Author: marvinsk

Red lines are not pink lines – TWTW …. ending 4 May, 2013

On By marvinskLeave a comment


Shalom all,

Red lines are not pink lines,
The media is all abuzz about air strikes on targets inside of Syria. The fingers are pointed at Israel. Syria and its ally in Lebanon, the Hizb’allah, threaten retaliation. Iran expresses willingness to train Syrian troops. Netanyahu demonstrates leadership, while all is quiet on the western (North American) front. That about says it all.

Two air strikes took place in three days against targets in Syria, the latest one being early this morning (Sunday). War planes could be heard streaming across the skies of Israel in the early hours of the day, while most of Israel slept. Like those that were hit on Thursday night, the targets last night were said to be Iranian arms shipments on their way to the Hizb’allah, in Lebanon.

According to a report in The New York Times, the Israeli Air Force fired air-to-ground missiles from the skies over Lebanon, without entering Syrian air space. This type of air strike is referred to as an “over-the-horizon” strike, or a “stand-off” strike. It allows a pilot to send missiles from a distance without exposing the plane either to anti-aircraft fire, or even shock waves that the plane itself creates. These types of strikes are not new. In fact they were invented during the era of the “Cold War”, with the intention of preventing the pilot from flying into a mushroom cloud generated by a nuclear blast. Israel used this technique as early as the Yom Kippur War in 1973.

It is reported that Israel targeted Iranian Fatah-110 single-stage, solid fuel rockets, which have a range of some 300 kilometers (over 186 miles), which can also be launched from the back of a truck. But, Hizb’allah already has hundreds, if not thousands, of fairly comparable Syrian-made M-600 missiles. So, why should Israel risk its pilots and possible retaliation from both Syria and the Hizb’allah at this time? It would seem to be because a “red line” should be a “red line” and not a “pink line”. This was clearly intended to send a strong message to the Iranian-Syrian-Hizb’allah axis that Israel is ready, willing and able to prevent the transfer of weapons from Syria to Lebanon. And, if we go a step further, the message was specifically intended for Iranian eyes, ears and understanding that Israel will do what she needs to do, when she needs to do it and wherever she needs to act, to prevent efforts to arm her enemies. As of this writing, there have been numerous responses from Syrians spokesmen, condemning the attack and threatening retaliation and asserting that Israel’s actions will result in an all-out regional war.

Netanyahu has repeatedly said that Israel will not allow shipments of sophisticated weaponry and unconventional (chemical or biological) weapons to fall into the hands of the Hizb’allah. Once it is becomes aware of such shipments, Israel needs to abide by her word and do whatever is necessary for the protection of the population. The fact that Netanyahu said he would act, and did act, speaks volumes for his leadership ability. The type of strike that occurred last night requires precise intelligence gathering – no small feat when we consider that Syria is in the middle of a civil war, but it remains alert and careful, having been previously exposed to attacks upon its various weapons facilities, as well as shipments intended for Lebanon (both last Thursday as well as this past January).

Knesset Member Tzachi Hanegbi (Likud) stated that what Israel wants to accomplish is mainly to ensure that “within the chaos in Syria, Hizb’allah doesn’t get strong enough that it will be motivated to act against us, something that would drag us into a conflict with Hizb’allah in which we would absorb more losses than in the past because we didn’t hit their growing capabilities in time.”

As expected, the official state media in Syria first accused Israel of carrying out a raid on a military facility not far from the capital. Activists within Syria claim that the targets were sites in Damascus itself, including, among other things, the weapon depot of the Syrian Republican Guard. The claim of the activists was denied by Syrian state media.

Still, we should be careful not to become proud or to brush off Syria’s threats of retaliation as mere rhetoric. Its national pride has been wounded and it has suffered embarrassment and loss of honor in front of a wider, Arab population. This is a dangerous situation in this part of the world, and almost begs for a response to restore its national honor. While Israel has kept a tight lid on the situation and has not been boastful, she is undoubtedly mindful of the potential retaliatory response, whether serious or minimal. Accordingly, the IDF has stationed Iron Dome anti-missile batteries in the northern city of Tzfat, as well as in Haifa (again).

In the meantime, the U.S. remains silent and uncommitted. The events of recent days has shown that there is a major difference between Israel’s setting of “red lines” and the U.S. setting “red lines”, at least as far as events in the Middle East are concerned. While President Obama supports Israel’s right to defend herself, his own “red lines” seem to be undergoing redefinition. It is understandable that Obama would rather withdraw American troops from regions in the Middle East, instead of sending in combat forces to yet another arena where the original intentions of the Arab Spring have taken a wrong turn. Still, as the President of the United States, he cannot ignore the increasing pressure being placed upon his administration to take military action against Assad’s use of chemical weapons against the people of Syria. For now, there is no decision to intervene. Indeed, Obama has already indicated that sending U.S. forces into Syria would not help either that nation or the U.S. With Israel’s closest ally sitting on the fence, we see, once again, that as far as this world is concerned, Israel has no other nation that it can rely on for help. 

Other Matters
Time is as much a problem for me as it is for most of you. Sometimes, the grind of daily life presses us, as we need to take care of “this” or deal with “that” and at the end of the day, all we want to do is take a break from it all. But, we cannot always do what we want to do, but we can pray that we can accomplish what we need to do. 

Sometimes, events cry out for mention. At other times, situations compete with one another for honorable mention. For various reasons, I needed to take a break and get some rest. So, many things needed to take a back seat for a while, in order to allow time to deal with urgent matters. Now that most of them are behind me, I can get back to giving you a glimpse of what is and has been going on here for the last few weeks.

The last TWTW dealt with the Holocaust and generated more responses and comments that I would have expected. Without exception, everyone who wrote was positive and encouraging. Some even wanted to know how to be in touch with organizations that reach out to Holocaust survivors. But shortly after that, Israel went through another difficult time of remembrance, as the nation mourned the loss of her sons and daughters, whose lives were given in the defense of this country, or whose lives were taken as a result of terrorist incidents. Israel is a small country and, as a result, many incidents touch a multitude of people. Not the least of these are stories relating to heroism and the sacrificing of one soldier’s life to save his comrades. Then there are the stories of those who remained behind, who mourn the lost of loved ones on a daily basis, not just once a year. One has to be made of stone not to respond to these stories and to mourn with those who mourn. But mourning turned to joy, as Israel celebrated her 65th birthday. I passed over those events in TWTW, not because they were not important, but because of the press of other commitments. 

Israel celebrates Lag BaOmer
The most recent “holiday” celebrated in Israel was Lag BaOmer. “Lag” is actually a contraction of the letters “lamed” and “gimel”, which has a numerical value of 33. “Omer” is the period of time between Passover and Shavuot (also known as the Feast of Weeks, or Pentecost). So, Lag BaOmer is the 33rd day after Passover in the Counting of the Omer, which falls on the Hebrew date of the 18th of the month of Iyar.

Jewish tradition today ties the holiday to the Second Jewish Revolt against the Roman Empire, which was led by Bar Kokhba. The revolt occurred during the years 132-135 and took place mostly in the region of Judea. In Israel, it is celebrated as a symbol for the fighting Jewish spirit.

Actually, the first 32 days of the Omer are a period of mourning, during which time Jews are not allowed to get married, listen to music or even take a haircut, among other things. The reason for the mourning period dates back to the story of Rabbi Akiva, who reportedly had 24,000 disciples, all except 5 of whom died in an epidemic that occurred during the first 32 days of the Omer. It is difficult to understand the impact that such a loss had on future generations. The Torah that is learned today in orthodox circles, along with its interpretations, was passed on by Rabbi Akiva and his 5 remaining disciples. One of those disciples was Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, concerning whom tradition says that he died on the 33rd day of the Omer and, as a result, we celebrate his memory on that day. Rabbi Shimon’s teachings are memorialized in the Zohar, which is a book of Jewish mystical thought. 
“Zohar” means “Glow” or “Radiance.” So on Lag B’Omer, the memory of Rabbi Shimon is honored, usually by lighting bonfires or candles, which are said to be symbolic of the light thats comes forth from the study of Torah.
Getting back to Bar Kochba – his forces were extremely successful against Roman legions. He fought to liberate Jerusalem from Roman rule and his influence and authority actually extended far beyond the region of Judea to much of what is the land of Israel today.

It is widely thought that the Romans probably would have left the Jews alone, if they had only confined themselves to maintaining a spiritual identity, following the example of Rabbi Yochanan Ben Zakkai, who was largely responsible for restoring Jewish life in Yavneh, after the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 A.D. But, that was not the case. Following the destruction of the Temple, the Romans made life progressively more difficult for the Jews throughout the entire Roman Empire, but particularly in Judea, rendering the Yavneh example not feasible to many. 

Examples of Roman oppression:
Under Emperor Domitian (81-96), potential Jewish leaders, who were descendants of the House of David, were hunted down by Roman forces.
Under Emperor Trajan, (98-117), Roman forces massacred Jewish communities in areas that are known today as Iraq, Libya and Cyprus, as well as Egypt. Seeing what happened in the regions surrounding Judea and Samaria, Jews started to prepare for more conflicts with Rome. these preparations included construction of various fortifications in different areas, as well as escape routes to caves near the Dead Sea.
In 133, Emperor Hadrian banned Jews from performing the rite of circumcision and sought to break the national spirit of the Jews, by constructing a temple to the Roman god, Jupiter, on the ruins of the Second Temple, which was destroyed by Titus in 70 A.D. More and greater efforts were made by Rome to break the national will of the people and to destroy the ability of the Jewish people to continue to exist as a nation. The final blow came after Bar Kochba’s forces were defeated, when Hadrian renamed the region of Judea as Syria-Palestina, in an effort to erase any trace and memory of the Jewish people to the land.

The full might of the Roman Empire was concentrated on defeating the Bar Kochba Revolt. At the peak of the war, Hadrian had committed a full 12 legions (out of a total of 28 that Rome had) to his campaign. Every effort was made to crush the Bar Kochba Revolt, because if successful, it could have brought down the entire Roman Empire, as such a success could have lead other conquered peoples to revolt against Rome, as well. The Roman historian, Dio Cassius, who lived a hundred years after the event, summarized the impact that the revolt had on the populations existing at that time: “[Many] gentiles came to their aid…the whole earth, one might almost say, was being stirred over the matter.” So, it became imperative to defeat Bar Kochba at all costs.

We can try to analyze the right and the wrong of Bar Kochba’s revolt against Rome, which resulted in the deaths of almost 600,000 Jews. But, it would not be beneficial, nor would it change history. It was the spirit of the Bar Kochba Revolt that had a major impact upon Israel’s early political leadership and which led them to declare national independence. It is the same spirit that pushes the Israeli people to say “no” to terrorism and to efforts to destroy us as a people. But, Bar Kochba was a man who studied his Bible. He knew that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob made promises to His people. However, like many who preceded him and who followed him, and who even proclaimed him to be the Messiah (like Rabbi Akiva), they relied upon the arm of the flesh and not on The Lord of Hosts. He continues to say: “‘not by might, nor by power; but by My Spirit’.” (Zechariah 4:6)

Lots of other things have happened over the past few weeks, some of which were right here in Haifa.

Hizb’allah drone shot down over Haifa waters.
A week ago last Thursday, the Hizb’allah sent an unmanned aircraft into Israeli airspace. These aircraft are usually quite small and many times accomplish their spy missions successfully and return back to their bases without mishap. But, small or not, Israel was able to track it from the time it took off in Lebanon and followed its course south along the Mediterranean Sea. When the drone (technical term: UAV – unmanned aerial vehicle) reached the coast of Haifa, it was shot down by Israeli Air Force jet with a single missile. An earlier Hizb’allah drone, sent six months ago, met a similar fate.

Responding to this incident, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said last week that “Israel will deal with every threat from Syria and from Lebanon from the sea, air and land…Syria is cracking and Lebanon is unstable. Considerable threats to Israel are seen coming from both places, and in Syria there are two direct threats. The first is the flow of weapons to terrorist organizations, and the second is a terrorist attempt to infiltrate our borders and attack our communities in Israel.”

It is reasonable to presume that the drone was not armed. If it had been, it would have evoked a severe military response from Israel. It probably was sent to test Israel’s ability to respond to small, barely visible aircraft, as well as its response time. In any event, the greater likelihood is that it was an attempt by the Hizb’allah to get out from under local and international Arab pressure and condemnation for siding with the Shiite regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad against the rebels, who represent the Sunni majority there. As a result of its military involvement in Syria, the question is being asked whether the Hizb’allah is more loyal to Syria and Iran than it is to Lebanon. So, by sending the drone, it was like sending a message to other Arab countries that the Hizb’allah have not forgotten that the real enemy is Israel and that their organization is the real defense of Lebanon. We could probably expect to see more incidents like this and on a more frequent basis. This is based on a claim by the Hizb’allah that its drone successfully penetrated our air space for eight minutes before it was shot down. Also, when this happened six months ago, Hizb’allah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah said that this type of sophisticated drone was manufactured in Iran, assembled by the Hizb’allah and that there would be more of them. Sending the drone was also an attempt to send an embarrassing message to Israel that if you can penetrate our air space, so we can penetrate yours. Obviously, the drone was sent to also take pictures and send them back to Lebanon, where they could also be published and be used as propaganda against Israel, showing Israel that she is relatively defenseless against this form of activity of the Hizb’allah. 

Still, the upside of Hizb’allah’s involvement in Syria is that it provides a bit of a rest for Israel from immediate concerns emanating from Lebanon, inasmuch as the Hizb’allah is not capable of fighting on two fronts at the same time. The downside, of course, is that the presence of Hizb’allah fighters in Syria allows them closer proximity to the latter’s extensive arsenal of advanced weaponry, including, among other things, chemical weapons, which could immediately be up for grabs when Assad’s regime falls. Things may change a bit, in light of the recent attacks against weapons convoys, which were intended to reach the Hizb’allah.

And behind the drones and the Hizb’allah’s involvement in Syria is, of course, Iran, who has made significant strides in drone development. But, once Iran is brought into the picture, the relative lack of concern over picture-taking drones becomes a major concern that at some point Iran and/or the Hizb’allah will arm the drones with explosives and send them against strategic locations here and possibly elsewhere.

