you win, you’ll have to pay your own way to Israel. So, if you’re still interested, here’s the site: www.facebook.com/U.S.EmbassyTelAvivIsrael

Embarrassment for the Presidential Entourage – Did Shimon Peres mean what he said?

At a meeting with Israeli reporters who accompanied President Shimon Peres on his trip to France, he was asked by a reporter from Channel one whether, in his opinion, the “peace process” should be renewed and construction should be frozen ahead of the upcoming visit of President Obama to Israel. His response was that in his opinion, “It should be done. This would considerably relieve Israel and improve its international standing. We need to strengthen our friendship with the U.S., but we’ll know what future steps she’ll take only after the [government] is set up.” 

Immediately following these remarks, the President’s Spokeswoman stopped the briefing and stated that the President did not understand the question and requested that the reporters ignore the answer, claiming that he heard and replied only to the first part of the question that related to renewing the “peace process”. Earlier during the briefing, Peres expressed hope that after the government is set up, Israel would return to the “peace process”. It is not clear whether the President misunderstood the reporter’s question, or whether it was a Presidential “blooper”. The President needs to refrain from talking about government policy and should not have been put in a position to answer a question concerning his opinion relating to that policy.
Israel is getting ready for Lebanon War III.
Not that we are looking for it, but the reality is that the civil war in Syria could spill over and trigger a confrontation with the Hizb’allah, whom Israel suspects is receiving advanced weapons from Damascus.
In recent days, 21 U.N. peacekeepers were abducted by Sunni rebels on the Syrian side of the Golan Heights. They were all released. But, tank and mortar shells from Syria have also landed in Israel and a written complaint was submitted by Israeli Ambassador, Ron Prosor, to the U.N. Security Council. In it, he warned that Israel “cannot be expected to stand idle as the lives of its citizens are being put at risk.”
Asked whether another war with the Hisb’allah would have consequences similar to the one that took place in 2006, one senior Israeli military officer said that he did not “in any way expect the casualty rate to be similar” and added “I want things to be as bad as possible for the other side and as good as possible for us.” Israel recognizes that the Hizb’allah has improved its capabilities over what existed in 2006, but, as one Lieutenant-Colonel here stated: “We train all the time for various possibilities, for scenarios. If we need to fight, be it tomorrow morning, or in another week or  year, we will be the best that we can be and we will win.” May we continue to train to “be the best we can be” and may God help us, so that we never have to prove it.
A nuclear Iran – the “most destabilizing event that we could imagine for the Middle East.”
In a candid admission before a U.S. Senate committee last week, Marine General James Mattis, the outgoing commander of U.S. troops in the Middle East and South Asia, said although he believes that Iran is trying to “buy time” through ongoing negotiations, it might still be possible that sanctions and other pressure could be applied to bring Tehran “to its senses”. He added that Tehran’s history was one of denial and deceit and that it was “enriching uranium beyond any plausible peaceful purpose.”
At one point, an interesting question and answer took place, as Mattis was asked straight out by Senator James Inhofe (Republican) whether he thought diplomatic efforts and economic sanctions were working to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon: “No sir”, was his reply, to which Inhofe stated, “Good”.
Mattis further stated that if Iran were allowed to develop a nuclear weapon, other countries in the region would probably follow suit, adding that he feared that a nuclear Iran would be the “most destabilizing event that we could imagine for the Middle East.” He predicted that a fall of the Assad regime would represent a major setback for its Iranian supporter and would prompt Iranian to arm militias in Syria, to “try to create a Lebanese-Hizb’allah-type effect.” He noted that the power base and geographic area of control of Syrian President, Bashir al-Assad, were eroding and that the U.S. was “quietly planning” with regional allies to undertake stabilizing operations, if needed, after the collapse of Assad’s regime.
The recent kidnapping of the U.N. peacekeeping force has brought the reality of the Syrian civil war home to Israel. Up until now, there were border skirmishes between Syrian regulars and the rebels and there were even “stray” bullets and mortar or tank shells that fell in Israeli territory. Recently, some seriously injured rebels (originally reported as civilians) sought refuge in Israel to receive much-needed medical treatment. But, on the whole, it had been something that took place “there” and the only ones who really dealt with the situation were our soldiers who were stationed on the Golan Heights and its vicinity. Now, the gravity and immediacy of the situation has hit home. The rebels have gained control over Syria’s borders with Jordan, Lebanon and Israel. Assad’s forces tend to be regrouping and focusing on retaining control over Damascus and the road leading from there to the Syrian coast, which is the region where most Alawite (a minority sect of Shiite Moslems, to which Assad belongs) Syrians live.
The problem facing Israel from the northeast is one of uncertainty. Assad was a known factor that we took into account. But now, there are no major players among the rebel forces; no central authority. Some belong to affiliates of al-Qaida. Others are simply armed militias and some are gangs looking for territorial control. Still others are Iranian soldiers, sent here to help Assad remain in power, or to try to establish a foothold in Syria, if his regime falls. Their presence in Syria is a fact and they were kept more or less from our border by the presence of the U.N. peacekeeping force, which acted as a buffer that keep the civil war from our fences. We need to adjust to a new reality, that has no ascertainable dimensions. As such, it is unstable, volatile and could erupt at any time, particularly as Assad’s regime and control diminishes. We should not rule out a desperate attempt on the part of Assad to go down in Arab history as the one who breathed his dying breath in an attempt to destroy Israel. He knows that his stockpile of weapons will be useless to him if his regime is overthrown, or worse, that it would fall into the hands of the rebels. So, a transfer of those weapons to the Hizb’allah (another Shiite ally) or use of them against Israel are two realistic probabilities.


U.S. rescinds International Woman of Courage Award to Egyptian Activist

The U.S. canceled its decision to give an Egyptian women’s rights activist the International Woman of Courage Award, after discovering her anti-American and anti-Semitic remarks on Twitter.


The recipient of the reward was reported to have said: “As time goes by I have discovered that no unethical action takes place without a Jewish touch.” Although she claimed that her Twitter account was “hacked”, she later wrote on Twitter in Arabic

: “I refuse to apologize to the Zionist lobby in America regarding my previous anti-Zionist statements under pressure from [the] American government therefore they withdrew the award.” Her latter comment could be understood as an admission that the earlier statements were hers.


Women proudly serve in the Israeli Defense Forces.
In “this man’s army”, women play a significant role. A full one-third of all Israelis serving in the military are women. They take their role seriously, as evidenced by the fact that 57% of all officers are women, who also constitute more than a quarter of all career officers. Some 92% of all army positions are available to them. I salute them!

“Music has charms to soothe the savage breast”, even those of U.N. members.
Israel and Iran are able to peacefully co-exist, not in the political realm, but in the person of Israeli pop singer, Rita. In the third-ever, full concert to take place at the United Nations General Assembly hall, Rita captured the attention and hearts of diplomats from around the world, as she gave an unprecedented and unforgettable concert of 10 songs, some of which were in Persian and some in Hebrew. Israeli Ambassador to the U.N., Ron Prosor, was the event’s organizer, that included distinguished attendees such as U.N. Secretary General, Ban Ki-Moon and General Assembly President, Vuk Jeremic.

Upon appearing on stage, the Israeli chanteuse introduced herself as an Israeli of Iranian origin. She also related a personal story how her mother influenced her musical career, adding that two years ago, she had an urge “to record the Persian songs that were the soundtrack of my life … the colorfulness of my roots … the warmth, the pain, the love, the hardship, the favorites, the aromas, the stories … But, I am actually celebrating being both Israeli and Iranian, a unique mixture that found expression in the most beautiful language: music.” And so there was for a time, peaceful co-existence.

And That was The Week That Was.

“O magnify the LORD with me and let us exalt His name together … O taste and see that the LORD is good; how blessed is the man who takes refuge in Him! … The eyes of the LORD are toward the righteous and His ears are [open] to their cry. The face of the LORD is against evildoers, to cut off the memory of them from the earth.” (Psalm 34:3, 8, 15-16)

Have a truly blessed week.

Marvin

Our enemies are up to their old tricks TWTW … ending 2 March, 2013

On By marvinskLeave a comment
Shalom all,

Our enemies were up to their old tricks last week and tried to see how we would respond to a rocket being fired on one of our populated cities. There was trouble for the not-so-friendly folks in Hizb’allah-land, as its leadership is facing difficulties staying alive. We still don’t have a coalition government and concern is growing over what the makeup of the government would be, if it is formed, and whether it will, in fact, be functioning by the time President Obama comes to visit. Germany is becoming more anti-Semitic and anti-Israel and Turkey’s Prime Minister doesn’t like Zionism. So, what else is new?

Rocket fired from Gaza at Askelon
Last Tuesday, an advanced Grad-type rocket was fired at Askhelon from the Rafah Area of the southern Gaza Strip. This type of rocket is capable of reaching up to 80 kilometers (50 miles). It was reported that this was the first time that a rocket has been fired at Israel since the end of “Operation Pillar of Defense” (in Hebrew: “Pillar of Cloud”) in November, 2012. In reality, however, there were a number of attempts to fire rockets into Israel since the end of that military operation, but, fortunately, all of the other rockets exploded inside of Gaza. The Al-Aqsa Brigades (the military wing of Fatah [P.L.O.]) claimed responsibility, claiming that the attack was in response to the alleged “assassination” of a “Palestinian” prisoner in an Israeli jail. Israeli authorities deny that the prisoner was killed and allege that he died of a heart attack. It is clear, however, that the firing of this rocket, or any rocket, from the Gaza Strip could only happen if Hamas gives its okay to such an action. The only real Israeli response came from President Shimon Peres, who in referring to the rocket attack, said “Israel has an interest in preserving the quiet, and so does Hamas.” Apparently, his perspective of what is in Hamas’ interest does not line up with Hamas’ perspective.

Nasrallah flown to Iran for treatment?
Following last weeks threat by Syrian rebels that they would attack Hizb’allah leader, Hassan Nasrallah, if he continued to assist the regime of Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad, the media was all abuzz earlier this week about a report from the Voice of Lebanon radio broadcast that claimed that Nasrallah, was was wounded by an attack from Syrian rebels, which required his being flown to Iran for treatment. A different report, coming from the Voice of Lebanon radio station and later, another one from the Turkish Anatolia News Agency, claimed that a malignant tumor in Nasrallah’s brain metastasized to the rest of his body and, after initially being hospitalized in Beirut, he was later secretly flow to Tehran for emergency medical treatment. Unfortunately, there was no official confirmation of either report from any other source.

But, by mid-week, Nasrallah appeared on Lebanese television on Wednesday and denied reports that his health was failing, stating: “The rumors that have been spread and their effect on the region prompted me to quickly arrange an appearance before you to talk about some of the issues at hand…I would like to stress that all of what has been said in the media regarding my health is false…[In] order to have our attackers learn their lesson, I decided to make a media appearance and to stress with my voice and image that all of what you have been hearing is patently false. If more rumors come out, I will appear again to debunk those rumors too.” At the same time, Nasrallah denied reports that his his deputy, Sheikh Naim Qassem, was seriously wounded when a convoy, with Syrian military officers and high-ranking Hizb’allah officials, was attacked by Syrian rebels. Although it was claimed that Nasrallah was speaking from Beirut, the actual location of the broadcast could not be validated. If, in fact, Qassem was severely injured, it could have considerable implications for the leadership of the Hizb’allah, as he was the one who was reported to take over for Nasrallah due to the alleged deterioration of the latter’s health.

Israel did not comment on the alleged poor health of Nasrallah, but pointed out that in the event that another war breaks out with the Hizb’allah, many Lebanese civilians could find themselves in harm’s way, inasmuch as the terrorist group is widely deployed in civilian population centers. This was not meant to be a by-the-way type of comment by Israel. Approximately two weeks ago, Nasrallah warned that if a war breaks out with Israel, the Hizb’allah had all of the weapons that it needed and would not have to import them from its  Syrian and Iranian allies. He also claimed that his terrorist organization had the capability to plunge Israel into darkness, threatening to fire missiles at Israel’s “ports, airports and power stations” and to blanket Israel with missiles “from Kiryat Shmona to Eilat”. It should be recalled that during the Second Lebanon War, which broke out in mid-July, 2006, some 4,000 missiles were fired into the north of Israel, causing approximately one-third of our population to seek shelter for five weeks. During that time, 121 Israeli soldiers were killed and about 1,200 Hizb’allah terrorists. Haifa suffered 12 civilian deaths, the largest of any other location in Israel.