Following last October’s drone incident, Israel has instituted various measures to prevent future incursions into Israel’s air space. Some of these measures proved themselves with this latest drone incident. But, as noted, the likelihood is that these drone flights will continue and increase in frequency, particularly as the situation in Syria continues to deteriorate. That means that Israel needs to step up both its vigilance and response readiness … just in case.

Interestingly, this past week, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, leader of the Hizb’allah, actually came out with a belated denial that his organization was responsible for sending the unmanned drone the week before, stating, in a televised speech: “Hizb’allah knows how to take responsibility for any actions, particularly those that hurt Israel. The Israelis claimed they intercepted a drone near Haifa, and immediately everyone blamed Hizb’allah. These accusations are an honor we never pretended to earn. The other option also raised by the various analysts in Israel and around the world, that members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard launched the drone, is baseless and unrealistic.”  Denying that it sent the drone, after boasting less than a week earlier that it did so, speaks for itself. As an aside, Nasrallah also referred to what was happening in Syria, claiming that Britain and Israel were behind the rebel forces fighting against the Syrian regime: “On the military level, those who oppose the regime in Syria don’t have a chance of toppling the government in Damascus … Syria has many friends in the region and in the world that won’t let it fall into the hands of the heretics from Israel, the United States or Britain”. The “friends” he was referring to, of course, include Russia, China and Iran. So, what else is new?

The Haifa Marathon, in the shadow of Boston’s Marathon
The bombing of the Boston Marathon sent chilling ripples across the world. It was planned by the perpetrators, unexpected by the participants and caught the police unprepared. It brought the reality of “terrorism” once against to the “home of the brave and the land of the free”. It is not politically correct to talk of terrorists or acts of terrorism on American soil. But, unless America gets its head out of the sand and stops pretending that following 9/11, it is now immune from such attacks, it is bound to have additional rude awakenings along the same lines.

Death and severe injury follow in the wake of terrorists and terrorism. there is no getting around it. Those who aren’t killed outright need to receive immediate attention by medical personnel, who know what they are doing. The U.S. has many excellent physicians, but few have experience in treating terror victims. As it turned out, both the suspected terrorist, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, and many of his victims ended up Boston’s Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, a teaching hospital of Harvard Medical School, and were treated by Professor Kevin (Ilan) Tabb, who is the director of the hospital and an Israeli. Dr. Tabb, who is also a member of the Board of Hadassah Ein Kerem Hospital in Jerusalem, where he studied medicine and completed his residency, stated: “Unfortunately, I have had a lot of experience with these types of injuries after years of treating people injured in terror attacks in Israel…We have a few Israeli doctors in the emergency room, and the director of the ER is also Israeli. But most of the physicians at the hospital are not Israeli, and they functioned exceptionally well”.



He added that as a result of the bombings, there were numerous leg injuries and many amputations. “In Israel we are used to this and here they are not, but the hospital was prepared. Most of those who were seriously injured in the attack were sent to the three main trauma centers in Boston, including ours…It was very similar to what I was used to in Israel in that we had to admit many injured people in a short period of time…The fact that we are treating both the victims and the suspected terrorist also reminds me of similar situations in Israel. In Israel we had an injured soldier and a terrorist lying on adjacent beds. When an injured person is admitted to the ER, the doctor or nurse treats him without asking questions.”



In the backdrop of what happened in Boston, every reasonable precaution was being taken when Haifa held its annual Marathon on April 23rd. Police were stationed all along the route, with a heavy concentration of security around the start and finish lines, including the bomb squad and ambulances. The number of participants come to around 15,000, an increase of about 33% over last year. Many said that they wanted to run as an expression of solidarity with the runners in the Boston Marathon. Others wanted to show that neither terrorist nor terrorism will damper the Israeli spirit. There were actually 3 events, which followed one after the other. First, the 2-1/2 kilometer event, followed immediately by the 5 km. run and the 10 km. event began when the 5 km. runners were halfway into the marathon. It was a sight to see. There was a special group, who ran to identify with the runners in Boston. And, as they and all of the participants crossed the finish line, the announcers were saying over and over that Haifa and Boston are united in spirit and that we support and encourage them, as we all stand united against those who try, but will not succeed, to frighten us. Our youngest son, Aviad, participated in the 5 km. run with many of his high school classmates. He said that there was something special about participating in the race this year. Based on the size of the turnout, I think that many agreed with him, even the octogenarian who was a Holocaust survivor, who was last one to cross the finish line, accompanied by two policemen on motor-cycles. We cannot, indeed, we must not, allow terrorists or terrorism to triumph. 

Diplomacy in the Ditch
There is an old joke that asks the question: “How do you know that a politician is lying?” The answer: “His lips are moving.” There is another question that is usually asked in this country, namely: “Is it good for Israel and the Jewish people”? When we put these two questions together, we must inevitably view with rational thoughts every policy statement that affects the country.

For a few weeks preceding President Obama’s visit to Israel, there was a renewed emphasis on expressing our willingness to resurrect the dead “peace process”. Language was used to encourage those who call themselves “Palestinians” to come back to the bargaining table. There were renewed efforts on the part of the Arab League to resurrect a peace plan that would allow for recognition of Israel by Arab countries, in exchange for Israel giving up territory acquired as a result of the 6-Day War and returning the situation to pre-1967 borders. Obama showed his true intentions, as well as his poor understanding of history, as well as the realities of the situation on the ground concerning the Middle-East conflict. Then, he sent in his new Secretary of State, John Kerry, to work out the details of the two-state solution. Even though Obama urged the “Palestinians” not to set pre-conditions for returning to the negotiating table, his urging had little, if any, effect upon “Palestinian” policies, as they continue with their insistence on a string of preconditions. These preconditions were enumerated in the last TWTW and include, among other things, a complete settlement freeze, the release of over 100 terrorists and a map of final borders of a “Palestinian” state. The attitude is one of “give me”, but don’t ask me to give you anything in return. It takes “two to tango” and Abbas is looking to Hamas to be his partner, not Israel, a move that will prevent peace negotiations between Israel and the “Palestinians”.

At this point, Netanyahu needs to stop wooing and courting Abbas to the negotiating table. Abbas is not interested in pursuing peace discussions with Israel, except on his own, exaggerated terms. He also has other concerns right now, not the least of which is trying to establish a new “Palestinian” government following the resignation of Salam Fayyad. Abbas’ desire to set up a unity government with Hamas is also accompanied by his concerns over the failed expectations of the so-called Arab Spring, which he hopes will not reach his doorstep.

But, even if Israel decides to put everything “on hold” with the “Palestinians”, and even with the various difficulties facing Abbas, the likelihood is that Abbas will not sit quietly and wait for the blue bird of happiness to show up one day with an Israeli offer of statehood, without the need to offer anything concrete in return. It should be recalled that the P.A. has acquired independent Observer Status at that international “un-organization”, known as the United Nations. This now allows the P.A. to file a claim with the International Criminal Court in The Hague against Israeli soldiers who could be accused of “war crimes”, which could possibly result in their inability to travel freely to those countries which are member states of the ICC. On the other hand, claims and counterclaims could be filed against the P.A.and against “Palestinian” leadership that encourage suicide bombers and the firing of missiles upon civilian-population areas in Israel. It is risky business and Abbas tends to play on the safe side, rather than take uncertain risks that could damage both his image and his goals.

The new Pope accepts Shimon Peres’ invitation to visit Israel.
More on this next time.

And That was The Week That Was.

“It is the living who give thanks to you, as I do today”. (Isaiah 38:19)
“The LORD is my light and my salvation; Whom shall I fear? The LORD is the defense of my life; Whom shall I dread? When evildoers came upon me to devour my flesh, my adversaries and my enemies, they stumbled and fell. Though a host encamp against me, my heart will not fear; Though war arise against me, in spite of this I shall be confident.” (Psalm 27:1-3)

Have a truly blessed week.

Marvin

נשלח מה-iPad שלי

Holocaust Remembrance Day – TWTW … ending 6 April, 2013

On By marvinskLeave a comment

Shalom all, 


Last week did not reveal a lot of major changes in political thinking, antagonism and rhetoric. Israel began to prepare for Holocaust Remembrance Day. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry added to his frequent-flyer miles, as he made his third trip in three weeks to our neck of the woods. The situation in Syria is becoming more problematic and the south is heating up, again. But, much attention in this update is given to the Holocaust.

Holocaust Remembrance Day
There are always will be those who do not want to remember that the Holocaust is a fact of history. For some, like Iran and other anti-semites around the world, it is a matter of willful denial. For others, remembering that the Holocaust really happened is too painful for them, either because it brings back memories of what they, themselves, went through, or because it generates anguish and thoughts of what others went through, during a time when the morality and conscience of the world sunk to an all-time low.
But, the long and the short of it is that the Holocaust stands as a scar on the heart and a wart on the hide of humanity that cannot be removed. The best way to cope with it, and to learn from it, is to never forget it. That’s why Israel has a day a year specifically set aside for the remembrance of the Holocaust. That day began in the evening of April 7th and continued until the evening of April 8th. The media was filled with stories that would pull tears out of a stone. The radio had songs that would wrench the heart. Our national leaders had statements and phrases that were intended to encourage us and strengthen our resolve, so that the phrase “Never Again!” would have reality to it.
Holocaust Remembrance Day here is marked by a ceremony at the Holocaust Memorial Museum, Yad Vashem. Memorial flames are lit by Holocaust survivors, whose incredible stories are told in brief before he or she takes the torch and lights the memorial flame. This year’s memorial of “Yom HaShoah” (“Day of the Holocaust”) included a theme relating to the 70th anniversary of the rebellion which began in the Warsaw Ghetto on April 19th, 1943, known as the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising (note: Unlike the International Holocaust Remembrance Day, which is marked worldwide on January 27th, which is the date of the liberation of the Auschwitz death camp, Israel’s Day of Remembrance coincides with the date of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, according to the Hebrew calendar). One of the heroes of the Warsaw Ghetto was Peretz Hochman, who was scheduled to light one of the six memorial torches at the opening ceremony at Yad Vashem. This honor was never experienced, as Peretz died only a few days earlier. His wife, Sima, was given the honor to light the memorial flame. Speaking of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, Dr. Havi Dreifuss, a senior lecturer of Jewish History at Tel Aviv University, stated: “For both Jews and non-Jews, this even has become the symbol of the desperate heroism and resolute struggle of the Jewish spirit.” Although tremendously outnumbered, the uprising was able to last for 27 days. When it was over, 13,000 Jews were killed. The approximately 50,000 ghetto survivors were sent to nearby death camps.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu began his speech by adapting a portion of the Passover Haggadah (the booklet that is used to guide participants at a Passover Seder) and stated: “In every generation our enemies rise against us to destroy us. In every generation, each man must view himself as though he had survived the Holocaust and went on to found the state of Israel. In every generation, it is our duty to ensure that the Holocaust does not recur.”
The remainder of his speech is significant for what he said, as well as for what he did not say: “During the generation of the Holocaust we were helpless to prevent the destruction. Many failed to recognize the danger in time, and once they did, it was too late. The trap had been set, the trap door had shut. The gates of our land were closed to Jewish refugees, as were the gates of most countries. From that point, it became very easy to exterminate our brothers and sisters — six million of them.
“Hatred of Jews, which peaked in Nazi Germany, the Jews’ weakness in exile and the world’s helplessness — these three factors came together to bring about the tragedy of the Holocaust. However, in the depths of darkness, a major shift in the fate of the Jewish people began. In the death camps and the ghettos, in the Warsaw Ghetto, Jewish history shifted. That is where the Jewish resistance rose up again.
“That is where the spirit of the Maccabees was rediscovered. That is where the flag of rebellion was waved anew. In the depths of despair unlike anything humankind had ever known, young Jews mustered up their power to resist and their Jewish courage, and fought back against the Nazi enemy. The fact that they were defeated did not diminish the power of their courage, nor did it diminish the great transformation they instigated in the history of our people.
“The defenders of the ghetto went from being helpless victims to becoming brave fighters. Five years later, with the same spirit, the few versus the many, Israel Defense Forces soldiers, among them many Holocaust survivors, defeated the Arab armies that tried to destroy the State of Israel. Our ability and willingness to defend ourselves are what ensures our continued existence and our future.
“Several days ago, I bid farewell to a young lieutenant colonel who served in the military secretary’s office at the Prime Minister’s Office. He is relocating to the Negev to train the future commanders of the IDF at the officers’ academy. He moved me immensely when he told me about his grandmother Hannah, who survived Auschwitz. The number that the Nazis tattooed on her arm ended in the numerals 78. As luck would have it, the identification number that Hannah received upon entering the State of Israel also ended in 78. Her number of death had turned into a number of life in the State of Israel. Hannah, who is watching us from the audience right now, survived the Nazi inferno, and today, her grandson, an officer in the IDF, is preparing our future commanders.
“I am proud to be the prime minister of this people, but there are those who seek to extinguish this light of ours. Iran has openly declared that it intends to annihilate the State of Israel. We appreciate the efforts made by the international community to halt Iran’s nuclear program, but at no point will we ever leave our fate in the hands of others, not even the closest of our allies.
“I am certain of Israel’s power, and I have faith in the Israel Defense Forces. I believe in you, the citizens of Israel. We are stronger today than ever before, and we will overcome the challenges that face us, as difficult as they may be. Never again will we get to a point where it is too late. Never again will we stand helpless in front of those who seek to kill us.
“We will know how to defend ourselves. In this place, and on this day I vow: There will never be another Holocaust.”
There is no doubt that his speech touched and encouraged many. It was a speech that touched on history, bravery, resolve, confidence, encouragement and gave warning. But, it also was prideful and contained his vow that the Holocaust would never occur again. I cringe when people talk with misplaced pride and make vows that they, themselves are not able to fulfill, particularly when those doing so are politicians and leaders of Israel, who speak on behalf of the nation and as their representatives. “If a man makes a vow to the LORD, or takes an oath to bind himself with a binding obligation, he shall not violate his word ; he shall do according to all that proceeds out of his mouth.” (Numbers 30:2) “When you make a vow to the LORD your God, you shall not delay to pay it, for it would be sin in you, and the LORD your God will surely require it of you.” (Deuteronomy 23:21)”When you make a vow to the LORD your God, you shall not delay to pay it, for it would be sin in you, and the LORD your God will surely require it of you. It is better that you should not vow than that you should vow and not pay.” (Ecclesiastes 5:4-5)
We have not yet reached the point when nations “will hammer their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, And never again will they learn war.” (Isaiah 2:4; Micah 4:3)  We live in a world that has failed to learn from its past failures and that is, once again, increasing in anti-semitism and in acts of hatred, vandalism and violence against Jewish people. The prophets speak of a time when Israel will once again suffer and when two thirds of the nation will perish, while one third will remain, to be refined and tested by God, so that they will call upon His Name.(Zechariah 13:9) 
With two of my children having served in the IDF and the third going to serve before too much longer, I, too, am confident that those who wear the uniform will continue to perform their assigned tasks honorably, to serve and to defend this nation and its inhabitants. And, to the extent that it depends upon them, they will act to insure that “Never Again!” is a meaningful statement.