Coalition capers
After some four weeks of official coalition talks, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu failed to put together a coalition government. As was expected, he met with President Shimon Peres on Saturday and received a 14-day extension to form a government. Netanyahu blamed political “boycotts” for his inability to form a coalition on time: “The main reason I have been unable to complete putting a coalition together until now is because of boycotts…A certain population with the State of Israel is being boycotted and that goes against my principles…I am doing everything in my power to unite the people [of Israel]. I think that as Jews we have suffered enough boycotts. We know that Israel is often boycotted in international forums and in such cases, we justifiably object.” He was, of course, alluding to the alliance between Naftali Bennett (Chairman of the Habayit Hayehudi party) and Yair Lapid (Chairman of the Yesh Atid party), which effectively forces Netanyahu to leave out the ultra-Orthodox parties, with whom he has had a long-standing partnership, even if they did not always see eye to eye. Lapid, whose heads the second largest party in the Knesset, with 19 seats, will not join a coalition government that includes the ultra-Orthodox. Bennett, whose party has 12 seats in the new Knesset, will not join the coalition without Lapid.

The political game-playing continues, with Netanyahu and Bennett hurling accusations at each other, directly or through spokespersons. The Prime Minister tried to appeal directly to Bennett’s constituency, pointing out, with substantial justification: “[When] Judea and Samaria settlement products are boycotted, we cry out, with good reason. If anyone should understand this, it should be the settlers in Judea and Samaria, who are subject to boycotts on a daily basis. Throughout our history, we have seen a lot of tragedy resulting from baseless hatred and civil strife.” He stressed that “the haredi [ultra-Orthodox] public is ready to accept [the] understandings” reached between Likud-Yisrael Beytenu and Tzippi Livni’s Hatnuah party on diplomatic and economic issues, as well as on shouldering the military obligation burden more equally. 

Responding favorably to Netanyahu’s request for an extension, President Peres that he was “pleased to hear that you [Netanyahu] believe that you can complete the task of assembling a coalition within two weeks…The state, in its current condition, needs a strong, organized, stable, elected government as quickly as possible, so that it can face security threats and grave social problems and bring all its people together as much as possible.”

Bennett’s response to Netanyahu was to the effect that Likud officials “boycotted” Bennett’s party, sending a message that it would not be included in the coalition. “We expected to be the first, most natural partner to enter Netanyahu’s coalition. Despite the boycott against us, we recommended to the president that he [Netanyahu] assemble the coalition, without imposing conditions. Just like we promised during the election. But the message coming from Likud was simple: Religious Zionism will not be in the coalition under any circumstances.” The reason purportedly given by the Likud representatives was that the diplomatic process (i.e., with the “Palestinians”) would not move forward with Bennett (who opposes any agreement that would give the “Palestinians” an independent state on Israeli land) in the coalition.

Where does this nonsense leave us? Netanyahu has until March 16th to present his coalition to the Speaker (or Acting Speaker) of the Knesset. In reality, however, if Netanyahu is pressed to wait until the last minute to inform that his government is ready to be sworn in, then the Speaker of the Knesset must convene the plenum (full body) of the Knesset within seven days, to vote on the new government. This would bring the matter to a vote by the 24th of March, the day before the Erev Passover (the evening when Passover starts), which is the 25th of March. This is usually a very busy time and it could be that the Knesset itself might decide to put off the vote on the coalition government until after Passover. 

So, with Bennett and Lapid forcing Netanyahu not to include the ultra-Orthodox, Netanyahu will have no choice but to start appealing to center and left parties, like Kadima (headed up by Shaul Mofaz, a former Army Chief of Staff) and Labor (headed up by Shelly Yachimovich), which will turn an intended right-wing government over to the political left, a scenario that would find favor only with those who seek to divide Israel and allow the establishment of a “Palestinian” state in the heart of the land.

Not to be left out of the picture is the appearance of U.S. President, Barack Hussein Obama, who is expected to arrive on our soil on the 20th of March. If Netanyahu manages to put together a coalition government bythe 9th of March, then the new government will need to be approved and sworn in by the 16th, only four days ahead of Obama’s arrival. That does not allow for a lot of time for a new coalition to work together and establish a clear understanding regarding government policy, either nationally or internationally. If, on the other hand, push comes to shove and everything is put off until the absolute last minute, then the possibility exists that Obama will arrive here, while we have a “lame duck government” in place, which is unable to make any firm commitments to Obama, placing him in a situation where, for reasons of practicality, he would consider putting off his visit until the new coalition government is approved. Otherwise, if he proposes that Israel agree to something that some of the coalition partners do not agree with, it could jeopardize the existence of the coalition, before it even gets off the ground.

If, for example, Bennett agrees to join the coalition at the very last minute, with or without Lapid, it could create a coalition crisis if, during Obama’s visit, discussion is held for the establishment of a “Palestinian” state and Israel is asked to commit herself to such an agreement. If Netanyahu brings in too many center and left parties and Bennett and Lapid join at the last minute, even if Bennett leaves, Netanyahu may be stuck with a coalition over which he has no control.

Of course, all of this is mere speculation and much will depend upon what happens with coalition negotiations in the coming days. Bennett needs to understand, if he doesn’t already, that he really has no choice but to join the government. His constituency expects it and will demand it of him. If he fails to join, either for personal animosity towards Netanyahu, or because he has shifted his alliance from national-religious right to centrist/left, it would be fair to conclude that his first term as Chairman of Habayit Hayehudi would also be his last. 

Still, there are the “red lines” of Bennett, one of which is that Tzippi Livni cannot serve as chief negotiator with the “Palestinians” and that she cannot serve as the Justice Minister. The first objection is clear, given the absolute refusal to agree to the establishment of a “Palestinian” state. The second is based on legitimate concerns of the national-religious right that Livni, who, as Justice Minister also would become the Chairwoman of the Ministerial Committee on Legislation, would use her position to prevent desired legislative action that would re-establish the national religious movement (religious Zionism) as a power to be reckoned with in Israel.

The nation is divided. Our leaders have become blinded by their own ambitions. There are threats from within and threats from without. Political positions change along with the way that the wind is blowing. There is only One authority for what should take place in Israel, but He is being ignored. He is the Lord God of all creation, the Holy One of Israel, Who does not change. He has chosen Israel and kept her and promises blessing for her and through her. Yet, the type of ruler whom the Lord seeks for Israel is “a man after His own heart” (1 Sam 13:14; 16:7). None of the present “players” seems to fit the bill and we are left to reap the consequences of the games played by power-hungry politicians, who sacrifice the good of the people for the sake of their own ambitions. We have a little more than a week and a half for Netanyahu to form his coalition government. We might still be surprised.

“Our enemies are uniting against us and we must come together.”
Prime Minister Netanyahu was briefed over the week-end of the meeting that took place in Almaty, Kazakhstan between Iran and the P5+1 countries over Iran’s nuclear ambitions. His response was simple and direct: “My impression from these talks is that the only thing that was achieved was to stall for time during which Iran intends to continue enriching nuclear material for an atomic bomb, and it is indeed continuing toward this goal…I must say that at this time our enemies are uniting to gather not only atomic weapons that could be used against us, but other deadly weapons that are piling up around us. At a time when they are coming together and uniting their efforts, we must come together and unite our forces in order to repel these dangers…I regret that this is not happening. I will continue my efforts tin coming days to try to unite our forces and bring them together ahead of the major national and international tasks that we face. I hope that I will succeed. I will continue to try.”

In line with the no-results meeting in Almaty last week, a bipartisan group of U.S. Senators introduced a resolution stating that if Israel would be “compelled to take military action in self defense, the United States government should stand with Israel and provide diplomatic, military and economic support to the government of Israel in its defense of its territory, people and existence.” But, Senator Lindsey Graham (Rep. S.C.) stated at a news conference: “This is not a green light to Israel to do anything other than defend itself…We will be there.” Those who proposed the resolution hope that it will pass before President Obama’s visit to Israel. What is not stated is a definition of “self-defense”. Do we need to wait until Iran fires a nuclear missile in our direction before the U.S. “will be there”?

We need to understand that the religious zealots who rule Iran are ambitious and ruthless. But, they are not stupid. They recognize strength, but like most predators, also sense or smell weakness. Up to this point, economic sanctions have hurt only the Iranian people, but have not affected the leadership. If economic sanctions are stepped up significantly and are coupled with a realistic threat of the use of military force, Iran may take a step backward and a door might open for full inspection and even a diplomatic solution. But, talk is cheap and the more that talk is unaccompanied by action, the less credible all the efforts of the civilized nations become in the eyes of Iran, who continues to laugh her way towards enriching uranium.

President Obama’s trip to Israel – What’s on his agenda?
Can there be any doubt that U.S. President Barack Hussein Obama and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry intend to push Israel to the limit, in an effort to force an Israeli-“Palestinian” peace deal? If some doubt still lingers, consider the statement made by British Foreign Secretary William Hague last week, after meeting with Kerry, that “there is no more urgent foreign policy priority in 2013 than restarting negotiations between Israelis and ‘Palestinians’.” If Obama is coming here just to “listen” and become a bit wiser in his understanding of Middle East realities, then how in the world did William Hague come up with his statement?

There should be no doubt that such an approach would be counter-productive and, in any event, if doomed to failure, just like the multitude of prior efforts to force Israel into making a really bad deal. It often seems that international politicos talk with each other – or to one another – without having the slightest idea about the realities on the ground. “The concept of “Palestinian” statehood is nothing but a punitive construct devised by our worst enemies –  the United States and Israel – to constrain “Palestinian” aspirations and territorial ambitions”. So said Professor Ahmad Khalidi, a prominent “Palestinian” advisor. Or, as stated by another “Palestinian” negotiator told a Diaspora Jewish group a few weeks ago, “We ‘Palestinians’ will not, i repeat NOT with capital letters, ever recognize Israel as a Jewish state, because this is meant by Israel to block the ‘Palestinian’ right of return to Jaffa, Haifa and Ein Karem.” If the politicos were paying attention, they would have understood that these statements simply repeat the same “Palestinian” position that caused them to refuse the overly-generous offers of former Israeli Prime Ministers, even up to 97% of the territory captured in 1967. In the light of such intransigent positions, why would our “friend” from across the Big Muddy want to push a peace deal though? It is clear from the outset that such efforts are ultimately doomed to failure, even if they bring about a temporary agreement, which will never hold. But, pride puffs up and power, particularly when it is abused, generates antagonism by the one being forced to do something against his will. It would not be a “change that either the ‘Palestinians’ or we could live with”

Turkish P.M. declared Zionism “as a crime against humanity”.
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the Prime Minister of Turkey, during his speech at a U.N. summit on tolerance, held in Vienna last Wednesday, stated: “Just like Zionism, anti-Semitism and fascism, it becomes unavoidable that Islamophobia must be regarded as a crime against humanity”. His statement was reminiscent of the U.N.’s Resolution 3379, adopted in 1975, which was repealed in 1991, by U.N. General Assembly Resolution 4686, which equated Zionism with racism. 
The U.N.Watch, a non-governmental monitoring organization, criticized Erdoğan’s comments and urged the members present at the summit “to denounce remarks that fundamentally contradict the very purpose of a forum supposedly dedicated to mutual tolerance…Erdoğan’s misuse of this global podium to incite hatred, and his resort to Ahmadinejad-style pronouncements appealing to the lowest common denominator in the Muslim world, will only strengthen the belief that his government is hewing to a confrontational stance, and fundamentally unwilling to end its four-year-old feud with Israel”. 

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon condemned Erdoğan’s statements, saying they were “hurtful and divisive,” and that such comments risk deepening Turkey’s rift with Israel. The Secretary-General’s spokesman said, “The secretary-general believes is it is unfortunate that such hurtful and divisive comments were uttered at a meeting being held under the theme of responsible leadership.”

A statement from Netanyahu’s office said he “strongly condemns (Erdoğan’s) statement about Zionism and its comparison to Nazism.”This is a dark and false pronouncement the likes of which we thought had passed into history.”

The Zionist movement was the moving, human factor that stirred the establishment of the State of Israel. Apparently, Erdoğan and almost everyone else present at the U.N. summit on “tolerance”, overlooked the fact that God is a Zionist (Psalm 9:11; 48:2 and others).
Anti-Semitism growing in Germany
After the Holocaust, all of the governments of German upheld their obligations and responsibilities to the Jewish people. Study of the Holocaust is mandatory in the German educational system and Holocaust denial is classified as a crime under German law.

But, in recent years, there has been a growing resentment in Germany against the Jewish people, who are accused of placing over-emphasis on collective German national guilt for the Holocaust.
The German “left”, which tends to “demonize” the Jewish state, is helped along by the sizable Islamic community in Germany, which now numbers over 4 million, which aggressively agitates against Israel and the Jews, who are being urged by some Jewish community leaders not to even wear kippot (Jewish skull caps) in public.

On the positive side, there is an abundance of pro-Israeli supporters in Germany, who occupy positions in all areas of German life. But, given the current tone of anti-Jewish and anti-Israeli sentiment, there is legitimate concern for the future of Jews in Germany. And, after the conclusion of Angela Merkel’s present term as Chancellor, the likelihood is that the situation will become even worse.

As noted, many in the German “left” believe that there is an over-emphasis of collective German guilt for the Holocaust. As the argument goes, not everyone was aware of what was going on. However, an article that just appeared in the New York Times Sunday Review refers to research that was done to “documenting all the ghettos, slave labor sites, concentration camps and killing factories that the Nazis set up throughout Europe.” The findings go far beyond what even the “experts” in Holocaust history could imagine. 

About 42,500 Nazi ghettos and camps were located throughout Europe during the time of Hitler’s reign of terror from 1933 to 1945, including “30,000 slave labor camps; 1,150 Jewish ghettos; 980 concentration camps; 1,000 prisoner-of-war camps; 500 brothels filled with sex slaves; and thousands of other camps used for euthanizing the elderly and infirm, performing forced abortions, “Germanizing” prisoners or transporting victims to killing centers. In Berlin alone, researchers have documented some 3,000 camps and so-called Jew houses, while Hamburg held 1,300 sites.” According to the article, one of the researchers said that although many Germans claimed ignorance after the war, the findings of the research reveal that they “must have known about the widespread existence of the Nazi camps at the time…You literally could not go anywhere in Germany without running into forced labor camps, P.O.W. camps, concentration camps,” he said. “They were everywhere.” The link to the NY Times article is: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/03/sunday-review/the-holocaust-just-got-more-shocking.html
Optimism or Pessimism – a psychological view
The American Psychological Association came out with a new study, according to which pessimists enjoy greater longevity that optimists. Normally, I would not include such a study in TWTW, but such a finding could end up being a bit of good news for the Jews. History has shown us that, like Tevya from the movie A Fiddler on the Roof, we have asked God on more than one occasion, “Couldn’t you choose someone else for a while?” Maybe it’s part of our DNA to fret and to worry about this, that and the other thing. And we have good reason to do so. Given the events that have surrounded our existence, we are always looking over our shoulder to see if someone is trying to sneak up behind us. And, having made it to this point, we are a constant reminder to the world that God performed and continues to perform miracles and that He has kept us alive to fulfill His promises concerning us as a people. We will continue to exist, despite attempts by nations and rulers to eliminate us, because God is faithful to His Word. (see Jer. 31:35-37) 
I won’t get into the details of the study, other than to point out the conclusion, that those who are pessimistic about the future tend to be more careful about health and safety matters, whereas those who see the glass as “half full” tend to be somewhat less careful and experience greater degrees of disappointment when things don’t work out as expected. Of course, there are a lot of variables that make up the equation and the study’s findings should not be considered as being etched in stone. In any event, we are encouraged not to fret, being assured that in a little while “the wicked man will be no more”. (Psalm 37:1, 7, 10)
Still, as a whole, we all too often tend to look at our difficult past and project it into the future. So, if we experience a blessing of sorts, we begin to anticipate that it won’t last too long, before someone or something will try to rob us of it. For example, if we’re told that it will be a beautiful day today, we will joyfully, but pessimistically, say “I’m afraid you’re right.” But, with all our pessimistic fretting, God has given us an attitude of unbeatable optimism. So, we can look at difficult circumstances and say, “We were able to make it past Pharaoh, we’ll get through this, as well.” 
And That was The Week That Was.
“For Zion’s sake I will not keep silent and for Jerusalem’s sake, I will not keep quiet, until her righteousness goes forth like brightness and her salvation like a torch that is burning.” (Isaiah 62:1)
“On your walls, O Jerusalem, I have appointed watchmen; all day and all night they will never keep silent. You who remind The Lord, take no rest for yourselves; and give Him no rest until He establishes and makes Jerusalem a praise in the earth.” (Isaiah 62:6-7)
Have a truly blessed week. Keep looking up and don’t let the devil get you down.
Marvin

The Scroll of Esther – The Presence of Him Who is Invisible – TWTW … ending 23 February, 2013

On By marvinskLeave a comment
Shalom all,

This was an appropriate week to celebrate the Feast of Purim. The children, and many adults, wore costumes, in keeping with a tradition that is not of Jewish origin, yet which has become part of our yearly celebration. In similar manner, members of the government continue to wear their masks and costumes, to give the appearance of being what they are not and to cover up the reality of who they are and the games they are playing. 

The Scroll of Esther – The Presence of Him Who is Invisible

Some stories, like true vintage wine, become better with age. One of them is the story of the exodus of the children of Israel from Egypt. We are commanded to tell the story from generation to generation. It reveals the presence of God, His might, His power and His holiness and ability to save the people whom He has chosen (Deut. 7:7-8). These attributes of God are also present, and He remains mighty to save, even when He is not in the forefront of the action, but in the background and even when He is not referred to or mentioned by name. This is the situation in the Scroll of Esther (Megillat Esther).

We know the story and is a great one. It is a story of absence – absence from the country where the sons of Jacob were to shine, to prosper, to worship God in the majesty of His holiness, to be blessed and to be a blessing. It is a story of the absence of a national leadership amongst the captives from Judea and Samaria who were taken first to Babylon during the reign of King Nebuchadnezzar, some of whom were later brought to Persia (modern-day Iran) and who were living during the reign of King Ahashverush (Ahasuerus). It is a story where the absence of God in the lives of the captives stands out by the failure to refer to Him. It is a story that serves as the background for the complaint of the people, as revealed in the explanation of the vision of the dry bones in Ezekiel, namely, an absence of hope: “Then He said to me, ‘Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel; behold, they say, “Our bones are dried up and our hope has perished. We are completely cut off”.'” (Ezekiel. 37:11) 

This comment is being written on the 13th day of the Hebrew month of Adar, the day “when the king’s command and edict were about to be executed, on the day when the enemies of the Jews hoped to gain the mastery over them, it was turned to the contrary so that the Jews themselves gained the mastery over those who hated them”. (Esther 9:1)

We look at the story with the benefit of hindsight. It is written for us and we can see how the pieces that seem disjointed all fit together and reveal the Hand of God and His unseen presence among His people, during one of the lowest times in the history of the nation of Israel. The major players are Mordechai, his niece Hadassah (whose name in exile was changed to Esther), King Ahashverush, who ruled over 127 provinces from India to Ethiopia and Haman, to whom the king gave exceedingly great authority. The king commanded that all of his servants, who were at the king’s gate, were to bow down and pay homage to Haman. But, Mordechai did neither.

From a political perspective, we see a “situation developing”. One man, who was at the king’s gate (i.e., was part of those who were close to the seat of power and who were able to come in and go out of the court without a special permit), defied the command of the king and would not bow down. It is recorded for us that Mordechai was living in the citadel of Susa. He was a descendant of Kish, who was a Benjamite and part of the upper class families who were taken captive and exiled along with King Jeconiah of Judah. (Esther 1:5-6) Another famous descendant of Kish was Saul, Israel’s first king, who disobeyed the Lord’s instructions given through Samuel the prophet, to strike and totally destroy Amalek. King Saul defeated the Amalekites, but allowed their king, Agag, to live – an act of disobedience that resulted in the Lord rejecting Saul from being king. Ultimately, the prophet Samuel killed Agag.

But, Haman is said to be “the son of Hammedatha the Agagite”. So, the consequences of Saul’s disobedience had future consequences for the nation of Israel. The descendants of Agag came to distant lands and some of them, like Haman, ended up in the service of the king of Persia. And so, once again, a descendant of Kish meets up with a powerful Amalekite.

However, not only is Mordechai a descendant of Kish, he is also a Benjamite. Benjamin was the last son of Jacob. He was born after Jacob’s name was changed to Israel, after Jacob crossed the Jabbok and after he and all of his household bowed down before Esau. (Gen. 32-33, 35:16-18) Therefore, Benjamin, who was the only son of Jacob who was born in the land of Israel, did not bow down before Esau. And, his descendant, Mordechai, stood his ground, as well, and did not bow down before Haman. When questioned by the king’s servants why he refused to bow, his answer was that “he was a Jew”. (Esther 3:5) The refusal of Mordechai to bow down before Haman “filled him with rage”. When he was told “who the people of Mordechai were … Haman sought to destroy all the Jews, the people of Mordechai, who were throughout the whole kingdom of Ahashverush (Ahasuerus)”. (Esther 3:5-6) Lots (Purim) were cast to determine the day that this would take place. 

Haman’s understanding went beyond the simple fact that there are a people under the king’s rule who have a different religion. The issue was not the existence of a different religious belief, which could be tolerated, but rather, the Jewish people, whose existence would not be tolerated by the descendant of Agag, the Amalekite. After all, only Mordechai refused to bow down, but the entire nation would suffer the consequences of his act of defiance.

The rest of the story continues, with Haman convincing the king to issue an edict that the Jewish people be destroyed. Haman was even willing to pay money into the king’s treasury if the king would agree to his request. Mordechai publicly demonstrated against the king’s edict and enlisted his niece, Hadassah (i.e., Esther, after whom the Scroll is named) to appeal to the king. Esther had been chosen to replace the deposed Queen Vashti, when the latter refused to appear before the king and his drunken friends, who had been partying for seven days. Esther explained to Mordechai that her life would be endangered if she came into the presence of the king without being summoned. Mordechai wisely explained the situation in a clear and unequivocal manner: “Do not imagine that you in the king’s palace can escape any more than all the Jews. For if you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance will arise for the Jews from another place and you and your father’s house will perish. And who knows whether you have not attained royalty for such a time as this?” (Esther 4:13-14) Things don’t get much clearer than that. Esther understood the gravity of the situation and that it was not her life only that was at risk, but those of the Jewish people who were under the rule and reign and authority of the king – her husband.

She requested that all of the Jews in Susa fast (and impliedly, pray) for her and not eat or drink for three days. She and her maidens would do the same and afterwards, she would go to the king, contrary to law, and, as she said: “If I perish, I perish” (Esther 4:16) And she and they did so and on the third day, the fate of Esther and the Jewish people was decided. The sentence of death had already been passed. Now, would the sentence of death be carried out, or will there be life? The golden scepter was extended to her and with it, life for her and eventually, life for the Jewish people. She chose the manner of presenting her petition to the king and the timing of it. In the meantime, the king had a bout with insomnia and had the chronicles of the kingdom read to him. It was then that he learned that Mordechai discovered and informed about a plot to kill the king, who now decided to publicly honor and reward him by dressing him in royal garments and having him paraded through the city square on a horse, on which the king had ridden. Haman was appointed to do this for Mordechai and to proclaim before all the people “Thus it shall be done to the man whom the king desire to honor.” (Esther 6:10-11) This further enraged Haman.

When Esther revealed to the king what Haman had done, the king issued another edict that allowed the Jews to defend themselves, inasmuch as by law, he could not cancel his own decree. Haman was the recipient of the king’s wrath, as he and his ten sons were hanged on the gallows and what had been meant for evil was turned around for good. (Esther chpt. 9) Mordechai recorded the events and sent letters to all the Jews in all the provinces under the authority and rule of King Ahasverush (Ahasuerus), obliging them to annually celebrate the 14th and 15th days of the Hebrew month of Adar, “because on those days the Jews rid themselves of their enemies and it was a month which was turned for them from sorrow into gladness and from mourning into a holiday … for Haman the son of Hammedatha, the Agagite, the adversary of all the Jews, had schemed against the Jews to destroy them and had cast Pur, that is the lot, to disturb them and destroy them…Therefore they called these days Purim after the name Pur…So these days were to be remembered and celebrated throughout every generation, every family, every province and every city; and these days of Purim were not to fail from among the Jews, or their memory fade from their descendants…The command of Esther established these customs for Purim and it was written in the book” (Esther 9:20-32)

At the end of the story, Mordehai was exalted to a position of power and authority, second only to the king himself. He was “great among the Jews and in favor with his many kinsmen, one who sought the good of his people and one who spoke for the welfare of his whole nation.” (Esther 10:3)

There is much that this story reveals and many aspects of it have significant, and indeed, eternal ramifications and applications for those within the Messianic community, as well as for the whole world. We see how the Hand of God was moving behind the scene, using the drunken feast of the king to embarrass the then queen, who was removed because of her disobedience to the command of the king (by the way, there was significant reason for that refusal); the choosing of Esther to replace her; the positioning of Mordechai as one who was at the king’s gate and his overhearing the plot to kill the king; his being of the descendants of the tribe of Benjamin; his refusal to bow before Haman the Agagite; the unsuccessful attempt to destroy the Jewish people and Mordechai’s being exalted with power and authority, second only to the king himself.

Our God reigns! “The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the LORD.” (Prov. 16:33) What the enemy of our souls meant for bad, God used for good. 