But, if our trust is in the strength of our flesh only, then our trust is misplaced. We did not succeed against the Arab countries because of our courage or strength. Indeed, we were tremendously outnumbered and under considerable military disadvantage. We succeeded because God pulled us out of the ashes of the Holocaust and fought for us, just as He did when He brought us out of Egypt. Woe to us if we rely on man and make flesh our strength and turn our hearts from the LORD. (Jeremiah 17:5)
I would have expected that a national leader of Israel, who holds a Bible study in his home, would have made reference to the God of Israel, Who keeps Israel and will not slumber nor sleep (Psalm 121:4). “Thus says the LORD, Who gives the sun for light by day And the fixed order of the moon and the stars for light by night, Who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar ; The LORD of hosts is His name: ‘If this fixed order departs From before Me,’ declares the LORD, ‘Then the offspring of Israel also will cease From being a nation before Me forever.’ Thus says the LORD, ‘If the heavens above can be measured And the foundations of the earth searched out below, Then I will also cast off all the offspring of Israel For all that they have done,’ declares the LORD.” (Jer. 31:35-37)
President Shimon Peres also spoke at the opening ceremony and, in my opinion, his speech was more to the point and touched more people than the speech of the P.M. Some of Peres’ statements appear below:
“The Holocaust will not sink into history’s gaping hole. It is here with us, burning, real. It resonates as we step on the stones of the ghettos. It hovers like a ghost in the barracks of the camps. It cries from the prayer shawls, the hair and the shoes that we see with our own eyes. It whispers from the tears that dried before we said goodbye. It is reflected in the photographs of the babies in their mothers’ arms. The noise of those murderous trains which have ceased moving still rings in our ears. The smoke has cleared, but it has not faded as it drifted into the sky above.
“Survivors walk among us, the Holocaust and its horrors are with them every day. Their blood flows through our veins. Their bravery accompanies every step of our lives. There was no greater horror in the history of mankind. Nothing can undo the greatest darkness mankind has ever known.
“The 74 years that have passed are more of a biography than a history. Millions of names are still missing, of parents and children, of entire Jewish communities that were destroyed (by the way – one of those communities is Ostrolenka, Poland, where my parents were from, who were able to leave in 1939, just before Germany’s invasion of Poland; many of my relatives never made it out and are listed among the 6 million who perished). There is no substitute for the culture, for the values, and for the talents that are gone. They remain as an open wound. We will not stop searching for every scrap of information, for a name yet to be identified, for a photograph that has been blurred. A third of our people, six million, were murdered for no reason.
“The Jewish people today are fewer compared to their number at the eve of World War II. We decreased in size, but not in spirit. We are working with all our might to fill the void. Physically and spiritually. To grow out of the ashes, to create something out of nothing, to defend. To foster our independence, and not to tire from efforts to better the world we live in….
“The Holocaust is an orphan with no comfort and a moral responsibility that cannot be compromised. It does not permit us, the Jewish people, to turn a blind eye. It must always serve as a warning to all of humanity.
“The map of Europe still contains local stains of anti-Semitism. The racism that was rampant on that land in the last century dragged it down to its lowest point. Ultimately the killings there damaged it as well.
“To our shame, there are some who have learnt nothing. Young [neo-nazi] skinheads. False scientists dressed in false suits. Yes! There remain those who repress the Holocaust and there are those who deny the Holocaust. Not all the volcanic eruptions have subsided. Crises are once again being exploited to reestablish ridiculous, yet dangerous, Nazi parties. Sickening anti-Semitic cartoons are supposedly part of the freedom of the press.
“The journey for justice and freedom is not over yet. When I hear the four words, ‘Let My People Go’ I feel again and again that the journey out of the house of slavery our people embarked on has not ended, and must not ground to a halt. It must not stop until slavery, in every way shape and form, is abolished — in every place, in every situation, until the winds of freedom blow away the stench of racism and clear the evil smoke.
“The enlightened world must ask itself how, so soon after the crematoria were extinguished and despite the terrible death toll the Allies had endured in the effort to counter the Nazi devil, the leaders of Iran feel they can openly deny the Holocaust and threaten another Holocaust. Whoever ignores the threat against one nation, must know that the threat of a Holocaust against one nation is a threat of a Holocaust against all nations.
“The Jewish people may be small but it they are large in spirit. That spirit cannot be burned in crematoria. From the ashes of the Holocaust emerged a spiritual revival and a political renaissance. Some of our people were cut off from the rest, but we rose and we built a state of our own. We lost possessions, but retained our values; We returned to our ancient homeland; We renewed our moral legacy. We returned to independence. We returned to creation, to education, and we returned to hope.
“We built a defensive force capable of dealing with dangers, new and old. The Israel Defence Forces, which was formed in response to the attempt to annihilate the Jewish state that had just been created, is also the right lesson from the Holocaust. It is founded upon the bravery of Jews in the Holocaust.
“Today, Holocaust Martyrs’ and Heroes’ Remembrance Day is also the 70th anniversary of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. There has never been a rebellion like it. They were so outnumbered, but their bravery remains as a model for so many. From now and forever! Today we salute their bravery with the flags flying in the wind of freedom. These are flags of exaltation, not only of grief.
“The resistance in the ghettos, in the camps and in the forests and the rebirth and bravery of the State of Israel all have a common thread. This involves dignity, renewed independence, mutual responsibility and kiddush Hashem [willingness to be martyred in the name of God]. As a ray of hope that continued to beam alongside terrible anguish. The ghetto fighters sought life even when circumstance screamed despair….Touting the heroism of the fighters is not just a matter of doing justice to their bravery. It is an existential need, for each of us, for all of us as a people. We have always praised their heroism, but not always paid tribute to the actual heroes. It is now time we do that. We have not always listened to their heartbeats or attended their health and taken care of their well-being. Time has come to right this wrong.
“The history of the Holocaust is not just a lesson from the past, it is also a lesson for the future so that we know how to defend ourselves against dangers and thwart them in advance. It serves as a lesson that we shall rely on ourselves, so that we retain our moral legacy, which withstood impossible situations. We must maintain our friendship with friends, and work with them to foster a better future, for every person, for every nation, for all nations so we can ensure humanity never again becomes inhumane. We’ll ensure that every person has the right to be unique — unique and equal. We will never despair. After all, we were commanded: ‘Do not fear, my servant Jacob’ because ‘The Lord will give strength to his people’.”
It is important to listen to what these two leaders said. Netanyahu left God completely out of the picture. Peres alluded to Him, in his last sentence, which is a combination of different passages from Scripture (the part about Jacob not fearing – see Isaiah 44:2; Jeremiah 30:10; 46:27-28 – it is God Who will bring us back from afar to return to the land and be secure, with no one to make us tremble; the part about The LORD giving strength to His people – see Psalm 29:11. If Peres had continued with the latter verse, he would have stated “The LORD will bless His people with peace”). 
Again and again, our leaders think that reliance upon ourselves defines us and will protect us. We, too, have not learned from our past, which cries out to us to “trust in the LORD; He is [our] help and [our] shield.” (Psalm 115:9)
The nation came to a standstill for two minutes, as sirens wailed from “Dan to Beersheva”. Cars stopped on the highway and people got out to devote moments of silence in memory of those who perished in the Holocaust.
Ours is a constant blending of past and present, which helps us look to the future. If only our eyes were lifted heavenward, the future would look all the more bright.
Lessons to be learned from The Holocaust
There are many lessons to be learned from the Holocaust. But, it is impossible to do a proper treatise in this week’s update. Nevertheless, what must be clearly understood is that defending our nation and our citizens is an essential priority.  However, before the defense is factored in, we must have a greater understanding that there is a nation that has come home after two thousand years. Just as the children of Israel eventually learned that Egypt was not their home, so we must ask the question whether we can truly be “at home” living outside of Israel. A few years ago, there was a popular song here that included the refrain, “Ayn li eretz aheret” – “I don’t have another country”. I realize that the return to Zion is a touchy issue for many Jewish people around the world. The early Zionists called for all Jews to return to their ancient homeland. But, only a few responded and came, while most remained in the Diaspora. I often wonder how things would have turned out if the Jews of Europe had responded more positively to the Zionist call. Now, with anti-Semitic incidents increasing all over Europe, as well as in North America and in other places around the world, I again wonder whether the Jews of Europe will listen this time to the call of Zionism and come home, or whether they think that what happened then cannot happen again now. I also wonder whether the time has come for “the wandering Jew” to stop wandering.
Another lesson to be learned from the Holocaust comes from the speeches made at Yad Vashem, to the effect that we can’t trust the fate of our nation to the hands of others, “even those of the best of our friends”, as mentioned by Netanyahu. Speaking about the Holocaust, IDF Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz said that “the State of Israel is the assurance that such an atrocity doesn’t repeat itself, and the IDF is the shield that protects the national home, a safe haven for the entire Jewish people.” Stated differently, the Holocaust has taught us that we cannot rely on the other governments of this world to step in and defend Israel when it is at risk. While this has a ring of truth to it militarily, it would appear obvious that it can also be applied to the diplomatic sphere. The world stood by as Hitler’s efforts to bring about the “final solution” of the Jews became more effective. Even now, the world looks on, as Iran laughs all the way to the circle of nuclear countries. We have no indebtedness to the world and, therefore, the world cannot tell us how we should act or what we should do to protect ourselves and our families from those who seek to do us harm. Nor should we allow the nations of the world to dictate policy for us regarding our national homeland.
So, in short, two of the most fundamental lessons, among many, that we can learn from the Holocaust are that we don’t have any place to call “home” other than Israel and that we should not allow any other nation to tell us how to protect ourselves. We have a God Who rules the nations and He alone should place a lamp to our feet and a light to our paths.
John Kerry tries to further Obama’s intentions
It didn’t take long before the ideas that were presented during President Obama’s visit to Israel and its environs were given expression by Secretary of State John Kerry, who returned here for his third trip in three weeks, to revive the dead “peace process” and move it along. Upon returning to Israel, Kerry met with P.A. President Mahmoud Abbas in an effort to get him to return to the negotiating table. Abbas, for his part, expressed a willingness to do so, but renewed old pre-conditions, while adding new ones: stop settlement construction, present a map of the proposed Israeli and “Palestinian” borders, release “Palestinian” prisoners, a promise from Israel not to withheld further payments to the “Palestinian” Authority and permission for the “Palestinians” to build in an area that is under total Israeli control (known as “Area C”). These demands were passed along to Israel, who would be out of its mind to agree to any of them. The “Palestinians” took a deep breath after what they considered to be a disappointing trip by President Obama. They expected more. But, now that he is gone, they have returned to their old ways, demanding much and giving nothing in return.
From the point of view of the “Palestinians”, the release of between 150-250 “Palestinian” prisoners would be a “trust-building step” that would foster a “positive environment” that would enable the two sides to meet. Haven’t we released enough of those prisoners over the years? Haven’t we demonstrated enough “trust-building steps” to get the other side to move? Of course we have. But, there is not even the basic recognition of Israel as a Jewish state and, from the point of view of Hamas, we have no right to exist at all.
Efforts were made by Kerry to try to convince Turkey’s leadership to restore full relations with Israel as quickly as possible. While meeting with Turkey’s Foreign Minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, Kerry stated: “We would like to see this relationship that is important to stability in the Middle East and critical to the peace process … get back on track in its full measure”. But, Istanbul also has its pre-conditions, namely: first, to end all commercial restrictions against the “Palestinians”. Davutoglu hinted that full “normalization” between the two countries would take time: “There is an offense that has been committed and there needs to be accountability”, adding that Turkey would proceed carefully towards full restoration of ties with Israel, after compensation for the Mavi Marmara incident (where 9 Turkish activists were killed by Israeli commandos) and an end to Israeli trade restrictions on the Gaza Strip, both of which remain stumbling blocks from Turkey’s perspective. He also stated (through an interpreter): “All of the embargoes should be eliminated once and for all”.
The Turkish newspapers “Hurriyet” also reported that Kerry offered that Turkey play the role of mediator between Israel and the “Palestinians”. However, both sides have rejected that possibility and “Palestinian” officials in Ramallah have indicated that they and Israel have agreed that Jordan would be the mediator between them. In a take-off from Lewis Carroll’s statement: “The hurrier I go the behinder I get”, it would seem that the greater the intensity to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict, the worse the suggestions become for how to accomplish this task. The White House’s efforts to mediate were one sided: give to the “Palestinians”. The offer for Turkey to mediate is conditional: give in to the “Palestinians”. The alleged agreement to have Jordan mediate is absurd: They had control of Trans-Jordan (also known as Judea and Samaria, also known as the West Bank) after the Israeli War of Independence and lost it in the 6-Day War, giving rise to the absurd claim by the “Palestinians” that we captured and are now occupying their land. So, Jordan’s participation would also be biased and based on “You took from us, give it back – to the ‘Palestinians’.”
Israel needs to stop trying to please and appease everyone. It should take the position of “We extended our hand in peace and friendship, but it was slapped away; we are willing to talk, but there is no one to talk with; we have other things that are of an emergency nature, so for now, no more offers; as bad as the situation may be with those who call themselves “Palestinians”, we’re willing to live with the status quo; unsuccessful attempts were made to get through our naval embargo of the Gaza Strip and we were foolish enough to agree to pay compensation for defending ourselves. Enough is enough!” We want the assistance of the U.S. vis-a-vis Iran and the U.S. wants our assistance vis-a-vis Syria. A fair trade-off between friends. Let’s leave it at that.
Israel concerned over Syrian troop withdrawal from the Golan
Over the past few weeks, Israel’s practical concerns had been focused on the proximity of the Syrian rebels to the Golan Heights and, of course, the firing of mortar shells into Israeli territory. But, the presence of Syrian, regular troops in the area of the Golan acted as a buffer between the rebels and Israel. Now, in the most significant redeployment of troops in the past 40 years, the Syrian government has ordered the withdrawal of four, elite Syrian divisions, comprising thousands of soldiers, removing them to the areas in and around Damascus, to fight the rebels. This creates a real concern that their withdrawal from the Golan Heights will leave a power vacuum that could be filled by various jihadist forces, who could turn their weapons towards Israel. 
Obviously, the removal of Syrian troops from the area of the Golan could also jeopardize the future of U.N. peace-keeping forces stationed in that region, as some countries are reconsidering their commitments to submit troops to the U.N. Disengagement Observer Force. Due to the deteriorating situation in Syria, Croatia withdrew its “U.N.” troops two months ago.
Israel’s primary concern, however, is not the possibility of rebel troops perching on her north-eastern border. Rather, it is Syria’s stockpiles of chemical weapons and advanced anti-aircraft missiles systems that could fall into the hands of Sunni Islamist rebels, who have links to international terrorist groups and/or into the hands of the Shiite Hizb’allah forces in Lebanon, who are loyal to Assad and have links to Iran. None of these scenarios is good for Israel. As the situation in Syria continues to deteriorate, Israel is trying to work through possible scenarios that would require immediate action and full military involvement. This is where U.S. pressure is added to that which already exists against Israel.
Anti-Semitism increased worldwide by 30% in 2012
Unlike opinion polls, which can have differing results based upon the different questions and different population groups who constitute the survey pool, statistics are usually based on undisputed, numerical data. On the eve of Holocaust Remembrance Day, Tel Aviv University’s Kantor Center for the Study of Contemporary European Jewry reported a 30 percent increase in anti-Semitic vandalism and violence worldwide in 2012. The report indicated that 686 anti-Semitic incidents took place last year, compared with 526 incidents the year before. A little over one third involved physical assaults against Jews, with some 50 incidents that involved the use of firearms. Among the places vandalized were about 190 synagogues, Jewish monuments and gravestones, as well as some 200 buildings in Jewish communities worldwide. The report also covered various anti-Semitic trends in public and political discourse, as well as in the “social media, which was described as a breeding ground for anti-Semitic and fascist groups promoting hatred against Jews.
Dr. Moshe Kantor, the head of the research center, stated: “As a Jewish leader, I can say that the [Jewish communities] in Europe are in danger. People are afraid to go to synagogue, to go to Jewish school – this is a new phenomenon and it is joined by several other trends we haven’t seen before, like the fact that neo-Nazi [parties] have not only become legal in Europe, they’re already holding parliament seats in Hungary, Ukraine and Greece.”
Neighborhood Watch
Iran – Yuval Steinitz, the Strategi Affairs, Intelligence and International Relations Minister, is calling on world powers to set a deadline to take military action against Iran, within weeks. This came as a result of unsuccessful talks held in Kazkhstan, which were focused on trying to persuade Iran to stop its nuclear enrichment program. Steinitz stated: “The time has come to place before the Iranians a military threat or a form of red line, an unequivocal red line by the entire world, by the United States and the West  … in order to get results.” He added that such action should be taken within “a few weeks, a month”, without elaborating further.
Referring to the example of North Korea, he stated: “I think that what is currently happening in Korea serves to demonstrate to us all … how urgent it is to stop Iran’s nuclear [activity]…North Korea was somehow allowed by the international community to gain nuclear weapons and it is threatening to use them against South Korea, Japan and even the United States. Imagine what could happen within two or three years not only to Israel, but to Europe, the United States and the whole world if the fanatical and extreme regime in Tehran attains nuclear weapons.”
It should be recalled that P.M. Netanyahu had spoken of a potential mid-2013 “red line”, but, according to various Israeli officials, this time line has been deferred without a new deadline being set. Whether or not this is an attempt to catch Iran off guard is not known at this juncture. We need to line up Netanyahu’s statements, along with his vow that there will never be another Holocaust, and hold him accountable for his words. When dealing with maniacal regimes, we cannot play politics and make empty threats, particularly when the potential consequences of failing to act could result in exactly what Netanyahu vowed would not happen.
Hebron – A “Palestinian” prisoner in an Israeli jail died of complications resulting from throat cancer. He was 64 and serving a life sentence. His death sparked clashes between “Palestinian” youth in Hebron and IDF troops, with the “Palestinians” claiming that the prisoner was denied the medical care he needed and that he should have been released on compassionate grounds when it was demonstrated that his cancer was diagnosed as untreatable.
In the wave of violence following the prisoner’s funeral, “Palestinian” youths pelted the IDF with stones. In another location near Tulkarem in northern Judea and Samaria, firebombs were thrown at an Israeli checkpoint. The IDF returned fire and killed two of perpetrators. P.A. President Abbas responded to the latter incident by saying that the use of lethal force by Israel shows that it wanted to “provoke chaos” in “Palestinian” areas. I guess he thought that firebombs and stones were not intended to “provoke chaos” or could not cause lethal injury. But, then, what can we expect from someone who still denies that the Holocaust happened?
Ramallah – It is impossible to avoid the latest ploy of the “Palestinians”, which adds the demand that Netanyahu present a map of the borders of a future “Palestinian” state. Despite his chalking up frequent-flyer miles, Secretary of State John Kerry’s efforts at shuttle diplomacy are destined to failure. Border maps have been presented in the past and have been rejected. But, such maps were part of on-going negotiations, which also went nowhere. Now, Abbas is trying to make the presentation of the map a pre-condition for renewing negotiations. This is absurd. Border negotiations cannot precede other issues, such as recognizing Israel as a Jewish state and a willingness to end all belligerency against Israel, including amending the “Palestinian” charter that calls for the destruction of Israel. If we start to talk about borders first, the other issues will never end up being resolved. It will be the classic situation of putting the cart before the horse. Abbas claims that he is willing to talk, but violence is once again in the streets of Hebron and other areas that are under the control of the P.A., with nothing being done by the P.A. security forces to stop them. By the way, the salaries for the security forces of the P.A. are paid for by a portion of Israel’s tax money that is transferred to the “Palestinians”. 
Interestingly, one Israeli reporter wrote a column in a leftist newspaper last week that throwing stones at Israelis is justified. Writing in Haaretz, Amira Hass defended stone-throwing by “Palestinians” as “the birthright and duty of anyone subject to foreign rule”. She was widely condemned for going overboard. One excellent response, which was published as an “Opinion” in Haaretz is by Dr. Cellu Rozenberg, a historian and national security specialist, which stated, in part: “The Palestinian resistance movements do not recognize Israel’s existence, even based on the 1947 borders…The PA is an artificial creation, which receives artificial respiration from the “occupier” on a daily basis. The PA does not represent the popular mood. Hass ignores the fact that in the eyes of Israel’s greatest opponents, even the PA must disappear. The PA was evicted from Gaza only because of its desire to conduct a dialogue with Israel. Hamas eliminated the PA in Gaza, and if there are free elections in Judea and Samaria too, we can assume that Mahmoud Abbas will no longer be president. Hamas leaders and others consider Abbas a traitor because he recognizes Israel’s right to exist within the 1967 borders. The fact is Israel severed itself completely from Gaza, with the exception of commercial ties, and opposition to Israel continues full force…Hass writes: “Often hurling stones stems from boredom, excessive hormones, mimicry, boastfulness and competition. But in the inner syntax of the relationship between the occupier and the occupied, stone-throwing is the adjective attached to the subject of ‘We’ve had enough of you, occupiers.'” There is a logical inconsistency built into this argument: If the end is correct, then the beginning – in other words the “symptoms” – is irrelevant.”
Netanyahu’s most recent comments
At a meeting with Secretary of State Kerry yesterday (Tuesday), P.M. Netanyahu stated: “I am determined not only to resume the peace process with the “Palestinians”, but to make a serious effort to end this conflict once and for all.” Following his discussions with Kerry, Netanyahu said that the discussions were about the peace process and concerned two primary issues: recognition by the “Palestinians” of Israel as a Jewish state and security arrangements. Israel is demanding that the “Palestinians” present their positions on both matters.
Seems like every time a U.S. Secretary of State comes to Israel, some unseen pressure is applied and we start to make statements and commitments that can only get us into trouble. First, Netanyahu sets “red lines” and “deadlines”. Then, he makes a vow that is impossible for him to fulfill. Now, he states that he is “determined” to resurrect a dead peace process and finally to make a “serious effort” to end the Arab-Israel conflict. We need to make sure that we have our “life jackets” on. It looks like we’re in for some rough waters ahead.
And That was The Week That Was, plus a little more.
“No weapon that is formed against you will prosper ; And every tongue that accuses you in judgment you will condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD, And their vindication is from Me,” declares the LORD.” (Isaiah 54:17)
“Behold, I have inscribed you on the palms of My hands; Your walls are continually before Me. Your builders hurry; Your destroyers and devastators will depart from you.” (Isaiah 49:16-17)
Have a truly blessed week.
Marvin
נשלח מה-iPad שלי