Israel sorely needs men like Mordechai today. He was the godly remnant amongst a people who believed that God had forsaken them. He represented the hope of a national restoration, when there had not yet been any experience with exile. Living outside the land, away from the Temple service, away from the place where God commanded the blessing, was all that the people knew. Yet, one man stood in the gap. He said “no”. He would not bow down to man and certainly not to a descent of those who sought to destroy the Jewish people. Today, we see and experience that once again, the nations conspire together against God and against His people, saying, “Come, and let us wipe them out as a nation that the name of Israel be remembered no more” (Psalm 83:4). Who knows whether we are alive for just such a time as this! We need to pray that God would raise up His Mordechais, those who are not willing to bow before the Obamas, the Ahmedinijads and the Nasrallahs of this world and the rulers of the United Nations and European Union. We need people to proclaim who they are and, by extension, who we are as we face the plans and pursuits of nations to divide this land and scatter God’s people. God doesn’t change. He remains the same yesterday, today and forever! A little faith can move mountains. “When a man’s ways are pleasing to the LORD, He makes even his enemies to be at peace with him.” (Proverbs 16:7)

With the thoughts of God’s sovereignty in mind, let’s take a look at what else happened this past week.

Threats of a Nuclear Iran
Nothing seems to faze Iran’s determination to develop nuclear capability. A report of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) indicates that Iran remains on its course and further, that it started to install advanced centrifuges in its main uranium enrichment plant in Natanz. The report was circulated last Thursday to the 35-national board and was then leaked to the press. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that “this is a very serious report, which proves that Iran is continuing to advance rapidly toward the red line I drew [referring to a speech he made at the U.N. General Assembly last September, during which he displayed a picture of a bomb with a fuse, on which he drew a red line, which indicated the final stage of the preparation of a nuclear bomb]…Iran is closer than ever to obtaining enough enriched material for a nuclear bomb.” The start of the upgrade is a concern to the six world powers who are preparing to meet with Iran this coming Tuesday in Kazakhstan to resume “talks” about its nuclear program. Given their lack of seriousness during the various rounds of “negotiations” held in 2012, we see that Tehran is making a mockery of the world’s efforts to curtail its nuclear ambitions. Its model is North Korea, who has ignored the condemnation of the world and has tested three nuclear weapons in the last seven years – and has survived. Iran is trying to follow suit.  Against this, God said: “No weapon that is formed against you shall prosper.” (Isaiah 54:17)

Coalition capers
In last week’s TWTW, I cautioned that “Time is beginning to press on Netanyahu and, in order to form a coalition government within the period allowed by law, he may end up having to make concessions for government posts and potential legislation that will come back to haunt him … and the nation. Woe to us if politicians are assigned to positions of major responsibility for which they are not suited.” The following day, it was reported that Tzippi Livni, whose left-wing party “Hatnuah” received only six seats in the 19th Knesset, was the first to join the coalition. She was given the post of Justice Minister AND received authority to conduct diplomatic negotiations on behalf of the Prime Minister. At a joint press conference held with Livni, the Prime Minister stated, among other things: “the country is facing enormous challenges, some of which are unprecedented…The threats from Iran, Syria and Hizb’allah do not stop for a moment. To address these threats, we need a broad and stable government that unites the people.” Then he added the following: “We must make every effort to advance a responsible peace process with the ‘Palestinians’.”

Not surprisingly, both Netanyahu and Livni came under fire from their respective party members and constituencies, who believe that both betrayed those who supported and voted for them. Livni pointed out what she considered to be the achievement in the coalition agreement: “Into my hands were placed the responsibilities to be the negotiator for Israel on the basis of two states and I am also proud to be the next Justice Minister to keep a Jewish and democratic Israel.”

An aide to Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), the President of the “Palestinian” Authority, called Livni’s appointment and authority to conduct diplomatic negotiations as a “positive sign”. If our enemies think something is good for them, it cannot be good for us. Livni served as foreign minister under Ehud Olmert, who offered to divide Jerusalem. She is an outspoken proponent of evacuating settlements in order to bring about a peace deal with the “Palestinians”. Netanyahu is opposed to both actions. So, the question of the day is whether either or both of these politicians has had a change of view.

Habayit Hayehudi, headed by Nafali Bennett’s, quickly got on Netanyahu’s case, saying “[In] contrast to pre-election promises, Netanyahu is not establishing a government based on the nationalist camp. The agreement with Livni, who led the disengagement process [from the Gaza Strip], will make it tough for us to join the coalition.”Indeed, bringing Livni into the government is the height of political cynicism and a perversion of the will of the voters who cast their lot, and the fate of the nation (from a human point of view), into the hands of Netanyahu.

Likud-Beytenu officials were quick to point out that Bennett was given the opportunity to be the first to sign a coalition deal, “but he missed it.”
There is no question that campaign promises have been broken and that Netanyahu has compromised on personal and national priorities, from the point of view of the Likud. Prior to the elections, Netanyahu made it as clear as clear could be that irrespective of the results of the elections, Livni would not be in charge of the peace process. She, for her part, has consistently attacked Netanyahu’s foreign policy. Both have turned a hundred and eighty degrees, which spells big trouble for Netanyahu to form and to maintain a coalition. This could lead to his notifying President Peres of his failure to form a government. This will affect Naftali Bennett more than Yair Lapid (Yesh Atid), who may end up losing votes if another election needs to be held.
In the spirit of Purim, one of the papers here ran a caricature of Netanyahu holding a Scroll of Esther, version of 5773 (2013), wherein Yair Lapid and Naftali Bennett are both dressed up as as queens to Netanyahu, who is dressed up as king. He is saying that he called Vashti and she refused to come. He called Esther and she refused to come. So he asks the question: “What is going on here?” Politics! 
Bennett has indicated that he will not join the coalition without Lapid. With everyone turning their backs on campaign promises, will Bennett agree to abandon his pact with Lapid and join the government? Netanyahu knows that he needs either Bennett or Lapid to form a coalition. Bennett is by far the better choice to keep a semblance of a nationalist government. As a result, Netanyahu said this past Friday that he is determined “to do all it takes” to get Bennett to join the coalition. So, the two parties are talking to each other again. And, as expected, both expressed a desire to put their past differences behind them and move on. But, negotiators for Habayit Hayehudi said that they would insist on removing Livni as chief negotiator with the “Palestinians”: “Defining Livni as the top diplomat when it comes to the peace process is not something we can live with.” So, some red lines are already being drawn by Bennett for joining the coalition. It is doubtful that Likud-Beytenu would be able to acquiesce to this demand, without renegotiating with Tzippi Livni. if the latter were to happen, there would be no reason to think that Netanyahu’s party would not reneg on future agreements as well. Pressure is mounting on Bennett from within his own ranks to get him to break the unnatural alliance with Lapid. Time is starting to run out. He needs to quickly decide whether he will join, or run the risk of new elections with a dissatisfied electorate. We should have a good idea in which direction we’re heading by the end of this week.
The Hizb’allah – time to call it by its name
During his speech at a ceremony commemorating the 93rd anniversary of the death of Joseph Trumpeldor (a Zionist pioneer who was killed defending the Tel Hai settlement outpost in 1920), President Shimon Peres demanded that the European Union include the Hizb’allah on its list of terrorist organizations. His words were to the effect saying it the way it is: “A short distance from here a terrible tragedy is taking place. In Syria, the president is shooting his own people and [Hizb’allah leader, Hassan] Nasrallah, who drapes himself in religious robes, is pushing Lebanon toward a bloody conflict, even though it has no enemy [in Israel]. The time has come to call the Hizb’allah  by its name – a murderous terrorist organization.”
Israel’s Homefront Defense Minister, Avi Dichter, said last week that adding the Hizb’allah to the EU terrorist list would interrupt the organization’s financing, adding “Europe, that’s the real base of Hizb’allah. If they aren’t able to gather money or raise finances in Europe, they are going to be in trouble.” So, who do we know in Europe who can cut off these funds?
There’s an old saying in this neck of the woods: “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” We’ll, it sounds good in theory, but not always in practice. In our neighborhood, we have several enemies and two of them are at odds with one another. Unfortunately, it is not because one of them wants to become friendly with us. The Syrian rebels, who are essentially Sunni Moslems and who are opposing the regime of Bashir al-Assad, who is an Alawaite, a minority faction of Shiite Moslem, threatened to attack Hizb’allah leader Nasrallah, also a Shiite, if he continues to support Syrian President Assad. The rebels referred to Nasrallah as a criminal and said that his era is almost over, adding: “Anyone who dares to attack our people and our land will pay a hefty price.” May the words come quickly to pass. I wonder how Nasrallah feels, knowing that his own cousins hate his guts.
I’ll leave you this week with an oft-quoted expression that defines a Jewish holiday: “They tried to kill us. They didn’t succeed. Let’s eat!”
And That was The Week That Was.
“Thus says the LORD of hosts, ‘I am exceedingly jealous for Zion, yes, with great wrath I am jealous for her.’ Thus says the LORD, ‘I will return to Zion and will dwell in the midst of Jerusalem. Then Jerusalem will be called the City of Truth, and the mountain of the LORD of hosts will be called the Holy Mountain.” (Zechariah 8:2-3)
Have a blessed week.
Marvin

Coalition politics get into gear, but don’t move – TWTW … ending 16 February, 2013

On By marvinskLeave a comment
Shalom all,
Well, I had a third computer crash in 14 months. Not a pleasant experience.  But, this time, I had everything backed up and am able to transfer the info to another machine. Someone suggested that I was “targeted”. That is possible, but I would not want to think along those lines. The absence of a computer makes writing The Week That Was a bit more difficult, as my fingers often hit more than one key on this iPad and words gets jumbled. Still, I’m getting used to it, at least until I can manage to get a new computer. Oy, such problems!
I also had a follow-up visit today with the surgeon who gave me two new hips. He said my x-rays came out the way he likes to see them. I was encouraged. But, he said I need intensive physiotherapy to increase the flexibility and range of motion of my left leg. Something to pray about.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had his own problems this week, as he continued his efforts  to form a coalition government. There was internal and international inquiries into the suspicious death of a Jewish prisoner in Israel, who held dual citizenship. The “window” for the “peace process” is said to be closing. North Korea and Iran friendship is an Israeli concern. And, among other things, the Pope announced his resignation. As usual, it’s been an interesting week.
Coalition politics get into gear, but don’t move.
There were lots of meetings and discussions last week, but no party has, as yet, agreed to join a coalition government headed up Netanyahu’s Likud-Israel Beiteinu party. While many believe that Yair Lapid is the fish to catch, in reality, Naftali Bennett is the one that both secular and religious factions are trying to woo.

Netanyahu (BN) met with Bennett (NB) this week, but the latter, the chairman of HaBayit Hayehudi party, doesn’t trust BN and turned down his offer of the position of Education Minister – a respected, senior position in the government that has not been held by a National Religious party member for the past 15 years. This caused Bennett to have to deal with 3 separate fronts this week, one vis-a-vis Netanyahu and the offer to join the coalition, one vis-a-vis Yair Lapid (Chairman of the Yesh Atid [There is a Future] party), who was concerned that Bennett would break the relationship between the two parties and join the coalition, and finally, vis-a-vis members of his own party, who wanted a credible answer why he turned down the offer for the Education Ministry.

He answered the members of his party by saying that BN’s coalition offer was “not serious, nothing more than political spin” (because it was made through the media and not to Bennett directly), adding that Netanyahu’s offer was intended to bring about a dissolution of the (informal) partnership between Bennett and Lapid and then later send him packing without any position in the government, after Lapid would agree to join the coalition – a sort of divide and conquer situation. But, Bennett’s claim lacks credibility. It really doesn’t make any sense that Netanyahu would sign a coalition deal with Bennett (that would then be submitted as law to the Knesset) and that BN would then turn around and blatantly violate the agreement and hang NB out to dry. But, Bennett’s explanation found acceptance, at least for now, as most of his party members trust him and believe that he knows what he’s doing. Be that as it may, the fact remains that BN was willing to give NB first pick among ministerial positions, if he would be the first to sign a coalition deal.

Recognizing that national political objectives must take precedence over personal disagreements, Netanyahu extended the offer to Bennett to be the first to enter the coalition, despite their previous disagreements. Still, Netanyahu makes no effort to hide his antagonism towards Bennett who, interestingly, served as Netanyahu’s bureau chief until 2008, when their personal issues caused them to go their separate ways. So what was it that generated such antagonism between the two of them?

When Netanyahu was the leader of the opposition (against the Kadima party), Bennett worked for him. Netanyahu noticed that certain documents were disappearing from the office, some of which were “leaked” to the media. One of them purportedly related to an event where Bennett said to Sara Netanyahu (Bibi’s wife) that he worked only for her husband, not for her. Although this “report” was unconfirmed, it was believed that this was what caused the rift between the two men, which prompted Netanyahu to urge Bennett to quit, which he did. Following Bennett’s resignation, there were other issues that surfaced, including monetary issues between them, none of which were illegal, but which somehow found they way to the media, as well. In order to balance the situation, it should be clarified that Bennett never removed documents or leaked them to the media and he took a lie-detector test to prove it.
Since leaving his position as Netanyahu’s bureau chief, Bennett has repeatedly criticized both Bibi and Sara and during the latest election campaign, he remarked that he (Bennett) and Sara attended a “terrorism course” together, a remark for which he later apologized. Bennett walks a thin line, being careful not to insult the P.M., whom his constituency supports as the clear choice as P.M. But, Sara is an easier and a more convenient target.
Still, notwithstanding that they trust their Chairman, there are some within Bennett’s own party who are starting to question whether the interests of HaBayit HaYehudi (i.e., religious Zionism) are paramount in Bennett’s mind, or whether he is slowly shifting to assert the interests of Yesh Atid. This is not without cause. Even in his opening speech to the Knesset, Bennett focused on issues such as equal participation in the draft (similar to the top priority issue of Lapid), while totally leaving out terms like “Judea and Samaria” or the “settlements”, notwithstanding that these are central to his party’s agenda and keeping in mind that he, himself, formerly headed the Yesha (an acronym in Hebrew that stands for Judea, Shomron and Aza [Gaza]) settler council.
All of the foregoing leads to the question whether Netanyahu will be able to sever the apparent union between Bennett and Lapid. Without at least one of them, Netanyahu will not be able to form a coalition government. But, as of this writing, it does not appear that Bennett will sign a coalition agreement without Lapid and Lapid, for his part, won’t join the coalition if the haredi (orthodox) parties are part of it. Neyanyahu cannot rely on Lapid’s loyalty, as the latter has already stated  he intended to replace Netanyahu within a year and a half. So, he needs the Haredi parties as a buffer to maintain his coalition, if he manages to form it and if Lapid decides to bolt later on. 
The ultra orthodox, for their part, have been in touch with HaBayit HaYehudi, as an attempt to patch up the relationship between their respective parties. The national Zionism rabbis are being given not only recognition (which the orthodox refused to give them in the past), but also honor. These are clearly political moves in an effort to get Bennett to join a coalition with the Haredi parties, but without Lapid. In a short while, we’ll know whether the rabbis in Bennett’s party will add to the pressure on him to leave Lapid and to join Netanyahu.
Netanyahu seems to be counting on Bennett’s constituency to pressure him not to allow the present right-wing government to fall. That just might be enough to force Bennett to join the coalition without Lapid. But, given the animosity between Netanyahu and Bennett, one can only speculate as to the longevity of the Netanyahu-led coalition that includes Bennett and, possibly Lapid.
Bennett served in two public positions in his life – as Netanyahu’s bureau chief and as the head of the Yesha settler council. He was asked to leave both positions, leaving behind issues of credibility. Now, he has surrounded himself with various advisers, all of whom have experience in the political arena and all if whom have a common, unifying factor, namely: they all worked against Netanyahu in the past. 
Time is beginning to press on Netanyahu and, in order to form a coalition government within the period allowed by law, he may end up having to make concessions for government posts and potential legislation that will come back to haunt him … and the nation. Woe to us if politicians are assigned to positions of major responsibility for which they are not suited. Let’s see what happens this coming week.

U.S. and Jordan: The window is closing on the “peace process”.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Jordanian Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh said on Wednesday that although both countries were committed to trying to end the Middle East crisis, nevertheless, the “window was closing” on the peace process. Kerry added: “The window is closing on this possibility, the region knows it, all the leaders that I’ve talked to in the region that brought this topic up. [It] is a prime topic and so it deserves our utmost consideration, and it will get it…It would be a huge mistake, almost an arrogant step, to suddenly be announcing this and that without listening first, so that’s what I intend to do, that’s what the president intends to do [when he visits here next month], but we are committed, as I’ve said to Minister Judeh and to others, to explore every possibility.”
F.M. Judah also stated: “There is agreement between us and the U.S. that the window is closing and we have to move fast, and we have to work together, and that this remains a priority of paramount importance to all of us. Peace in the Middle East, I’ve said before in this room, is peace of mind for the rest of the world. This is just not a local or regional conflict. This is a global conflict, with global ramifications, and it remains a core central issue.”
Given these clear statements, it is also clear that as much as the U.S. will attempt to play it down, the reality of the situation is that President Obama will come with an agenda, and accompanying pressure, to push Israel into making more gestures and painful compromises towards the “Palestinians”. The “Palestinians” have their own agenda and were not swayed by threats from the U.S. or from Israel following their successful, unilateral bid to upgrade their status at the U.N. So, the likelihood is that they will not be willing to budge in their demands, leaving the ball in Israel’s court for the success or failure of Obama’s intended push to end the Middle East conflict. If Obama fails, we’ll be blamed for it. If Netanyahu caves in to U.S. pressure and Obama succeeds, we’ll end up suffering for it. Better to be blamed – it hurts less.
Before leaving this “window-closing” episode, I should note that the growing realization in Israel that there is a very small likelihood of reaching a full and complete “final status” agreement with then”Palestinians”. Israel is not alone in this perception. There is also a recognition that if, in the unlikely event that a “settlement agreement” could be reached that would end the conflict, such an agreement would not hold. This reality doesn’t seem to phase European states, who are looking to put pressure on the U.S. to put pressure on Israel and to lay out the parameters of a final settlement to both sides, including a withdrawal to then1967 cease-fire lines.
Putting these “realities” together, Israel will be expected to make concessions in order to restart the “peace process”, a process which Israel does not expect will bring about a conclusion to the conflict. Hey, what is the other side going to give up? Looking at what it has given up in the past, the conclusion is that it will not give up anything, or give up on anything. Pressure applied on Israel will harden the position of our enemies. So, why should we agree to concede anything?
So, what options does Israel have? It could say that given the political upheavals and changes in our neighboring countries, this is not the time to restart political initiatives to resuscitate a dying, if not dead, peace process. Or, it could simply agree and cowtow to the European and American pressures and make more territorial and political concessions, which would constitute irresponsible behavior by our leaders and place the country in an extremely vulnerable position. Or, it could be wise and try to buy time, by agreeing to explore various possibilities, as long as the same does not affect our vital, security interests. If you have another, viable option that should be considered, please let me know.
Prisoner “X” – a true spy mystery
Many of us like a good mystery or a good spy novel, where the “good guy” wins and the “bad guy” loses, where intrigue is interwoven between fact and fiction, where we try to put the hints and clues together, but often miss or overlook simple statements that shine a light on the darkness of the plot and, of course, where the story has a good, but surprise, ending.  But, what happens when the story takes an unexpected twist and, after the “good guy” accomplishes his mission, he becomes a “bad guy”? What happens when the story seems to be over, but there are more unanswered, than answered, questions. This is the situation with the “spy” story that filled Israeli headlines all week, along with the headlines of Australia and much of the international media.
The episode concerns Ben Zygier, an Australian citizen, who made Aliyah (immigrated to Israel) and was recruited by the Mossad, Israel’s security intelligence agency. The when, the where and the how he was recruited are not relevant for our discussion. Some may remember that in early 2010, a senior Hamas figure, Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, was assassinated in Dubai, by persons using Israeli-counterfeited, Australian passports. The Australian Foreign Affairs department was reported to be “furious” with Israel over the “passport fraud” involved in the Mabhouh affair and the then Australian Foreign Affairs Minister summoned Israel’s ambassador to reprimand him. As a result, Australia expelled a member of Israel’s embassy, in retaliation.
A little over a week later, the Australian government was informed through intelligence channels that the Israeli authorities had arrested a dual Australian-Israeli citizen, in relation to serious offenses under Israeli national security legislation. It was rumored that Zygier was planning to pass information about Israeli espionage activity to the Australian Security Intelligence Organization (ASIO) or to local media. 
Zygier made four trips back to Australia in 2010, during one of which he applied for a visa to Italy. According to Australia’s ABC, he was arrested by Israel when it was believed that he gave, or was about to give, the ASIO inside information about Mossad operations, including an upcoming operation in Italy. But, he never got the chance to “blow the whistle”. After his arrest, he was placed in solitary confinement, in a “suicide-proof cell”, where he was also under constant surveillance. The Australian government sought ”specific assurances” from Israel that Zygier’s legal rights would be respected, that he would have legal representation of his choice, that his family would be informed of his detention and that he would not be mistreated. In December, 2010, Zygier committed suicide. His body was shipped to Australia, where he was buried.
While there was information passed between Israel and Australia, neither country made a big issue out of Zygier’s death, as both appeared to want the matter to pass quietly and, in a sense, die with him. And so it remained, until the media began to dig into the story and made it an international cause célèbre, particularly by those who wanted to smear Israel’s reputation and accuse it of everything illegal under the sun.
The issue brought to light questions concerning activities of secret service agencies, with allegations of cloak and dagger operations, torture and even suggestions that Zygier did not commit suicide, but was murdered. During the course of accusations leveled against Israel and the Mossad, what was already known became obvious, namely, that the sacred cows of secret service organizations around the world often graze in fields of deception, falsehood and cover-up.
Zygier was given a fictitious name, with his consent and the approval of his family – “Prisoner X”, so that his imprisonment would not be made known to others, even to his jailers. But, this was with his consent and, presumably, it was also to protect the members if his family, who knew about his arrest and imprisonment, as well as to protect the lives of other agents. His trial took place behind closed doors, but that was for reasons of national security. The Rule of Law applied throughout the course of all of his legal proceedings, which were conducted before senior judges. He was represented by three lawyers and a fourth, of national prominence and reputation, visited with him shortly before his suicide to discuss the ramifications of a possible plea bargain. He was allowed access to his family. In short, he was not denied what has been referred to as due process”. That is because Israel is a democratic country and even if one is accused of the most severe offense, he will still be granted his rights like any other citizen.
The affair created negative ripples against Israel in countries around the world. But, it also raises the question of how far can the media go, and how much should the public be allowed to know, concerning the activities of secret service organizations, particularly Israel’s Mossad?
After almost a week of media reports in Israel and elsewhere, P.M. Netanyahu, for the firsr time publicly, addressed the issue of the Zygier affair, stating: “I completely trust the State of Israel’s security forces. They work devotedly and with the utmost commitment to ensure that we are able to live in this country. I also completely trust the State of Israel’s judicial authorities [who have concluded after a lengthy investigation that Zygier did, in fact, commit suicide]. Israel’s security forces and intelligence agencies operate under the full supervision of judicial authorities which are completely independent. Amid the balance between guarding our security and obeying the law, we also preserve freedom of expression, but overexposure of security and intelligence operations can do harm, sometimes even great harm, to national security. Thus, in every discussion of the matter, one should not take security interests lightly, and in the reality in which the State of Israel exists this must be a central concern. We are not like other counties. We are an exemplary democratic country that safeguards the rights of suspects as well as individual rights, no less than any other country.  But we are also more threatened, more challenged, and so we have to safeguard the proper functioning of our security forces. Therefore, I am asking everyone to let the security forces do their work quietly, so that we can continue to live securely in Israel”.
That is the story of “Prisoner X”. We know some of the facts, but a lot of questions remain unanswered: Of what crime was he accused? Why was he confined to severe isolation? Given that he was under 24-hour surveillance, how could he commit suicide? Why was the case kept from the Israeli public, when it was reported in Australia two years earlier? We are left with a spy mystery that has an unresolved ending. Maybe the story is not fully over yet.

Iranian military leader killed in Syria – Iran vows revenge (on Israel)

A couple of weeks ago, a convoy reportedly carrying chemical weapons from Syria to Lebanon was stopped in its tracks. The shipment never made it to its destination and those accompanying it were either killed or wounded. Israel was accused of carrying out the attack, but Syria claimed that a nearby factory was hit and not a convoy.


Be that as it may, one of the people said to have been killed as a result of the attack was General Hasan Shateri, a senior commander of Iran’s powerful, Revolutionary Guards, who was in charge of reconstruction projects in southern Lebanon. The exact details relating to Shateri’s death were not clear, such as on which side of the Syrian-Lebanese border he was killed. However, true to form, an Iranian office in Damascus said that it was inside Syria, which, of course, leads to the question why he was there, if he has specific “reconstruction projects” to deal with in Lebanon. The Iranian official in Damascus said that he was on a “work visit”, but no further information was forthcoming and we can only imagine what kind of “work” he was involved with in Syria. One Iranian clergyman was quoted as comparing Shateri to Imad Mugniyeh, the former chief of intelligence for the Hizb’allah, who was killed in a car bombing in Damascus in 2008.