Afterthoughts on Obama’s visit to Israel – TWTW … ending 30 March, 2013

On By marvinskLeave a comment

Shalom all, 

It’s almost hard to believe how much time, effort and finances went into the different aspects of President Obama’s brief trip to and around Israel. About $12 million was spent, much of it related to security measures. But, now that he’s returned to points west, we have a chance to reflect on what happened and ask “now what?” Netanyahu’s apology to the Turkish Prime Minister continues to be a hot issue, which is not over yet. 
Some After Thoughts on President Obama’s visit
It is now more than a week after U.S. President Barack Hussein Obama whirlwind visit to Israel, which included time in the area presently under the control of the “Palestinian” Authority, a s well as Jordan. This time allowed for reflection upon what that visit was all about and what it accomplished.
When all of the photo ops were finished, we were able to know only what the different leaders wanted us to know, namely those things that were made available to the public, through joint media statements, or “leaks” to the media from more or less nameless individuals who were privy to the private conversations held between President Obama and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, between Obama and “Palestinian” Authority Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) and between Obama and King Abdullah of Jordan. The public statements were intended to appease different audiences, particularly those on both sides of the Arab-Israeli conflict. To Israelis, the message was that we have ties to this land that are of ancient origin and that any resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict must include a recognition of Israel as a Jewish state. To the “Palestinians”, it was that they have a right to live free in their own land. The clear conflict is that the President made a distinction between our land and their land, as if the latter is separate from the former and, at some mysterious point in time, came into existence in Judea and Samaria..
It soon became obvious that Obama ran the show and called the shots, who he would speak with and why. Students, instead of leaders, because they are younger and more impressionable, as well as a friendlier audience. The fact that the university students from Ariel University were excluded from attending his speech in Jerusalem’s convention center revealed a continuation of the political stance of the United States, not to recognize what is “over the Green Line” as Israeli. Clearly, this decision was also calculated to minimize potentially antagonistic responses, particularly concerning Jewish settlement areas. The “Palestinians” had to take notice of this position and needed to be thankful for it. The same reasoning holds true regarding the decision not to address Israel’s Knesset, but to speak “directly” to the “next generation” of Israeli’s potential leadership.
What should be seen as a significant, positive achievement from Obama’s visit and speeches, at least from Israel’s perspective, is that which is most objected to by the “Palestinians”, namely, the demand that they, the “Palestinians”, recognize Israel as a “Jewish state”. This can be understood from the comment of Salah Bardawil, a Hamas member of the “Palestinian” Legislative Council, who referred to that demand as “the most dangerous statement by an American president regarding the Palestinian issue.” This should be considered a little more in depth.
Even if we leave out the Biblical account (which should always be in the forefront of our thinking), the identity of Israel as a “Jewish state” is not of recent vintage. It dates back to the time of Theodor Herzl, who, in the late 1890’s wrote his book, The Jewish State (“Der Judenstaat”). It was referred to dozens of times in the The Balfour Declaration of 1917, and by the U.N., in Resolution number 181 of the General Assembly, which partitioned the area of the “Palestinian” Mandate into two. And, of course, there are several mentions in Israel’s “Declaration of Independence”, which proclaimed “the establishment of a Jewish state in Eretz Israel, to be known as the State of Israel”.
This is a fundamental issue and lies at the heart of discussions and so-called “negotiations” with the “Palestinians”, who want us to be religiously neutral, political entity. For over 40 years, we have been talking with those who did not recognize our right to exist and insisting on this specific, recognition of our national identity and during all this time, it has been rejected. The idea underlying the concept of “two states for two peoples” is that there is one population, which is Islamic, and another population, which is Jewish. Even Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who was willing to offer the Arabs an extreme compromise, said in 2007: “I do not intend to compromise in any way over the issue of the Jewish state.” This demand was again soundly rejected by Mahmoud Abbas, who said: “In Israel, there are Jews and others living there. This we are willing to recognize, nothing else.” This precondition to continued and/or renewed negotiations was repeated by P.M. Netanyahu, in “Israel expects the Palestinians to first recognize Israel as a Jewish state before talking about two states for two peoples.” The response by Abbas, in rejecting this precondition, was sarcasm: “What is a ‘Jewish state?’ We call it the ‘State of Israel.’ You can call yourselves whatever you want. But I will not accept it. … It’s not my job to … provide a definition for the state and what it contains. You can call yourselves the Zionist Republic, the Hebrew, the National, the Socialist [Republic] call it whatever you like, I don’t care.”
In September, 2011, the head of the Arab-Israeli organization, “Adalah” (meaning, “justice”), explained why those who call them “Palestinians” cannot recognize Israel as a “Jewish state”: “For the Palestinians to recognize Israel as a Jewish state is to declare their surrender, meaning, to waive their group dignity by negating their historical narrative and national identity. … we would accept the rationale of the [Jewish] Law of Return, and as a result, we would waive our right to return, even in principle.”
Less than a week before that, Abbas said: “Don’t order us to recognize a Jewish state. We won’t accept it.”
This refusal has been repeated time and time again by Abbas and various representatives on the part of the “Palestinians”. As stated above, this issue lies at the heart of all of Israel’s negotiations with them. But, their refusal to recognize Israel as. “Jewish state” imposes a double standard. The revised draft of what has been called the “Constitution of the State of Palestine”, which was revised in 2003, states, among other things:
“Article 2. ‘Palestine’ is part of the Arab nation. The state of “Palestine” abides by the charter of the League of Arab States. The “Palestinian” people are part of the Arab and Islamic nations. Arab unity is the goal, the “Palestinian” people hopes to achieve.
“Article 5. Arabic and Islam are the official “Palestinian” language and religion. Christianity and all other monotheistic religions shall be equally revered and respected. The Constitution guarantees equality in rights and duties to all citizens irrespective of their religious belief.”
So, the double standard is that the “Palestinians” want their state to be “Muslim”, but refuse to recognize our state to be Jewish.  As an aside, if Islamists truly “revered and respected” the rights of all citizens in different Islamic countries, “irrespective of their religious belief”, then there would not be people in those countries who are facing the death penalty or long-term jail sentences for converting from Islam to another religion.
In retrospect, Obama’s speech requiring that “Palestinians must recognize that Israel will be a Jewish state” caught the “Palestinians” off guard, forcing them to deal with the issue that has, until now, prevented any progress towards peace. But, most Israelis just don’t trust the “Palestinians”. For the most part, Israelis don’t see the need to even try to renew negotiations. The situation, from a security perspective vis-a-vis the “Palestinians”, has been relatively quiet. No suicide bombers for a while. After withdrawing from Lebanon and from Gush Katif (just north of Gaza), both at considerable expense to Israel, there is no reason why Israel should be put in a situation of having to negotiate and give up more territory or make more “painful concessions” to our enemies.
Obviously, the recognition of Israel as a “Jewish state” is not the only issue, of course. Another one is the preconditions set by the “Palestinians” for renewed negotiations. This, too, was addressed by Obama, when he called on the “Palestinians” to drop any preconditions for returning to the bargaining table. Both of these requests accomplish one positive diplomatic effort, namely, to place the ball of responsibility for the breakdown and/or continuation of negotiations into the court of the “Palestinians”. It took years for terrorists to learn how to put on a suit and tie and to call themselves politicians. Let’s see how long it takes for them to learn how to pick up the political ball without dropping it.
By the way, it was reported that Justice Minister Tzipi Livni has announced that she will oppose any law that states that Israel is the national home of the Jewish people. Is this really the person that Netanyahu has appointed to head up negotiations with the “Palestinians”?
Obama’s visit did not clarify matters regarding Iran, as no time-table for dealing with it has been set, at least not publicly. The failure of the U.S. to take a firm, positive stand on this issue during or immediately following his visit could only be understood as a tacit continuance of U.S. policy of diplomacy. It cannot be understood as “speak softly, but carry a big stick”. Such a policy continues to misunderstand the mentality of this region and acts as an encouragement to Iran, among others, to the discouragement of Israel and the rest of the world. Undoubtedly, in conversations that took place behind closed doors, Israel was given assurances of U.S. military backing when (not if) the time comes to act. But, in light of North Korea’s recent actions and threats, it becomes obvious that the timetable has been moved up and the longer everyone waits, the greater the danger to Israel, the region and the world. This is not a time or matter for political correctness. It is a time that requires facing reality with eyes open and clear thinking. It is not a time for fancy speeches, nor is it a time for prideful expectations that the problem can be dealt with later. No one wants to run to war, nor do we want to send our sons into harm’s way. But, neither do we want to hear “Oops! We waited too long.”
Israel’s apology to Turkey
Another result of Obama’s visit here was mentioned in last week’s TWTW, namely, Israel’s apology to Turkey for the Mavi Marmara flotilla incident, which took place in 2010. This continued to be a major issue in Israel all week and in political circles around the world. Many of Israel’s friends praised her for taking a “correct and brave step”. But, Netanyahu’s actions in this regard have drawn political fire at home. 
Among those who opposed the apology was Naftali Bennett, head of HaBayit Hayehudi and the newly-appointed Economy and Trade minister, who published the following on Facebook: “Since the apology was made public, it appears [Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip] Erdoğan (pronounced “Erd-wan”) is doing everything he can to make Israel regret it, while conducting a personal and vitriolic campaign at the expense of Israel-Turkey relations…Let there be no doubt — no nation is doing Israel a favor by renewing ties with it. It should also be clear to Erdoğan that if Israel encounters in the future any terrorism directed against us, our response will be no less severe.” He encouraged those serving in the IDF to “always do everything, and I mean everything, to protect the lives of Israeli citizens. This is your job. We’ll deal with the rest. The people of Israel stand behind you, we are always with you.”
Indeed, it would be foolish to think that after so much negative rhetoric against Israel by Erdoğan, all of a sudden he would change his tune and embrace Netanyahu and Israel as long-lost friends. As was clear from the outset, Netanyahu’s telephone call to Erdoğan was initiated by Obama and Erdoğan was under obligation to answer the call, due to Turkey’s involvements wither both the United States and NATO. With Obama in the picture, Erdoğan was put in a situation where he had no choice, but to accept Netanyahu’s apology. However, putting aside his verbal assaults against Jerusalem is another story, which come almost as a reflex reaction to the stimulus of hearing mention of Israel. Erdoğan has taken every opportunity to play up the apology and to take credit for this claimed political victory over Israel. 
Many of the politicos in Israel who support the apology say that it was a good, political move and that the timing was right, give the turbulence and instability of the situation in Syria. That reasoning was debunked by Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu, who that “Israel’s apology was not about Syria [but] was a product of Turkish diplomatic pressure.” While those serving in Israel’s commando units were not happy with the way in which the apology was worded, in that it gave the impression that the military operation did not “succeed” because of them, they nevertheless understand that this was a political decision that they will just have to live with.
Several other matters were said to have been dealt with, as part of the phone call where the apology was made. The acceptance of the apology was said to include an agreement to end legal claims against Israeli soldiers, as well as an understanding that Turkey would not pressure Israel any more to lift the naval blockade of the Gaza Strip. These latter items are not “official” statements from either country, at least not at this juncture. It is hard to believe that Netanyahu, being the skilled negotiator that he is, would not get at least verbal assent to these issues before agreeing to compensate the families of the nine Turkish activists, who were killed by our commandos who boarded the Mavi Marmara. Before these unofficial reports circulated, it was reported that the Turks are unable to stop the legal proceedings that were commenced against the IDF officers and commandos who boarded the Mavi Marmara. This, too, will be revealed shortly.
Whether or not we agree to pay “compensation” to the activists’ families, it is, as we say, a done deed, that is the agreement. However, the matter of amount of “compensation” for the families is far from being resolved, as Turkey is asking for $1 million per family, while Israel offered $100,000. Obviously, these are opening salvos and both sides will have to compromise on the issue. Jerusalem is sending an official delegation to Ankara to work on this matter and it won’t be long before we know whether there is a deal, or whether we end up with another diplomatic crisis with Turkey because of the lack of agreement on the amount of the “compensation”.