A spokesman for the Revolutionary Guards was quoted as saying that the”mercenaries and supporters” of Israel were responsible for Shateri’s death. That is a sufficiently ambiguous statement for it to be unclear whether the accusation was directed against Israel only, or whether it was intended to include the rebel forces fighting against the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Not every accusation requires a response and this time, Israel wisely decided not to comment, particularly since there is absolutely no proof that Israel has any ties to Syria’s rebels. Even though all of the rebel groups are quite outspoken in expressing their antagonism against Iran because of its support for Assad’s regime, none of those groups admitted being responsible for the killing.

The death of Shateri reveals a more problematic issue, namely: Iran’s presence in two countries bordering Israel, Syria and Lebanon, and its political and military support for the Hizb’allah, the terrorist, Shiite movement that is Iran’s proxy in Lebanon. Both Syria and the Hizb’allah are essential for Iran’s strategy in the Middle East and Syria serves as a bridge to the Hizb’allah, which is an important foothold for the Revolutionary Guards. A similar account of the incident was reported in Lebanon, but the name was different. The dead man was identified as Houssam Khosh Nweis, who was said to be the director of the Iranian Council for Reconstruction in Lebanon, who had lived there since the end of the Second Lebanese War with Israel in 2006. Although the name difference was not immediately reconciled, still, Iranian officials in Lebanon often work under different names, so that the presence of Iranians in Lebanon does not get publicized there.

Ali Shirazi, a representative of Iran’s “supreme leader” to the Revolutionary Guard threatened that Israel will soon pay for Shateri’s killing and was quoted by the Iranian Students News Agency as saying: “Our enemies should also know that we will quickly get revenge for [the death of] Haj Hassan [Shateri] from the Israelis, and the enemies cannot shut off the Iranian people with such stupid acts [as the killing].”

Neighborhood Watch

Iran
There is a report that major powers are planning to ease sanctions that prevent Iran from trading in gold and other precious metals, if Iran takes steps to close its Fordo uranium enrichment plant. The offer is expected to be made to Iran at the end of this month, during planned talks in Almaty, Kazakhstan. The P5+1 group (Britain, China, France, Russia, the U.S. and Germany – don’t you just love those titles?) expect Iran to allow wider U.N. inspections and to demonstrate that its nuclear program is only for non-military purposes. The Ayatollah Ali Hamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader, who has the final say on all state matters in Iran, rejected direct talks with the U.S. over its nuclear program and said that Iran was not seeking nuclear weapons. He added that if Iran intended to build them, the U.S. could not stop it, saying: “We believe nuclear weapons must be abolished and we have no intention of building…They [the U.S.] want to deny the Iranian nation of its peaceful use of nuclear energy. Of course, they won’t succeed.” 

P.M. Netanyahu spoke to the Board of Governors of the Jewish Agency in Jerusalem and addressed the situation with Iran, saying: “The historic desire to eradicate the Jewish people has come back with full force…Israel is facing a set of daunting challenges, first of which is Iran. The Jewish fate has changed, but our enemies have not. Israel is a uniquely moral country, and attempts to delegitimize it are one of the great moral failure of our time…Iran does not conceal its desire to destroy the Jewish state and also to threaten the rest of the world. Iran has spearheaded the effort to eradicate the Jewish state; that is why it is developing nuclear weapons. Iran is seeking the power of mass death, and it is enough to see what they do now to know what they will do then…An Iranian nuclear weapon would transform the Mideast into a nuclear tinderbox, changing the world as we know it. The sanctions themselves, even the toughest sanctions, will not stop them. Case in point: North Korea. Sanctions need to be coupled with a robust, credible military threat. Only then will we have a change to stop it. I believe that stopping Iran is the number one task of anyone seeking peace and security in the world.” Need I say more?

Netanyahu’s reference to North Korea demonstrated not only Israel’s concern, but that if the free world, as well. Earlier in the week, U.S. Secretary of State Kerry stated that the North Korean nuclear test last Tuesday that drew international condemnation needed to be looked at in a broader non-proliferation context: “The international community now must come together with a swift, clear, credible response as pledged in the U.N. Security Council Resolution 2087. My message about this is really simple, this is not only about [North Korea] and its continued flaunting of its obligations under three separate U.N. Security Council resolutions. This is about proliferation and this is also about Iran … because they are linked, you connect the dots. It is important for the world to have credibility in respect to our nonproliferation efforts, and just as it is impermissible for North Korea to pursue this kind of reckless effort, so we have said it is impermissible with respect to Iran.” 

The practical concern of Israel, the U.S. and other countries, is that due to the connection between North Korea and Iran, if the former develops the necessary technology that would allow for expediting the production of a nuclear warhead, the likelihood is very great that it will quickly find its way to Iran, and from there to the Hisb’allah and others in the region.

Syria
It is not Syria’s instability that is the primary concern of Israel, but rather its storehouse of weaponry. This was the concern when the convoy was allegedly attacked by Israel two weeks ago and it remains of vital concern today. Netanyahu referred to this matter when speaking to the same Board of Governors of the Jewish Agency and stated: “Syria has some of the most sophisticated weapons ever built, which can threaten not only Israel, but also the U.S. and the world. There is a tide in this region, and it is not moving toward modernity, but rather backward. We can’t sit and wait for things to happen. We must protect and prepare ourselves in the face of any threat.”

In the meantime, the rebel forces fighting in Syria keep coming closer and closer to the border with Israel and rebel forces overran a military police checkpoint in Khan Arnabeh, a town in the Golan Heights not far from the cease-fire line along the demilitarized zone with Israel. The has caused Israel to station additional troops in the north, just in case. 

The casualties in the fighting are not always government troops or rebel forces, but civilians as well. Seven wounded, Syrian refugees approached the border with Israel and were provided medical treatment by Israel soldiers, who then transported them to an Israeli hospital for further treatment. This was the first time that Syrians found shelter in Israel from the ongoing civil war in their own country. One of the wounded was said to be in critical condition and the others were in serious condition. Vice P.M. Moshe Ya’alon reported on Israeli T.V.: “It was on a humanitarian basis…Refugees approached the border, received medical treatment and we decided to bring them in for treatment in territory in light of their condition.” However, the IDF Chief of General Staff, Lt. General Benny Gantz, was said to be “extremely unhappy” that he was not notified of the decision to allow the seven Syrian refugees into Israel for medical care. His concern is legitimate, as it stems from the fact that allowing such entry is a very delicate issue that could have a major political affect and could also set a dangerous precedent in this regard. Although there is a good likelihood that due to the serious nature of their wounds, he would have approved their entry into Israel if he knew about it, he justifiably preferred to have been briefed in advance of such decision. In an effort at potential damage control as a result of their entry, the IDF issued a statement that this particular situation was a “pinpoint incident and that Israeli policy is to not allow anyone to cross the border fence, except in extreme cases.” Notwithstanding that statement, the IDF is considering setting up a fired hospital along the border to treat wounded coming from Syria, a clear indication that more are expected in the near future.

Lebanon
Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of the Hizb’allah, in a fiery speech made via a video link (he does not show himself in public for fear of being assassinated) marking the anniversary of the deaths of three of Hizb’allah’s leaders, said that anyone who thinks that his organization is vulnerable, because of the fighting in Syria, is mistaken. He added that if Israel attacked Lebanon, the response of the Hizb’allah would be harsh, pointing out that the Hizb’allah had all the weapons it needed in case of a war with Israel and it would not need to import any weapons from Syria and Iran: “The resistance will not be silent regarding any aggression against Lebanon…A few missiles would plunge Israel into darkness (referring to plans to attack power stations, in additional to ports and airports)…Can Israel survive six months in the dark?” Nasrallah threatened to fire missiles “from Kiryat Shmona [in the north] to Eilat [in the south]”. It is reported that the Hizb’allah has more missiles than all of the other Arab countries in the region, combined.

Despite widespread belief that the Hizb’allah was involved in last July’s terrorist attack in Bulgaria, the European Union said that if such involvement were proven, it still would not formally declare the Hizb’allah a terrorist organization, but it would consider implementing pinpoint sanctions against it. Canada, on the other hand, who is a friend and supporter of Israel, is pushing EU countries to add the Hizb’allah to the list of terrorist organizations. A Canadian government official is reported to have said that evidence of Hizb’allah involvement in terrorism across the globe, with the support of Iran, was abundant. Nasrallah said that he would not comment on the Bulgarian report that was blaming the Hizb’allah for the attack that killed five Israeli tourists and one Bulgarian national.
Pope Benedict XVI Resigns

I was asked if I could comment on the resignation of Pope Benedict the 16th. I could, but opted not to do so at this time, as this is already a lengthy report. I apologize that I did not have the time to write a shorter one.
And That was The Week That Was.
“For the eyes of the LORD move to and for throughout the earth that He may strongly support those whose heart is completely His.” (2 Chronicles 16:9)
“Do not be grieved, for the joy of The LORD is your strength.” (Nehemiah 8:10)
Have a blessed week.
Marvin

President Obama’s Tactical Visit to Israel – TWTW … ending 9 February, 2013

On By marvinskLeave a comment
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

Bad, bad and worse – TWTW … ending 2 February, 2013

On By marvinskLeave a comment

Shalom all,

It’s been an interesting week, with tank and troop movements to the north, as well as F-16s flying overhead and northward. We are also thankful for the positioning of an Iron Dome anti-missile system in the north, as well as one much closer to home, in Haifa.

The major emphasis these past days was on weapons of mass destruction in Syria, which could fall into the “wrong hands”. The region is becoming more and more unstable, but concerned neighboring countries like Jordan and Turkey are not taking any action. Instead, they allow Israel to take the lead and then condemn her for it. So, what’s new?

“Bad, bad and worse”
The week started with P.M. Netanyahu meeting with a delegation from the U.S. House of Representatives, with whom he discussed his growing concern over developments in Syria. As he put it, the various options and consequences facing Israel were “bad, bad and worse”. Israel continued its diplomatic efforts to inform governments around the world of what could happen if Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal fell into the hands of the rebels fighting against the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, or even worse, into the hands of the Hizb’allah. If media reports emanating from Lebanon are to be believed, then some of these chemical weapons, including long-range missiles have already reached this terrorist organization, causing Israel’s Defense Department to work overtime. In addition to cooperation with the U.S. regarding this matter, discussions were held with Russian President Vladimir Putin, in Moscow, over the seriousness of the situation.

The same essential message was conveyed by Netanyahu to Middle East Quartet special envoy, Tony Blair, last Sunday, when the latter was told: “[The] Middle East doesn’t stop for elections; everything continues. We need to work on peace and security and there’s no better person to work with than you.”