The content of the telephone conversation between Netanyahu and Erdoğan continues to be a matter of concern here. The Turkish newspaper Hürriyet reported that the conversation between Erdoğan and Netanyahu, which included Obama, was recorded. The contents of that recording has not been made public for reasons which should be obvious. If, in fact, it does exist and is not just “rumor”, then it was leaked to the media for effect and to place additional pressure, and possible embarrassment, on Jerusalem. Still, Erdoğan is playing up the situation, building up both himself and his ego, by claiming to now be a major player in the Arab-Israeli conflict. According to his statement last Wednesday, there has been a shift in the balance of power concerning this matter, because the “apology agreement” requires that Israel cooperate with Turkey regarding it. I find it very difficult to believe that after so much “bad blood” with Turkey over the last three years, and, particularly with Erdoğan, that Netanyahu would agree to obligated Israel to cooperate with Turkey in an effort to resolve this long-standing conflict.
Until Erdoğan steps down, it does not appear that he will ease up on his complaints against Israel. We’ll get a good indication which way the wind is blowing when he visits Gaza soon and stands alongside leaders of Hamas. Israel had good reasons for wanting to end the diplomatic crisis with Turkey, but, if the ice between our two countries doesn’t melt quickly, we may end seriously regretting making the apology.
Obama’s Meeting with King Abdullah II in Jordan 
When President Obama met with Jordan’s King Abdullah II, he extended a compliment to the latter’s great-grandfather, King Abdullah I, whom the U.S. President said “gave his life in the name of peace.” While sounding good and certainly respectful, it appears that the differences between Western and Middle-Eastern cultures was not understood and, therefore, possibly lost when that statement was made.
Without going into a lengthy history of the region, we’ll jump to modern times when, following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire and the division of its lands between the British and The French, the area east of the Jordan River, referred to as Transjordan, became part of the British Mandate for Palestine. When the British Mandate came to an end, the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan came into existence with Abdullah as its first king. His military forces were part of those which fought against the newly established State of Israel and were defeated. But, they succeeded in crossing the Jordan River and capturing the area of Judea and Samaria, which was renamed the West Bank (of the Jordan). Under Abdullah’s rule, the country changed its name to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.  He came to understand, as did those under his rule, that the continued conflict with Israel would not be beneficial to either side and held out a hand of reconciliation with Israel. Apparently, for this reason, he was assassinated in 1951, as he left the al-Aksa mosque in Jerusalem. As an interesting aside, no proposal was made by Arab leaders at that time to create an independent “Palestinian” state in any of the areas now under the control of the P.A., or in the area known internally as E-1, or even Gaza, which was then under the control of Egypt.
In 1979, President Anwar Sadat made peace with Israel and was assassinated two years later. In 1982, the then President of Lebanon, Bachir Gemayel, was assassinated two weeks after agreeing to begin the process of normalizing diplomatic relations with Israel.
Ehud Barak, while serving as Prime Minister of Israel, offered Yassir Arafat about 97% of the territory now is dispute. The offer was turned down, apparently, because of his understanding that acceptance of the offer meant ending the holy war against Israel. Ending the conflict with Israel could also end his life. Not that I’m convinced that he wanted to end the conflict at all.
So, where does that put other Arab leaders today? The region is infiltrated by Islamists, many of whom look forward to the day when Israel will be defeated and the Jews will be thrown into the sea. If they attempt to establish peaceful relations with Israel, they may experience a fate similar to that of asking Abdullah I, Bachir Gemayel and Anwar Sadat. The exception to the rule, so far, is King Hussein (the father of Abdullah II), who concluded peace negotiations with Israel and brought the formal state of war between the two countries to an end. 
So, if we go back to the compliment made by Obama to King Abdullah’s great grandfather, it could be understood by a Middle-East mindset as a warning to be careful because of efforts to peacefully co-exist with Israel. We have been at peace with Jordan since 1994 and while our relations could be closer and better, we maintain a mutual respect for one another and share common regional concerns, while still not being in agreement on a number of matters. 
Words have a tremendous affect on those who hear them. I don’t doubt that under the circumstances, the King understood them in a positive way, while many of our other neighbors would understand them exactly the opposite.
Cyprus and France both take action against the Hizb’allah
A Cypriot court sentenced a member of the Hizb’allah terrorist organization to four years in jail, for plotting to attack Israeli interests on there. During the sentencing, the panel of 3 judges said: “There is no doubt these are serious crimes which could have potentially endangered Israeli citizens and targets in the republic.”
Cyprus is a member of the European Union, which organization has consistently resisted pressure from Israel and the U.S. to include the Hizb’allah on its list of terrorist organizations.
Notwithstanding that, according to a French official quoted by the Arabic newspaper Al-Hayat based in London, France has agreed to add Hezbollah’s military wing to its list of terrorist organizations, after Bulgaria accused the organization of planning and carrying out a terrorist attack there, in which five Israelis and a local bus driver were killed, as well as because of Hezbollah’s involvement in aiding Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in his bloody fight against armed rebel groups.
Until now, the only European country that lists the Hizb’allah as a terrorist organization is the Netherlands. Anyone up for a  trip to Holland?
Another flotilla – this time from inside going out
Three years ago, pro-“Palestinian” activists tried to break Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza. Nine of them, who were aboard the Mavi Marmara, were killed by Israeli commandos acting in self defense. Although we were legally justified in our military action, we apologized and agreed to pay “compensation” to the families of the activists.
Now, another flotilla is on the pro-“Palestinian” activists’ planning board. The main difference is that this time, the provocation, which is designed to break our naval blockade, will go out from Gaza. The plan is to attempt to reach international waters, beyond the 3-mile fishing boundary set by Israel. 
The local and foreign activists will take part in what is being referred as the Gaza’s Ark Flotilla Freedom Coalition, will use a special, refurbished fishing boat refurbished for the event. According to organizers of the event: “Gaza’s Ark is the evolution of the flotilla movement. We’ve moved away from sailing into Gaza with aid. We now focus on sailing trade out, because it’s quite clear that if the ‘Palestinians’ were able to trade, their dependence on aid would be diminished quite significantly”. 
What needs to be clarified is that this intended flotilla and all similar events have as their primary purpose the embarrassment of Israel which would again lead to international condemnation. It has little, if anything, to do with reducing “dependence on aid”. This is one of the major, left-wing media bluffs for the past almost 40 years. “Palestinians” are almost universally shown in news clips as living in squalid conditions, with shops closed and enraged youths hurling stones at the IDF. What is not shown is Gaza, whose hotels can compete with some of the best in the world. Take a look at the following sites and some of the comments of people who have stayed in these hotels:
and 
http://www.tripadvisor.com/Hotel_Review-g663088-d594409-Reviews-Al_Deira-Gaza_City.html which are ranked the number 1 and 2 hotels in Gaza City, respectively. If there is blatant poverty in any of the areas that are under the control of the “Palestinian” Authority, it is because their leaders have squandered the billions of dollars and other foreign financial aid that has been transferred to the P.A. over the years.
The naval blockade over the area of the Gaza Strip was imposed by Israel in 2007, following the Hamas take-over of that area in 2007. The blockade is a legitimate act of self-defense by Israel and is designed to prevent, as much as possible, weapons reaching Hamas by sea. Some pro-“Palestinian” activist groups claim that the blockade violates international law and restricts the freedom of the “Palestinians”. Even though this argument was previously raised and was shown to be invalid, they keep repeating it, hoping that if enough negative pressure is placed on Israel, maybe international law will be changed, or at least bent a little bit.
Neighborhood watch 
It is difficult to ignore the fact that the U.S. has been overly lax when it comes to dealing with countries that are either out of control or on their way to becoming out of control. Such a lackadaisical attitude towards Syria, North Korea and, of course, Iran, seems to have encouraged those countries to continue on their paths of destruction, some intended towards its own citizens, like Syria, with others intended towards the rest of the world, like anorth Korea and Iran.
In Arab society, there is a custom of exacting blood revenge. However, when an errant murderer exposes his tribe to a chain of needless revenge killings, the tribe leaders can declare the man an “alien” and leave him to his individual fate. From that point forward, according to tribal law, revenge can only be exacted on the individual murderer, and his immediate circle is safe. The murderer is abandoned by the tribe, and the cycle of revenge is brought to an end.
Representatives of the Alawites, a minor sect of Shiite Moslems in Syria, are trying to distance their community from Syrian President Bashar al-Assad (who is, himself, an Alawite), by claiming that he does not represent them. This attempt to dissociate themselves from Assad has taken various forms of denunciation, including referring to Assad as a criminal, who should be removed from power and authority. In reality, however, such attempts to “unidentify” themselves with Assad are actions taken to protect themselves and their families from the backlash and anticipated revenge that will be taken upon the Alawites, who, until now, have been in the governing branch of Syria and who have enjoyed the benefits of being part of a “special class” of ruling elite, despite their smaller numbers, compared the majority of Sunni Moslems in Syria. This response is also in line with Arab thinking and custom, which allows for a tribe to “expel” a rogue member, declaring him to be an “alien”, which would put an end to the risk of the entire tribe having to pay the price for his wrongful actions, when his victims seek to carry out revenger. Placing him outside of “the fold”, in a sense, leaves the revenge factor on the individual only and not on the entire tribe. Whether or not this will hold true when Assad is deposed is another matter entirely. One cannot be silent while over 60,000 fellow countrymen are being killed by a rogue leader, only to wake up one day and say “It wasn’t us. It was him.” As long as the possibility existed that Assad would be able to remain in power, his fellow Alawites said nothing, as they, too, would retain their positions of power and influence. However, now that there doesn’t seem to be any question about Assad’s regime being toppled, all of a sudden, instincts at self-preservation kick in, with attempts to point a finger at an individual, instead of at the collective, who supported him.
Nations are aligning themselves with the Syrian situation, depending upon how their interests are affected. Russian warships supply advanced military materials to Assad’s regime, the Hizb’allah has fighters spread out in different locations in Syria and, of course, Iran helps to keep the Shiite regime alive. Interestingly, the Chinese are also been helping Assad and despite their own intervention into Syrian affairs, these countries strongly oppose other, outside intervention.
As a result, the Americans and the Europeans hesitate to supply weapons to the rebel forces, for fear that another Islamist dictatorship will replace Assad, already armed with the latest in weaponry, which could be used against them and their interests.
The desperation that Assad is experiencing cause him to take considerably more aggressive military action, using every means available to him. While it is fully anticipated that the rebels will overthrow his regime, the cost to Syrian citizenry is mounting. When he is finally toppled, Syria will become vulnerable to the strongest of the opposition forces, which will, again, provide opportunity for the Muslim Brotherhood to step in. The only real question at this juncture is how will Assad’s reign, and reign of terror, come to an end? Will he be assassinated by those from within, will he be captured and publicly humiliated like Khaddafi from Libya, will he fight to his dying breath, or be secreted out of the country by one of his allies? Related, of course, is whether he will choose to use extensive chemical weapons. The possibility always exists that, despite everything, he will try to leave a positive legacy in the annals of Arab history by making a last-ditch effort to attack Israel with his extensive supply of weapons.
There is a lot more happening in this neck of the woods that is heating up the arena. There should be an increase in activity along the Syrian-Israeli border, there should be increased threats from the Hizb’allah in Lebanon. There will probably be a renewal of hostilities in the south, as Hamas will again start to flex its muscles, after a brief period of relative quiet, allowing it to re-arm and to fortify some of its positions. Egypt is run by the Muslim Brotherhood and the situation in Iraq has become more violent, after the U.S. withdrew its forces, which allows for greater intervention by its former enemy, Iran. In short, the picture of the neighborhood, from a military-political point of view, looks depressing. Depression leads to more violence and, ultimately, to inter-national conflict. Fervent prayer is needed, as Israel can be caught in the middle of it all.
Jordan and the P.A. agree to cooperate to stop the “Judaization” of Jerusalem.
Jordan’s King Abdullah signed an agreement with “Palestinian” Authority President, Mahmoud Abbas, to cooperate with one another to stop the “Judaization” of Jerusalem. The constituted a ratification of Jordan’s protectorship of Islam’s holy sites in Jerusalem. A statement emanating from Amman provides: “This is something that is especially important during a time in which Jerusalem is faced with dramatic obstacles and everyday illegal changes are made to its original identity“. Exactly what the parties mean by “Judaization” of Jerusalem and how they intend to carry out their cooperation agreement, remains unstated. At this time, it signifies a closer, working relationship between Jordan and the “Palestinian” Authority with regard to what is still under Israeli sovereignty and includes much of which is in areas that are the subject of dispute.
And That was The Week That Was.
“The LORD reigns, let the peoples tremble; He is enthroned above the cherubim, let the earth shake.” (Psalm 91:1)
“I will lift up my eyes to the moutains; from where shall my help come? My help comes from the LORD, Who made heaven and earth…Behold, He Who keeps Israel will neither slumber nor sleep.” (Psalm 121:1-2, 4)
Have a truly blessed week.
Marvin
Originally sent to email list on April 3, 2013
נשלח מה-iPad של

President Obama’s visit to Israel – TWTW … ending 23 March, 2013

On By marvinskLeave a comment



Shalom all, 

After two months of negotiating for jobs and titles, Israel’s new coalition government was finally sworn in. Some were happy, some were not. Most of the country was just tired from the seemingly endless politicking that went on during the negotiations and were relieved that, at least for now, we finally have a new government. Still, last week was all about President Obama’s brief visit to Israel. Some were happy, some were not. Some couldn’t care less. Just before Obama left the country, Prime Minister Netanyahu apologized to Turkey’s Prime Minister for Israel’s “operational mistakes” that occurred during the Mavi Marmara flotilla incident three years ago. Some were happy, some were sad. Some had mixed emotions. The Syrian border is becoming worrisome and this week, we celebrate, once again, our becoming a nation – 3,500 years after the event.

President Obama’s visit to Israel
On the surface, it looked as though Barack Hussein Obama was on the campaign trail, trying to win the hearts of voters – only from a distance of over 5,000 miles from Washington, D.C. There were lots of smiles, lots of hand-shakes, lots of hugs, lots of compliments and lots of humorous moments. Along with that, there were clear, political messages that were given and, undoubtedly, serious discussions and undisclosed negotiations that took place behind closed doors.

Yes, President Obama touched a lot of sensitive issues in a positive way. He said many “right” things and visited important places, all of which were intended to show American support for Israel, for the Jewish people, for our Biblical heritage and Feasts, for our ties to this land, for our technological progress and even for Zionism. He jokingly described the “apparent differences” between him and Prime Minister Netanyahu as something that was planned in order to provide material for the writers of a popular Israeli TV program and handled a heckler in his student audience, by saying that this, too, was planned so that he could feel at home. 

He seemed to pull out all the stops and made every effort to “charm” the people of Israel, whose attitude towards him, on the whole, until then, was one of distrust. There are valid reasons for that attitude, going back to the beginning of his first administration and his first visit to this region, when he by-passed Israel, endorsed the “Palestinian” rhetoric and bowed (literally) to the Muslim world. He added insult to injury, as he condemned Israel’s actions, treated P.M. Netanyahu with disdain and disrespect and made demands to freeze settlement construction, even in suburbs of East Jerusalem that were primarily Jewish areas. And, adding insult to injury, he totally ignored our Biblical and historical ties to this land during his famous Cairo speech in 2009.

Now, at the beginning of his second term, in his first trip abroad, he came to Israel, purportedly to speak to the people. In so doing, it appeared as though he was trying to turn the clock back and “undo”, to the extent possible, his sins of the past. His public communications here, from the time he stepped off the plane, until his departure, went beyond what many referred to as “charm”. There was a sense in which his audiences were mesmerized and captivated by his charisma and his efforts to show his friendship and support to the people of Israel. He referred to the relationship between the U.S. and Israel as an eternal, unbreakable alliance. Indeed, Israel played this up as well, giving an operational name to this visit, namely “Unbreakable Alliance”. But, this is the English designation. The Hebrew designation is “Alliance Between, or Of, Nations”. There is a clear difference between the two of them.

There also was a major difference in the attitude of “officialdom” here during Obama’s visit. The emphasis was on the relationship with the man, Obama, rather than with the U.S. It was as if the importance of this visit was the person of Barack Hussein Obama, rather than the “alliance between our two nations”. And Obama soaked it all in and played his part to the hilt. 

But, the part that he played reflected the position that he, and U.S. officialdom, espouse, namely: stop the settlement expansion and resurrect the dead “peace process” to enable the implementation of the “two-state solution”, all at the expense of Israel. While addressing a selective student audience at Israel’s International Convention Center, he was applauded numerous times. Almost everything he said found favor with this audience. But, after the humor, the jokes and all the nice words that hit all of the right spots, he got to the heart of the matter: “Just as Israelis built a state in their homeland, “Palestinians” have a right to be a free people in their own land.” That’s the long and the short of it. Your history, your ties to this land for millennia, has a limited geographical area. It does not include “their [the ‘Palestinian’s”]) land“. The message was actually a double one, with each part intended for its particular audience, Israeli and “Palestinian”. It was Obama’s way of addressing his student audience with the “two-state solution” situation and he urged his young listeners to act, so as to influence our leadership to get on with the program, as he sees it. It was a classic “yes, we can” speech. The first problem, of course, lies in the erroneous premise that “their land” is being occupied by Israel. This faulty premise and the arguments that flow from it, have been addressed time and again by me, as well as by others. A lie that is repeated often enough and loudly enough tend to gain credibility, even by those who made up the lie. The second, even if the premise were true, is that the “Palestinians” have not come to the same conclusion regarding a “two States for two peoples” solution. All efforts to pursue the unachievable is like building a house on sand, which will not stand when the storms come.

I could not help but notice the difference in the way Obama related to former Prime Ministers of Israel, whom he referred to with respect, and the casual way, during his speech, in which he referred to Netanyahu, relating to him as “my friend Bibi”, rather than as the Prime Minister of the nation who hosted his visit. It was a polished speech. It was specific and it was addressed to the next generation of potential leaders of this country. When it was all over, we realized that very little, if anything, has changed regarding Obama’s world view of the Middle East situation.

Lest we tend to over-react, let’s consider some additional factors, namely: As the head of state of the most influential country in the world, he chose not to address the representative body of leaders of the State of Israel, the Knesset. Rather, he chose to take his message directly to “the people”, in this case, university students. He did not visit the Western Wall, nor the Temple Mount  (regarding the latter, the “Palestinians” issued specific directives for him, what he could and could not do), undoubtedly to avoid a confrontation or to create the impression that U.S. policy (which treats those locations as “disputed” areas) has in any way changed. It should be recalled that the university students who were invited to hear Obama did not include students from Ariel University, which is “over the Green Line” and, therefore, is considered by U.S. officialdom as being in “occupied territory”. So, on the surface of things, at first it appeared that this was going to be “a change we could live with”. But, when all the joking was put aside and the smoke cleared, we understood that the purpose of his trip was to further his agenda to divide Israel and scatter our inhabitants. Really, the more things seemed to change, the more it became obvious that not only did everything remain the same, they seemed to get worse.

Obama is sending in his new Secretary of State to deal with the “diplomacy” – if we can use that word – that will be required to implement Obama’s desire to bring about an end of the Arab-Israeli conflict during his second term in office. The primary question is: From which areas will we be requested to withdraw – the ’67 cease-fire lines, or the totally indefensible 1949 borders? Neither one will be good for Israel. The secondary questions flow from the first: What is the motivation, at this juncture, to agree to push negotiations with the “Palestinians” to get them to “negotiate” with us, as if we didn’t make the effort over the years? And what price do we have to pay?

Even though most Israelis would affirm that we cannot entrust our security to any other country, it would seem that the clear motivation for Netanyahu’s actions is the U.S. promise of backing of Israel vis-a-vis Iran. There is still no clear U.S. decision regarding a time-table for dealing with Iran. Obama’s policy of continuing with diplomatic efforts is still the one that prevails, although, once again, Obama made it clear that if diplomacy fails, all options are still on the table, an argument that has been repeated ad nauseum. At this point, Netanyahu may have been satisfied with a promise of U.S. support, both in terms of military supplies and manpower, when Israel decides that it can no longer wait for U.S. diplomacy to work. There are also concerns that U.S. diplomatic efforts may result in a compromise, that will allow Iran to accomplish its goals even more quickly, by developing medium-enriched uranium. The clock is running and if action is not taken fairly soon, it will be too late to shut off the alarm. Everyone will point a finger at the U.S., and Obama, for their failure to act and for allowing the world to be placed in jeopardy. I realize that it is not the sole concern of the U.S. and that other countries around the world will share in the blame of allowing a nuclear Iran to threaten everyone’s existence. But, world leaders need to lead and take the initiative, which includes risks. If they don’t, history will hold them accountable for their failures. 