There were conflicting media reports regarding the take-over and control of the al-Safira compound south of Aleppo, Syria, where chemical weapons are both produced and stored. Some claimed that the compound fell into the hands of the Sunni (Moslem) rebel forces, while other reported that government forces, helped by Hizb’allah fighters, have regained control over army bases throughout the country, as well as the area around the al-Safira compound. One jihadist rebel group claimed: “Assad ordered the military to increase its bombing campaign in al-Safira, because he is in cahoots with the Zionists, who are helping his regime survive.” One can only wonder from what source they obtained such information.
The real “help”, from an encouragement point of view, comes from the deployment of a sizable Russian naval force off the Syrian coast, purportedly for exercises being conducted under the personal supervision of Russia’s military chief. The immediate goal of Russia’s naval presence is not certain. It could be that the intention is to “encourage” the U.S. to come to some kind of an agreement regarding Syria. Alternatively, Russia’s presence in the area could be part of a preliminary move to provide practical assistance to Assad that old enable him to maintain control at least over Alawite (minority Shiite Moslem faction) areas, by securing control over the coastal area of Syria. If the latter is correct, it could indicate that the Russians genuinely believe that the present Syrian regime is about to become history, as indicated by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s explicit statement that “Assad’s days in power are numbered.” That assessment is not new, but it gains validity coming from this source. This could result in a situation where the government is overthrown and where Syria could, possibly, be divided into different areas that are separately governed. However we might look at it, there is a continuing concern over the growing instability inside of Syria.
Crossing the “Red Line”
Israel had previously warned Assad not to try to imitate Saddam Hussein, the former Iraqi dictator who never managed to make good on his intentions to pummel Israel with weapons of mass destruction. Transferring WMD to Hizb’allah would be crossing Israel’s “red line“. It’s hard to believe that Assad didn’t understand the warning. The greater likelihood is that given the present turmoil in Syria and the risks inherent in pursuing military action in Syria at this point, he probably gambled that Israel would not do anything and so, he simply chose to ignore the warning.
The Syrian military has in its possession an estimated 1,000 tons of chemical weapons material, as well as thousands of advanced missiles and rockets, and assorted anti-aircraft and anti-naval missiles. Its cache of chemical weapons, including sarin and VX nerve agents and mustard gas, is the largest in the world, and its existence is a cause of many sleepless nights to Israeli officials and civilians alike. So, it is fully understandable that the transfer of WMD to terrorists is a “red line” that cannot be crossed, as the same would provide for almost limitless opportunities to attack Israel with such weaponry and result in literally hundreds of thousands of casualties here, with little opportunity for retaliation. This is especially true of the Syrian and Iranian supported Shiite Hizb’allah.
Israel has been a bystander in the Arab Spring. Still, even though it was not an active participant, government and opposition forces in at least three countries (Libya, Bahrain and, of course, Egypt) have accused the other side of collaborating with the Zionists. Egyptians President Morsi used the conflict of last November to catapult himself as a person who needs to be reckoned with, not only in Egypt, but in the Middle East in general.
Although Spring usually follows Winter, the upsets in the Arab world have turned things around, so that Winter follows Spring and, along with it, new players are introduced who have few, if any, central leadership, although most have a common allegiance to a new Islamic order.
With that background, we return to the situation involving the transfer of WMD from Syria to the Hizb’allah. Such a situation would be a benefit to Assad from a number of perspectives. First, it  needs to be understood that Syria is not in a position to conduct a normal war with Israel, which leaves it with very few real options, paramount of which is its WMD. It has already come under international condemnation for alleged use of chemical weapons against the rebels. If it makes major use of such weapons, it would crossNATO’s “red line”. The clear understanding is that if it does not use those WMD, it will probably end up losing them. So, transferring such weapons to the Hizb’allah would remove the possibility of such weapons falling into the hands of the Sunni (Moslem) Syrian rebels, Second, it would provide Assad with an opportunity to indirectly threaten Israel, through its ally, the Hizb’allah. Third, use of the same by the Hizb’allah would probably not incur the wrath of NATO, as long as the European Union continues to refuse to recognize the Hizb’allah as a terrorist organization. This would elevate Assad to the status of someone who could either create, or prevent, an all-out regional conflagration.
Although Israel had and has no desire to become embroiled in the Syrian Civil War and even though Israel has been “encouraged” not to respond (as it was similarly “encouraged” during the first Gulf War when missiles rained down upon Tel Aviv and Haifa), still, it will not allow itself to be used as a pawn, with no say about what is going on, when remaining silent could affect the lives if hundreds of thousands of its citizens.
So, when it became obvious that the international community was not going to act, Israeli jets “allegedly” struck a convoy heading from Syria to Lebanon, which convoy reportedly contained Russian-made SA-17 anti-aircraft missiles, as well as some chemical weapons from Syria’s Scientific Studies and Research Center (the “SSRC”), which runs Syria’s program for WMD. These anti-aircraft missiles are portable, easy to operate and are capable of catching planes by surprise, including fighter jets and low-flying aircraft. They could significantly impair Israel’s freedom of movement beyond the border. With a combination of mobility, speed, and long range capabilities, the SA-17 surface-to-air system is a veritable threat to the Israel Air Force, especially if the missile system were to fall into the hands of a terrorist group like the Hizb’allah in Lebanon. Air force officers are calling it the “game changer” because, unlike the Hizb’allah’s arsenal of surface-to-air weapons, the SA-17 battery is capable of going mobile in as little as five minutes. If that wasn’t bad enough, the Syrian military also has the Pantsir-S1 system, which is more advanced than the SA-17, is more precise and is one of the most modern air defense system of its kind. If the Hizb’allah were to get hold of this rocket system, the activity of the Israeli Air Force would be severely jeopardized.
Although Israel was widely condemned by the Islamic world for its air strike against the convoy, particularly by Syria, Iran and the Hizb’allah, there is still a possibility that none of these three countries will rush in with a military retaliation, despite threats to do so, but will seriously weigh potential Israeli responses to their respective regimes and how the same could affect their long-term goals. Still, knowing who our neighbors are, Israel is taking precautions to strengthen our northern border and we should not rule out the possibility that the Hizb’allah, more than Syria, will attempt to flex its muscles and fire missiles into the north of Israel in the very near future. Such an act by the Hizb’allah will also serve to test our readiness to retaliate against another missile barrage, as occurred during the Second Lebanese War.
A closing note on this situation: Israel’s “alleged” attack on the convoy demonstrated that, as the only free and democratic country in the region, it will not tolerate a real and immediate threat to its citizenry. It also sounded a clear warning to the entire international community, the U.S. included, that when its safety is in jeopardy, it will not sit around twiddling its thumbs, waiting for its “friends” to act. Finally, while Iran’s nuclear program still is Israel’s number one concern, our “alleged” attack against the transfer of WMD shows that Israel continues to keep its military option on the table and that it will act, unexpectedly, with devastating results.
Back to Politics
With the events relating to Syria, the Hizb’allah and Iran this past week, coalition politics has been pushed off the headlines, but continued to receive honorable mention in secondary columns of the newspapers. At this point, it is reported that 82 Members of Knesset have recommended that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu form the next government. He has been called upon to do so by President Shimon Peres, the third time in his career. With such widespread backing, the negotiations for forming a coalition would seem to be over almost before they began. But, such is not the case. 
The primary obstacle has do with there the assignment of ministerial positions. Once this is agree upon, most of the other matters can be resolved, some sooner, some later. 
From a practical point if view, it is widely presumed that progress will be made to equalize the distribution of the national service burden. The state of the economy would be scrutinized and some difficult changes will be proposed and implemented. and, in all likelihood, Netanyahu will be pressured to be more flexible regarding the “Palestinians” and the so-called “peace process”, as long as an agreement is not reached allowing for the establishment of a “Palestinian”? state. If the latter were to occur, Naftali Bennett’s party, Habayit Hayehudi (which received 12 seats in the recent elections) would leave the government.
The main concern of P.M. Netanyahu at this point is that “Yesh Atid” (headed by Yair Lapid) is not fully on board and could easily withdraw from a coalition, causing a crisis that would lead to an early election. In order to prevent this, Netanyahu is seeking to establish a large enough coalition, so that even if Lapid opts out, the government would still stand. Friendships in politics are fragile enough, but when it comes to position and power, long-term allegiances have collapsed, placing the country on a path of uncertainty regarding almost every decision.
The reality of Lapid’s surprising victory at the polls, apparently, finally got to him. He was the  natural, first potential coalition partner, having garnered 19 seats in the 19th Knesset, making his party the second largest next to the Likud and making Lapid the leader of the opposition. But, something happened this past weekend. Instead of closing the gap and moving towards becoming a coalition partner, he is moving further away and becoming more arrogant in the process. Success at the polls seems to have made his head spin. He is taking almost an all or nothing approach to joining the coalition and boasting that if he doesn’t get everything that he wants, he will insure that the opposition will bring about early elections and he will replace Netanyahu as Prime Minister in another year and a half. We’ve seen this prideful attitude before and as recently as the elections of four years ago, when Haim Ramon boasted that Tsippi Livni would replace Netanyahu with a year and a half. Now, after the latest elections, she’s waiting to see whether or not she will even be invited to join the coalition in Netanyah’s new government. It would seem that Lapid’s strategy would be to make demands upon Netanyahu that, if granted, would, in effect, act as an obstacle to the religious parties joining the coalition. Then, with the religious out, he could use a coalition disagreement as a basis for causing Yesh Atid to withdraw, resulting in the coalition no longer having a majority and, thus, forcing new elections. From Netanyahu’s perspective, however, he will not very quickly turn his back on the religious parties, who have generally supported him in the past.
That brings us back to Naftali Bennett as the one who will be able to help establish a Netanyahu-led coalition, or whether the baton will pass to Lapid. It doesn’t seem realistic that Bennett and the religious parties will allow Lapid, with hardly any personal, political experience, to run the government, particularly in light of his views regarding enlistment and national service, as well as his willingness to pursue negotiations with the “Palestinians” that could lead to the establishment of a “Palestinian” state. So, we come back to the scenarios first mentioned in last week’s TWTW, namely: Likud, HaBayit HaYehudi and the religious parties, which will still give Netanyahu a 61-59 majority. Whoever else joins will simply give him a broader-based coalition.
Sounds simple, but it’s not. The Shas ultra orthodox party now says that it will not cooperate with either Lapid or Bennett. That sounds more like a negotiation threat than a promise. From a political perspective, Shas will do almost anything to get its hands on the Ministry of the Interior, the office that controls, among other things, documentation from womb to tomb, including marriages and immigration. If offered this cabinet post, it would undoubtedly make almost any compromise and “cooperate” even with ultra secularists. The only thing that would take priority over this political pursuit is the overriding desire to insure that no government decision or policy is enacted without Shas being consulted. For this reason, it is actually wooing the religious faction within Bennett’s party to make sure that Shas has a say in any legislation affecting Torah life. It is clear that the picture is heating up and is probably causing Netanyahu a double Excedrin headache.
Neighborhood Watch
Syria – Bashar al-Assad continues the policies of his father, Hafez al-Assad, in his attempts over the past decade to rule Syria with an iron hand. The father succeeded in convincing the general populace that what was good for the ruling minority Alawite party was also good for the nation. This manner of ruling the people was passed down to Bashar, who was not the heir that was originally intended to take over after the father ceased his authoritative rule. But, when the heir apparent died in an automobile accident, his brother, Bashar, was given the nod. Instead of practicing opthamology, he practiced what his father taught him, politics – how to get into power and stay there. He was a good student and learned well, too well. He is now investing all of his efforts at prolonging his rule, and his life, even if doing so has resulted in the deaths of more than 60,000 of his own people and causing almost three quarters of a million people to become displaced from their homes. His removal from power, one way or another, is the goal of the Syrian rebels, who are, essentially, from the Sunni Moslem majority.
With so much hatred and antagonism directed towards Bashar al-Assad, one can only wonder how the Syrian people reacted when they learned that his wife, Asma al-Assad, the first lady of Syria, is pregnant. There were no shouts of joy in the street and no public announcements of a potential heir to the rule of the Assad family. The due date is said to be sometime next month. The Syrian Arab Spring will be two years old on March 15th (the Ides of March). No one is able to state whether Bashar will even be alive at the time that this child is born. But, it is reasonable to presume that this child, if a son, will not succeed his father as President of Syria.

Egypt

Unlike Syria, the situation in Egypt is about to burst and the population is seeking to remove the president for the second time in 2 years. Only  this time it is Mohammed Morsi, who entered office as President of Egypt around half a year ago. As was mentioned in TWTW last week, the immediate incident that sparked the present uprisings was the imposition of the death sentence on 21 soccer fans who were held responsible for the deaths of fans and players alike at a match held inPort Said a year ago. But, realistically, the public outrage stems from widespread disappointment among the Egyptian populace, particularly those in the lower socio-economic status, of the “achievements”, if they can be referred to as such, of the revolution, which deposed Hosni Mubarak. The people are starting to wake up to the reality that it was foolhardy and very unrealistic to presume that the problems that faced Egyptian society would be resolved overnight, or by replacing one tyrannical regime with another, untested one that was aligned with the Moslem Brotherhood, or that poverty would be done away with, that new jobs would spring up without the proper infrastructure to create them or that Egypt would once again suddenly become a “must place to visit” for tourists. “Hope deferred makes the heart sick” (Prov, 13:12) and, along with heartfelt disappointment comes anger, focused at this point at Morsi, just as it was focused towards Mubarak.
This is the same Muslim Brotherhood president, Muhammad Morsi, who only 3 years ago blatantly described “Zionists” as “bloodsuckers who attack the Palestinians, these warmongers, the descendants of apes and pigs.” And, on another occasion in 2010 said: “We must never forget, brothers, to nurse our children and our grandchildren on hatred for them: for Zionists, for Jews.” This is the leader that the people of Egypt now seek to depose.

Add to the anger and disappointment a form of frustration by the Egyptian liberals, who were widely credited with being responsible for the overthrow of Mubarak’s dictatorship, and who now feel that the revolution was, in a sense, stolen from them by the Moslem Brotherhood and their man of the hour, Morsi. The frustration lies in the fear of the toppled dictatorship being replaced by an Islamic theocracy. But, what has happened in recent days is that the widespread protests have added further instability to an already tense situation, threatening the sense of security that is necessary to create and rely upon effective, central leadership.
It should be noted that the events in Egypt came on the heels of the elections in Israel. If the average Egyptian would be asked, the likelihood is that whatever he/she might think of Israel’s government, it would have to be acknowledged that here, the citizens determine their political future in a free, democratic exercise of their rights and not by bloody revolutions that use terms of enlightenment like “Arab Spring”. As things appear now, it would seem that for most Egyptians, it is more like the winter of their discontent.
Iran
One day after being asked by President Shimon Peres to firm a coalition government, P.M. Netanyahu stated that stopping Iran’s “nuclearization” is Israel’s most urgent task. He added: “Yesterday I called on all the parties in the Knesset to join me and form a national unity government that is as broad as possible, and which unites the public in such a crucial moment in our history . . . Our over-arching goal is to stop the nuclearization of Iran. This mission is becoming more complex because Iran is obtaining more advanced centrifuges that shorten the enrichment time. We must not accept this with resignation.” Too much has been said about this and very little has been done. Maybe, Israel is hoping that there would be more underground explosions in Iranian nuclear facilities, which would save us the job of having to fly in and level the Iranian infrastructure, while most of the world sits by and observes how it should be done.