Friends encourage one another and do not place conditions on their friendship. So, after all the nice ego-building words of encouragement and support in public, what really counts is the relationship that exists when the parties are out of the lime light.

Only days after Mr. Obama left our territory, a decision was made by Israel to the renewal of our monthly tax revenue transfers to the “Palestinian” Authority, which is said to help it to relieve its financial crisis. Is this one of the “confidence building measures” that the president encouraged us to undertake? What about our own financial crisis? The new Minister of Finance, Yair Lapid (Yesh Atid party) remarked shortly after assuming office that he didn’t realize just how serious our own financial situation is. He said: “The picture that is gradually unfolding before me is much worse than I supposed … Leave behind words like ‘deficit’ and ‘fiscal crisis.’ I’ll explain it in a much simpler way. I came to renovate the house, but I discovered that our account has a monstrous overdraft; it’s ominous and still growing. We are talking about an expected deficit of some 50 billion shekels ($13.7 billion) this year, 5 percent of the gross domestic product and double the planned target. How did that happen?…Like any overdraft: They wasted a lot money they didn’t have, money they thought would come in didn’t come in, they took on commitments they shouldn’t have taken on. It turns out, once again, that the citizens of Israel always know what they are talking about…For some years already, the government has been trying to sell them a story that the situation is good, but they knew all along that it’s not true and that the situation can’t be good. They are in a bad way, and everyone they know are also in a bad way; they can’t pay their monthly bills and they have absolutely no chance of buying an apartment.” At last, someone in authority has publicly stated what I have been saying for years – the economy has not been revitalized and most of the people are struggling to get by. Let’s see whether the new Finance Minister will help to balance the budget, or at least make a substantial dent in that direction. 

Clearly, the discussions that took place between the two leaders behind closed doors had to be of considerable significance to cause P.M. Netanyahu to agree, at this time, to renew giving our tax money to the P.A. and to apologize to the Turkish Prime Minister for the events that resulted in the deaths of Turkish activists aboard the Mavi Marmara 3 years ago.

P.M. Netanyahu apologizes to P.M. Erdoğan.
It was not exactly a ” let’s kiss and make up” situation. Nor was it an “I’m sorry for what happened, let’s get on with life” situation, which brought about Netanyahu’s willingness to apologize to Turkish Prime Minister Recip Erdoğan (pronounced Erdwan). The crisis between Israel and Turkey began in May, 2010, when the Mavi Marmara left Turkey in an effort to breach Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza. The ship was stopped at sea and its purportedly peaceful passengers attacked Israeli commandos, who boarded the ship, resulting in the deaths of nine Turkish activists. Even though an international board of inquiry determined that Israel was legally justified in its actions, Erdoğan demanded: an official apology; the lifting of the naval blockade of Gaza, and compensation for the families of the Turkish activists who were killed. Israel had refused to consent to those demands, which resulted in a complete breakdown of relations between the two countries. That is, until the last moments of Obama’s visit to Israel.

As the two leaders proceeded to the airport last Friday, Netanyahu phoned Erdoğan and when the conversation was over, Netanyahu expressed regret over the deterioration in the relations between the two countries and “apologized for operational mistakes aboard the Mavi Marmara”. This met Turkey’s demand for a “formal declaration”, beyond a mere statement of regret over what happened. But, it was a private, not a public declaration. But, Netanyahu went beyond apologizing and agreed to provide compensation to the families of the Turkish activists who were killed. In all likelihood, a compensation “fund” will be set up and the compensation will be paid to it and later transferred to the families. The lifting of the naval blockade was not agreed to. I suppose we should be thankful for that. There was not the slightest reciprocity from Erdoğan, for his comments a few weeks ago condemning Zionism, saying that it was a “crime against humanity”.

As expected, the Netanyahu’s apology and agreement, in principle, to provide compensation, drew comments from all sides of the political spectrum, both positive and negative. On the whole, the political left approved, while the political right disapproved, with certain exceptions. Those who lauded his actions aligned themselves with the argument that he acted in the “national interest”. This is the official line taken by the Prime Minister’s Office, which claimed that the disintegration situation in Syria required “regional coordination” that was “demanded” by the U.S. It should be pointed out that the U.S. had been trying to get Turkey into the picture, but its efforts were rebuked by Turkey, who said that the rift between it and Israel was too great to allow it to work together with us in dealing with the Syrian crisis. 

Another official in the Prime Minister’s Office said that the apology came about “from an understanding and desire to end the crisis with Turkey, and [… because] in the Middle East, the relationship between us [Israel] and Turkey is of great significance in regard to Syria, but not just in that regard”, at the same time denying that it was the result of U.S. pressure. An official statement from the Prime Minister’s Office included the following:

“[Prime Minister] Netanyahu said he had seen Erdoğan’s recent interview in a Danish newspaper {in which Erdoğan clarified his ‘Zionism is a crime against humanity’ statement}   and appreciated his words. He made clear that the tragic outcome of the Mavi Marmara incident was not intended by Israel and that Israel regrets the loss of human life and injury. In light of Israel’s investigation into the incident which pointed to a number of operational mistakes, the Prime Minister expressed Israel’s apology to the Turkish people for any mistakes that might have led to the loss of life or injury and agreed to conclude an agreement on compensation/non-liability.

“Prime Minister Netanyahu also noted that Israel had substantially lifted the restrictions on the entry of civilian goods into the ‘Palestinian’ territories, including Gaza, and that this would continue as long as calm prevailed.”

Apparently, it was not believed that the above official statement was enough, so Netanyahu wrote on his Facebook page that “before Shabbat, I spoke to the prime minister of Turkey. The changing reality around us forces us to constantly re-evaluate our relationships with the countries in the region. Over the last three years, Israel has made several attempts to end the crisis with Turkey. The fact that the situation in Syria is deteriorating by the minute was a key consideration in my decision. Syria is disintegrating, and its enormous reserves of advanced weapons are beginning to fall into various hands. The biggest danger is if terrorist organizations were to obtain Syria’s chemical weapons. It is important for Israel and Turkey, both of which border Syria, to be able to communicate with one another, and it is also important to communicate in the face of other regional challenges. In addition, U.S. President Obama’s visit, together with Secretary of State Kerry, created a diplomatic opportunity to end the crisis. Therefore, toward the end of the American president’s visit, I decided to call the Turkish prime minister and resolve the conflict, repairing the relations between the two countries.”

Lieutenant-General Benny Gantz, the Chief of Staff of the Israel Defense Forces, was on the positive side of those who commented on the agreement with Turkey, calling it “extremely important”. He added: “It is important to remember the past, to learn from it and draw conclusions, but don’t look back like Lot’s wife, who remained planted in place, but rather look forward. When you look at the region, there is no doubt that tightening regional relations have strategic implications. The prime minister was wise to mend this relationship, which can influence our ability to handle challenges…. There are those who misinterpret the influence that this has on the IDF. I fully support any soldier anywhere as long as they use their judgment and abide by our values. Aboard the Mavi Marmara, the operation was carried out with determination and value-driven professionalism. Any other army in the same situation that the IDF fighters were in would have ended up with dozens of fatalities. The commandos acted professionally. They, too, understand that the remarks made about them serve a strategic purpose.”

Let’s consider for a moment the above two statements. On the one hand, the P.M.’s office said that the apology was due to “operational mistakes”. On the other hand, the IDF Chief of Staff said that the commandos carried out the operation “with determination and value-driven professionalism”, but added that the official “remarks made about them serve a strategic purpose”. So, if there were “operational mistakes”, it had to relate to planning and preparation for boarding the Mavi Marmara and not to the actions of the IDF commandos who boarded the ship and who acted in self-defense when they were attacked, resulting in some of them being seriously wounded.

Politics once again played its role in international affairs, this time bringing further injury to the IDF commandos who were involved in the Mavi Marmara incident. One of them who was interviewed had this to say: “The apology of the Prime Minister hurt me and I am sure also [hurt] many of my friends…I don’t want to get into the question whether it was necessary to apologize for political reasons. The fact that they claimed that there were “operational failures” is spitting in our faces as fighters sent to perform a mission. We did everything in order not to hurt innocent people, and we encountered there not violence – what was there was simply terrorism. I hope they clarify this point, because it really can damage motivation to join the commandos.”

This statement really strikes at the heart of the feelings and attitude of those who were commanded to board the Mavi Marmara. The ship violated international law and it sought to breach Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza. Those who were aboard the ship were supposedly on a “peaceful” mission, but the realities revealed otherwise. They were on a political mission that was intended to embarrass Israel in the international community, who needed very little persuasion to condemn Israel. Among the many things which characterize Israel’s combat soldiers is a high degree of motivation. If that is removed from the equation, our effectiveness would be considerably diminished and our security would be severely compromised. Our soldiers should not be made pawns for political expediency. The realities of the deteriorating situation in the Middle East should speak for themselves and should act as catalysts to bring about cooperation and working relationships between those who have common interests in the region.

Israel and Turkey are both threatened by the regional upheavals. In the last three years, since the Mavi Marmara incident, we have seen the “Arab Spring” turn into the “Arab Winter”, with the Muslim Brotherhood coming into power and influence in neighboring countries. The civil war in Syria has left over 60,000 people dead and the overflow of that war could quickly affect Lebanon and Jordan, as well as Turkey, all of whom share a border with Syria, as does Israel. So, there are mutual concerns that should enabled Turkey and Israel to mend their differences, without causing Israel national and international embarrassment. 

What seems to be overlooked in the situation is that despite the diplomatic rift between our two countries, our financial ties continued over this time to prosper. Tourism to Turkey may have suffered, but this is likely to change before too long. But, what seemed to be missing from the picture is a reality that Erdoğan needs political friends in the region, many of whom he lost when misinterpreting the Syrian situation. He does not know how to deal with the threat of unconventional weapons being funneled into the hands of terrorist groups and does not know how to prevent Syria from falling into the hands of radical jihadist elements when the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad comes crumbling down. He does not know how to deal with the increase in Kurdish activity in Syria and the gap between Turkey and Iran has widened, as both seek to gain a foothold in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, as well as gain influence over the “Palestinians”. So, in a real sense, Israel is its most natural ally. Even though they don’t have the same goals, in many respects they share the same concerns. They could have reconciled their differences in an effort to work on mutually-shared interests, but Erdoğan would not consider it until now. Maybe he didn’t even want to end the crisis between the two countries, as his anti-Israel rhetoric grew bolder and more pronounced with time. Perhaps he was guided and motivated by a desire to re-establish the Ottoman Empire, with himself at its head. 

There are those who would argue that there was no political arm-twisting taking place in the remaining hours before Obama left Israel. They are entitled to their point of view. I see it totally differently. We admitted doing wrong, when we were officially justified in acting to protect the country. In this area, honor carries a lot of weight. It will prevent someone from apologizing and from compromising, even when absolutely necessary. One who attains honor usually does so at the expense of the one doing the honoring, who is seen as losing honor and prestige. What happened last Friday resulted in Turkey being honored and Israel losing honor from an Islamist perspective. It will affect all future discussions and/or negotiations with all of our neighbors in the future.

What is the compensation that is being demanded by Turkey? Reportedly, the amount is $1 million for each of the nine families of the activists who were killed, while Israel is said to be willing to pay $100,000 per family. We acted in self-defense and now we are being asked to pay for being successful? How many more flotillas will be sent to break our naval blockade? How many more activists will be on board? How many more crises will we have to face … and with how many different countries who oppose the blockade? Only time will tell.

The situation in Syria is deteriorating.
Syrian gunmen opened fire at an IDF jeep on our northern border over the week-end. When it happened the second time, Israel responded, destroying the Syrian outpost with precision fire. Israel’s new Defense Minister, Moshe Ya’alon, said that the Syrian fire was a “violation of Israel’s sovereignty [and that we] take the fact that Syrian shots were fired at an IDF patrol in Israeli territory last night and this morning very seriously”, adding that “Any…fire from the Syrian side will be answered immediately by silencing the sources of fire when we identify them.”

Amos Gilad, a senior Israeli Defense Ministry official reported on Army Radio that sometimes the fighting between Syrian rebels and government forces take place not far from Israeli lines. “At times, shells or bullets are fired at Israel. Usually the shooting (from Syria) is not deliberate, but it doesn’t matter…Israel should not be the target of any attack, whether intentional or unintentional – because after all, if you accept something that was unintentional, that could lead to something intentional in the end.”

During the last approximately 40 years, since the Yom Kippur War, the area between our two countries has been relatively calm. But, there is a growing concern by military officials that a rebel take-over could upset the situation. As stated by IDF Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz: “We are seeing terror organizations gaining footholds increasingly in the territory. For now, they are fighting Assad. Guess what? We’re next in line.”

Although Israel is doing its best to stay out of Syria’s civil war, it has acted from time to time to return sporadic fire, as well as bombed a convoy said to include weapons headed for Lebanon. The rebels condemned Assad’s regime for not retaliating.

Interestingly enough, The Wall Street Journal reported this past week-end that the Syrian rebels are being provided with military intelligence by the U.S. Is the expected reconciliation between Turkey and Israel intended to help the U.S. bring down the Syrian regime, without getting its hands muddied in providing troops for actual combat? I wonder.

Israel celebrates its independence as a nation – 3,500 years after it first happened.
On Monday evening, the 25th of March, Israel, along with Jewish and many non-Jewish families around the world, celebrating the Feast of Passover, in accordance with the Biblical command in Leviticus 23:4-8: “These are the LORD’s appointed feasts, the sacred assemblies you are to proclaim at their appointed times: The LORD’s Passover begins at twilight on the fourteenth day of the first month. On the fifteenth day of that month the LORD’s Feast of Unleavened Bread begins; for seven days you must eat bread without yeast. On the first day hold a sacred assembly and do no regular work. For seven days present an offering made to the LORD by fire. And on the seventh day hold a sacred assembly and do no regular work.” 