On a bit of an amusing note, Iran’s President, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad said that he wants to be an astronaut, the first person to be sent out as part of the Iranian space program. He should be encouraged to do so, considering that he already is a space cadet. 
There really were a lot of other things that happened in, around and concerning Israel during the past week, but the major emphasis was on the movement of WMD and coalition politics. Next time, we’ll discuss some of them.
For now, THAT was the week that was.
“He has told you, O man, what is good; and what The LORD requires of you: to do justice, to love kindness and to walk humbly with your God.” (Micah 6:8)
“When a man’s ways are pleasing to The LORD, He makes even his enemies to be at peace with him.” (Prov. 16:7)
Have a truly blessed week!
Marvin

Electioneering is over, but no government yet – TWTW … ending 26 January, 2013

On By marvinskLeave a comment
Shalom all,

Thank You!
I would like to thank all those who wrote, called, visited and encouraged Orit and me following my second hip-replacement operation in seven months. This surgery was a bit more complicated than the first and took an extra hour to complete. Following 10 days in the hospital and another 2-1/2 weeks in a rehabilitation facility for intensive physiotherapy, I was discharged and returned home last weekend. I will continue with physiotherapy through the national health clinic that we belong to, starting Monday, the 28th. This will be for 2-3 times a week for several months. My projected time to return to work is March 1st, unless my progress allows me to return earlier. There is a lot to deal with between now and then and I would covet your prayers for much grace and that all would go well.

Israeli Elections
The electioneering is now over and all the votes have finally been counted. For the first 2 days immediately following the elections, it appeared that the voting brought about a stalemate, with an equal number of Knesset seats becoming available to the political right and left (60 -60). But, when absentee ballots were counted, the right gained an extra seat, resulting in a 61 to 59 representation. The majority now includes the Likud part (Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu), Habayit Hayehudi (Naftali Bennett), Shas (religious) and Yehadut HaTorah (religious). Technically, P.M. Netanyahu can form a coalition government, without having to compromise on core principles of the Likud.

Realistically, however, the results of the national elections held this week have left Netanyahu still  at the helm, but somewhat weakened. His goal is to build a broad-base coalition, something which will require all of his skills to reconcile conflicting views of the “center left”, represented by “Yesh Atid” (There is a Future, represented by Yair Lapid) and of the religious “right”. The extra 2 Knesset seats provide a safety net for Netanyahu, in the event that coalition negotiations with the “opposition” fail, or, if they succeed, but the “opposition” later withdraws from the coalition over anticipated ideological conflicts.

The big surprise winner of the elections was Yair Lapid (Yesh Atid party), who received 19 seats and now heads the second largest political party after the Likud. His success shows that he understood the issues affecting a large section of the population and spoke to those issues, namely social matters, sharing the military responsibility and economics. 

Netanyahu wasted no time in contacting various “opposition” leadership in an effort to start coalition discussions, including, of course, Yesh Atid. It is the reality of numbers that would appear to guide Netanyahu in deciding who to pursue first. With Lapid on board, only 11 additional seats (who will provide supporting votes in the Knesset) will be needed for a majority to pass legislation. It would be reasonable for Netanyahu to make Lapid his first coalition partner.

Some issues find common ground between Netanyahu and Lapid, such as those affecting the budget. Lapid leans more towards the “social justice” issues presented during the summer protests of 2011. But, his constituents are also those who will bear the brunt of a major budget deficit in the very foreseeable future. Interestingly enough, Netanyahu may find support from Lapid regarding the government’s dealings with the “Palestinians”, provided that Netanyahu does not negate the “vision” he presented in his Bar-Ilan speech in 2009, where he expressed a willingness to resolve the Israeli-“Palestinian” conflict by the establishment of two-state solution.

It will be interesting to see how Netanyahu will balance the perspective of Lapid, who is in favor of renewing negotiations with the “Palestinians”, with that of Habayit Hayehudi’s Naftali Bennett, who is not opposed to negotiations with the “Palestinians”, as long as Netanyahu doesn’t agree to the establishment of a “Palestinian” state. 

Another “issue” that loomed large in the election campaigns concerned the enlistment of yeshiva students into the IDF. While this was and remains a primary issue with Lapid – and his joining the Likud-coalition would probably be based on reaching a preliminary agreement on this issue and the recruitment of the ultra orthodox – there is a degree of flexibility on this issue by Bennett and it would not be unreasonable to expect that if both Lapid and Bennett join the coalition, then the Knesset would be able to amend the enlistment law to make the sharing of the military burden more equitable. If such an amendment would be passed, then at least one, if not both of the religious parties could then join the government, which would substantially increase the size of the coalition. If, in addition to wooing Lapid, Netanyahu can close deals with the 3 other parties that make up the political right, then the coalition will be well on its way to becoming a fact, even before P.M. Netanyahu is given authority by President Peres to form the next government.

But, there are rumors that there may be some conflicts that would prevent, or at least delay, Bennett’s party from joining the coalition. Bennett was formerly very active in the Likud and much relied upon by Netanyahu, before he left the fold to become involved with other, lesser parties, and, eventually, became head of Habayit Hayehudi. This created a personal rift between the two of them that will have to be put aside, if Bennett is to become part of the coalition. If the rumors turn out to be true, then, of course, Netanyahu would have to press the religious parties to join before trying to amend the legislation regarding enlistment of yeshiva students. This could cause an early coalition crisis and it would be in Netanyahu’s best interests to resolve potential conflicts with Bennett and bring him on board early. No matter how we look at it, ideological issues of the different parties could result in a lengthy negotiation process, which would mean that Netanyahu will have to compromise in different areas in order to create a smooth path for all of the coalition partners.

Additional rumors have it that Shaul Mofaz, presently the head of the Kadima party (that was the largest opposition party in the last Knesset under Tzippi Livni), who barely made it back to the next Knesset with 2 seats, may rejoin the ranks of the Likud. Mofaz was a former head of the IDF, but it is far too early to talk about a cabinet position with the new government, such as Secretary of Defense. Time will tell. Politics do, indeed, make for strange bedfellows.

When the time comes, in all likelihood, the greatest issue that will face the coalition partners is the division of ministerial posts. The shortage of such positions will probably require opening new positions in Israeli embassies and consulates to absorb the new faces and to placate some Knesset Members who, as a result of the election results, are now, in a sense, political refugees.

The Labor party, which received 15 seats (a major disappointment for Labor), has already indicated that the ideological and economic issues between it and the Likud make it impossible to be part of a Likud-coalition. Another left-wing party, Meretz (headed up by Zahava Gal-On), said that her party would not join a Netanyahu-led coalition government.

The new Knesset will have more women and more religious representation than any prior Knesset. That should, at the very least, make for lively encounters on the floor of the Knesset.

Neighborhood Watch
The major focus this week was upon Egypt, Syria and, of course, Iran. The situation in all three countries is explosive, in one way or another.

Egypt
Almost two years after the removal of former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, the population has again taken to the streets. The latest event left 39 people dead and hundreds injured. The demonstrations began last Friday to mark the second anniversary of the revolution. According to official reports, some ten people, including two police officers were killed by live fire during confrontations with authorities in the city of Suez. Similarly, in the city of Alexandria, confrontations broke out between security forces and demonstrators who called for the overthrow of the regime of Presudent Muhamed Morsi. Hundreds were injured.

But, the spark that started the latest political conflagration was the imposition of the death penalty on 21 people, who were convicted of being criminally responsible for the deaths of 74 soccer fans, including players and even policemen, in a disaster that took place a year ago on the soccer field of Port Said, when the local team surprisingly upset the visiting team and caused the deadly riot to break out. The judgment of the court was the signal for the additional protests, in Port Said, that left dozens dead and hundreds more injured. The military was called out to help the police, but to no avail. Some of the rioters tried to break into the prison to remove the people who were convicted and sentenced to death and wanted to execute them “street style”. Dozens more were arrested in this latest uprising. As a result of these protests, the Egyptian Security Council! Headed up by President Morsi, held an emergency meeting, following which it was announced that consideration is being given to declaring a national emergency.

Every situation that is indicative of the Egyptian government’s potential loss of control becomes a warning for Israel to pay close attention to the causes of the civil unrest and the responses that flow from it. Since the takeover of the government and its control by the Moslem Brotherhood, the demilitarized zone between Israel and Egypt has become a breeding ground for almost every type of anti-Israel militant, with little or no initiative on the part of Egyptian authorities to try to prevent or curtail terrorist activities against Israel. 

Syria
And now to our neighbor to the northeast. As of this weekend, Syrian President Bashir al-Assad has been responsible for the deaths of over 60,000 of his own people, including government forces.

Assad has become considerably more bold than in the past, being bolstered by Russian backing and Russian warships anchored off the coast of Syria to prevent any attempt by “the west” to interfere there. Also, Assad is reported to have given instructions to his senior military staff that if he is overthrown, either by the rebels who are backed by the west, or if he is torn apart by an angry mob, like what happened to Gaddafy in Libya, then they are to fire Syria’s missiles (serious stuff) at Israel and Egypt. Israel as a target is understandable, but why Egypt? Because the Moslem Brotherhood there sided with the rebels against his government. In other words, even if he is remembered for having fired missiles upon ither Moslems, he’ll still go down in the Arab history books as someone who tried to destroy Israel with a missile bombardment, as his own legacy to the Arab world.

Iran
According to a former CIA agent, the underground explosion that occurred on January 21st at one of Iran’s uranium enrichment plants destroyed major parts of the enrichment plant, and some 240 staff who were trapped inside. The explosion created shock waves over a 5 kilometer area. Unconfirmed reports claim that Iran believes that the explosion was the result of sabotage.

Speaking of Iran, while attending an economic conference in Switzerland, outgoing Israeli Minister of Defense, Ehud Barak, was interviewed by a Swiss daily and stated: “The Pentagon prepared a sophisticated operation, direct and sensitive to an attack upon Iran.” Barak noted that “in a worse-case situation, we need to have the preparedness and capability to carry out a surgical operation, which will significantly delay the [Iranian] plans and which will convince them that it won’t work because the world is detained to stop them.” He mentioned that he used to laugh at his American when speaking about a surgical action, because Israel thinks in terms of a chisel, while the U.S. thinks in terms of a 5 kilogram (11 lb.) hammer. He added that “If everything else fails, it is possible that we will end up with a focused surgical strike”, mentioning that the Pentagon already prepared such a plan on the instructions of the White House.

However, in an article that appeared today (27th January) in Israel National News, Iranian Ayatollah Ahmed Khatami was quoted as saying two days ago: “The United States says it will not allow Iran to be nuclear, but it is so blind that it hasn’t noticed that Iran has already become a nuclear state.”  Well, folks. What has been done can be undone. All that is necessary is wisdom and determination.

International Day of Remembrance For Victims of the Holocaust
Seven years ago, in a rare move, the United Nations approved an Israeli proposal to proclaim January 27th, the day that Auschwitz concentration camp was liberated, as International Holocaust Day. By doing so, it rejected every attempt to deny the Holocaust, as well as condemned hatred and violence, based on ethnic or religious affiliation. This day is intended to insure that people everywhere in the world would not only remember what happened, but by so remembering, that it should not happen again. it is particularly important to pass on a true knowledge of history to our children, so that they, too, will take a stand for truth when the time comes – a time which is already here. Hatred of Jews, in general, and of misread, in particular, is again rearing its ugly head throughout the world. The same U.N. that proclaimed this historic day still provides a platform to those who deny the Holocaust and allows them to spew forth their verbal venom to an ever-increasing receptive audience. When the lessons of history are not learned, particularly as regards Israel and the Jewish people, the hypocrisy of fools, who oppose both God and His chosen people, leads them to repeat the same mistakes.
And That was The Week That Was.
“Call to Me and I will answer you, and I will tell you great and mighty things which you do not know.” (Jeremiah 33:3)
“Behold, days are coming”, declares the LORD, “when I will fulfill the good word which I have spoken concerning the house of Israel and the house of Judah. in those days and at that time I will cause a righteous Branch of David to spring forth; and He shall execute justice and righteousness on the earth. In those days Judah will be saved and Jerusalem will dwell in safety; and this is the name by which she will be called: the LORD is our righteousness.” (Jeremiah 33:14-16)
With prayers for a truly blessed week.
Marvin