As seen from the Biblical commandment, the celebration of the Passover takes place on one evening, even though in many places outside of Israel, the holiday is celebrated for two days, instead of one. That is followed immediately by the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which is a 7-day celebration. Over the years, the two holidays have been combined and are referred to together as the Passover holiday, so that from a non-Biblical perspective, Passover is an 8-day celebration, instead of a 1-day celebration. 

Sometimes we forget that we were not always a nation. We began as a small family, with the head of the family who was Abram, later to become Abraham, to whom God promised both a people and a land. Abraham’s family grew and the promise was repeated to the “son of the promise”, Isaac and then again, to his son, Abraham’s grandson, Jacob. Jacob had 12 sons and one daughter. They were an extended family, but living together. Like most families, there was lots of sibling rivalries and one of these resulted in the 11th son,   Joseph, being sold to traders and eventually into slavery. The rest of the sons lied to their father and claimed that Joseph was slain, resulting in the father grieving. Times became difficult and the father sent most of his remaining sons to Egypt to buy food. What they didn’t know was that their younger brother, who was sold into slavery, acted faithfully towards the God of his father, grandfather and great-grandfather. As a result, despite his early sufferings, he found favor in the sight of God and man and achieved greatness under the existing Pharaoh. When his brothers came down to Egypt to get grain, they had to deal with their younger brother, but did not recognize him. Eventually, in an emotional reunion, he revealed himself to them, pointing out: “As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result, to preserve many people alive.” Seventy people went down to Egypt, joining Joseph and there was a tremendous family reunion. The family was given fertile land and they settled in, they prospered and their families grew.

As the generations passed, their numbers grew considerably, so much so that another Pharaoh, who did not know Joseph, was afraid that the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob would become so numerous that they would outnumber the Egyptians. So, he enslaved the descendants of Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel, and made their lives bitter. As they suffered under the whips of their cruel taskmasters, they cried out to God, who heard their them and remembered his covenant with their forefathers. At that time, Pharaoh had ordered the slaying of the Hebrew male children. Despite such a command, one particular male child, Moses, was miraculously saved. He was allowed to be weaned by his mother, who received payment from the daughter of Pharaoh, and grew up in the courts of Pharaoh, becoming trained and learned in all the ways of the Egyptians, learning to be “something”. Yet, at the age of 40, he had to flee Egypt and spent the next 40 years on the backside of the desert, where he married and tended his father-in-law’s sheep. It was at this time, that he learned to be “nothing”. He was then called by God to return to Egypt and to lead his kinsmen from slavery to freedom. It was during that time that Moses learned that God was able to make “something” out of “nothing”.

But, why was it necessary for the children of Israel to become enslaved and eventually need a deliverer? Being human, the tendency is to enjoy creature comforts. Life was difficult in Canaan. The children of Israel lived like nomads, wandering from place to place, looking for greener pastures, so that they could feed their flocks. When the famine became severe, they looked elsewhere for sustenance, eventually leaving Canaan and going to Egypt, where life took a turn for the better. Perhaps, for the first time since Abram left Ur of the Chaldees, the Hebrews had a place where they could live without wandering and where they did not have to listen to the bleating of their goats, who were hungry. And so, they settled in. After a while, they seemed to have forgotten that the place of blessing was not Egypt, but Canaan. Living in the midst of a country, filled with all kinds of false gods, most of them seemed to forget the One, True God, who promised to bless them and make them a blessing to all of the families of the earth. So, although God chose the children of Israel, they had, in large measure, forgotten Him and they needed to be re-deemed the people of God. Because life was good, at least for a few generations, they were oblivious of the fact that they needed to return to Canaan when the famine ended. After generation upon generation, they became rooted in the wrong place and they needed to be up-rooted and brought back to the place of blessing. Nothing like a crisis to get us to rethink our situation and our priorities.

The crisis was slavery. They no longer enjoyed the land, they became slaves to it. They no longer found the favor of the Pharaoh, they became his property. It took a while, but eventually they started to complain and to ask for help. Slaves do not free themselves, they need to be set free. When one seeks to be truly free, not only from the system that enslaved them, but from the power that kept them slaves, they needed outside help. That’s where God made His provision. He made it tough on the slave owner, Pharaoh, and eventually defeated him and all that he trusted in, showing that the gods of Egypt were powerless against the God of Israel.

Often we forget that all of Egypt was under the condemnation of death. The means by which death could be avoided was to provide for an innocent lamb to be chosen, inspected for four days and found perfect. The lamb was to become the sacrifice. At the appointed time, each family was to take his lamb and slaughter it, pouring the blood of the lamb into a hole at the entrance to the home, then dipping hyssop into the blood and placing the blood on the doorposts and then the lintel of the houses in which the lamb would be eaten. All who followed God’s instructions were saved from death. Those who didn’t, died. Passover revealed God’s principle of life for life. An innocent life that would be slaughtered to provide for freedom from slavery. “A” lamb shortly became “the lamb” and then became “your lamb”.

When death entered the family of Pharaoh, the power of the ruler of Egypt was defeated and those who were his slaves were allowed to go free. What began as a family of about 70 entered Egypt, ended with over 2 million being set free from slavery. No longer were they a small family. In over 400 years, they became a nation and, in fulfillment of God’s promise to Abraham, they were brought out, so they could return to the land of promise and blessing. It was our day of national independence, some 3,500 years ago.

We are commanded to repeat the story of the exodus from Egypt to our sons, generation after generation. We are to tell the story of how God redeemed us with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. Every generation is to see itself as if it personally came out of Egypt. We are to rejoice and in the freedom from slavery in Egypt. The lesson is intended to be personal. It’s not what happened to “them”, but what happened to “me”.

But, if we consider that all that happened to the children of Israel was freedom from physical slavery, then we miss the big picture from God’s perspective. He is the One Who deserves the honor and the glory and the praise. He is the One Who established the means by which true freedom could be obtained. It was the principle of life for life and the need for blood atonement. As Moses would later write, according to God’s command: “For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you on the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood by reason of the life that makes atonement.” (Leviticus 17:11)

The shedding of the blood of the innocent lamb and the placing of its blood from the threshold to the door-posts to the lintel of the home formed a picture of a cross, stained with blood. It pointed to the “Lamb of God Who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29), Whose blood would be shed on the cross of Calvary, to free us not only from the penalty of sin, which is death, but from the power of sin in our lives. Like those who were in Egypt, we are all under the penalty of death, which is the penalty for sin (Ezekiel 18:4, 20; John 8:24). We’ve all missed the mark, we’ve all sinned and we’ve all fallen short of the glory of God (Psalm 130:3). Like the salvation of old from Egypt, this salvation – freedom from the penalty and power of sin, is also by faith in the shed blood of the Lamb. It is a one-time event and will not be repeated, but is always available.

In less than three weeks, Israel will once again celebrate Independence Day, only this time as a nation state. We will do so in the land that God has given to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and entrusted to the Jewish people. Despite our dispersion in the diaspora, despite centuries of persecution intended to destroy us as a people, we have once again returned to the land, in fulfillment of God’s promises and prophecies concerning them. Woe to those who seek to divide it and remove us from it.

And That was a little more than The Week That Was.

“The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me, Because the LORD has anointed me to bring good news to the afflicted; He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to captives and freedom to prisoners.” (Isaiah 61:1)
“I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and of supplication, so that they will look on Me whom they have pierced.” (Zechariah 12:10)

Have a truly blessed week.

Marvin


We have a new government – TWTW … ending 16 March, 2013

On By marvinskLeave a comment
Shalom all,
Last week was all about coalition negotiations and pressure politics, last-minute deal breakers and deal makers. When it was all over, a coalition government was formed. But, no one passed out the cigars. One coalition partner is ready to agree to the establishment of a “Palestinian” state. Also, there was lots of busy-ness and preparations for the visit of President Obama. We lost two of our finest in a helicopter crash and Muslim clerics told the President of Israel that they were opposed to terrorism against Jews. 
We have a coalition government. But, at what price?
P.M. Netanyahu demonstrated his ability to retain control of the cabinet, despite tremendous pressures from the emerging parties of Yesh Atid (Yair Lapid) and Habayit Hayehudi (Naftali Bennett). But, the makeup of the coalition is a recipe for disaster. The combination of those two parties (whose leadership worked hand-in-hand through almost the entire period of coalition negotiations), coupled with Hatnuah (Tzippi Livni), is enough to stymie any decision that Netanyahu may choose to make. He may have control of the cabinet, but he clearly does not have voting control of the coalition members. It is a disaster waiting to happen and it will be a miracle if the coalition survives for Netanyahu’s entire term, even for half a term.
In the final analysis, Lapid agreed to accept the position of Minister of Finance. Now, when the question is asked “Where’s the money?”, he won’t be the one asking, but rather, the one explaining. He has a lot of homework to do, so that he can not only give intelligent answers to financial questions, but also make rational suggestions regarding future government spending. He campaigned on social justice issues and he will have a genuine opportunity to deal with them now. Some people have once again taken to their tents, with signs seeking “social justice”. This was a major movement that took place during the summer of 2011. The problem then, as now, is that there was no agreed-upon definition of “social justice”. Every type of special interest group tried to get into the picture. Public figures appeared at “tent city” rallies, along with actors and popular singers. When the tents finally came down – most of them voluntarily, some more forcibly, very little was actually accomplished. It will be interesting to see how Lapid will respond to the situation, if the “tent protest” starts up again in earnest.
In the meantime, the coalition is made up of partners, who don’t really trust each other. The negotiations wore everyone out, with each side claiming victory of one sort or another. It was an exercise of flexing muscles, trying to show who is stronger, who can hold his breath longer and who is willing to hold everything up in order to finally get the “job” that was sought after.
It should also be pointed out that smooth sailing is not on the horizon for Likud-Yisrael Beytenu. There are rifts in the rafters and the once relatively strong “partnership” between the two parties may be heading for dissolution, with each party going its separate way. That would make life for Netanyahu even more precarious than it is now. His party may have control of the cabinet, but it does not reflect the overall weakness of his position vis-a-vis voting power in the Knesset itself. The coalition is built on eggshells and it won’t take much for it to crack and for a coalition crisis to develop that can quickly and relatively easily bring down the government. The politicians played their games until the very last moment. Instead of having a strong government, which is needed in these days of national, regional and international turmoil, we have a government made up of partners with differing world views that are really worlds apartment. 
But, coalition-partner problems are not all that await Netanyahu. His negotiations, that eventually resulted in forming this fragile coalition, left long-standing political allies as casualties within his own party and some of those who were injured may return the “gesture” before too long. Stay tuned for the next episode.
No ultra-Orthodox in this coalition.
It is anticipated that Shelly Yachimovich, head of the Labor party, will become the leader of the opposition. She will be joined by the religious parties, who were ousted from the government at the behest of the dynamic duo, Yesh Atid and Habayit Hayehudi, and who vowed to make the new government’s life miserable. Of course, the Arab parties will continue to be part of the opposition.
Aryeh Deri, of the ultra-Orthodox Shas party attacked Netanyahu and stated: “You cannot wash your hands of this … I have no doubt that history will harshly judge the person who participated in this situation. True, there are plenty of excuses … but these excuses won’t survive the stringent test of history. The sole blame lies and will lie with you.The result is that 2,000,000 people, all of whom are citizens of the second Israel, the Israel of the disadvantaged sectors … all will remain without representation in the incoming government. They will all see how you, their prime minister, boycotted them.” It is rumored that Deri will now seek to become the Mayor of Jerusalem.
Livni ready to sign an agreement “today” with the “Palestinians”
The Chairwoman of Hatnuah, Tzippi Livni, who is also the Justice Minister to be, spoke last Tuesday at a conference organized by The Institute for Policy and Strategy at the Herzliya Interdisciplinary Center. She rejected the contention that negotiations with the “Palestinians” could not move forward because if the instability in the Arab world. According to one major, Hebrew language daily, she stated: “the attempt to stop the two state vision because of the changes in the Arab world is similar to an animal that stops because she sees the headlights of a moving car.” She also said that she decided to join the government due to the “urgent need” to sign a policy arrangement with the “Palestinians”: “I want to sign today because I know who are the heirs of today’s leaders. It should have been done before.”
It has already been mentioned that such an attitude is problematic. Negotiation means that there is a give and take in the discussion. So far, all that has happened in the last dozen and a half years is that we have given and the “Palestinians” have taken. But, there has not been any reciprocity. Nor can there be, as they don’t have anything to give us.
What is missing in Livni’s statement, as in statements by of the left-wing politicians and media and, of course, by spokesmen for the “Palestinians” is that the two-state solution relates to two states for two peoples. As long as there is no recognition of the State of Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people, not only is there nothing to talk about, there is no one to talk with!
President Barack Hussein Obama’s visit to Israel and the region
When U.S. President Obama first announced that he was planning to visit Israel, the news was received in Israel with mixed emotions. Why is he coming? What does he intend to accomplish? What are his real motives for making this trip and why now? Time after time, it was reported that he is coming as a show of unity between our two nations. Time after time, it was reported that he does not have any new agenda regarding the resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Time after time, it was reported that his primary purpose is to discuss matters relating to Iran and Syria. Then, little by little, a report here and a report there began to reveal that progress with the “Palestinians” and a renewal of the dead and buried “peace talks” are major items that will be discussed. 
He is scheduled to arrive here in the morning on Wednesday, March 20th. He will be shown an “Iron Dome” battery, which was moved to the airport for lack of time in his schedule to see it in the field. This is a gesture to him for the funds invested by the U.S. in this defense project. He is supposed to be joined by P.M. Netanyahu and President Shimon Peres at this time. After the photo op at the Iron Dome battery, he will go to the President’s Residence in Jerusalem and meet with President Peres. Following that, he will meet with Netanyahu and, perhaps, several members of his new government. The following day, Obama will visit the Israel Museum in Jerusalem and then move on to Ramallah, in the West Bank. Upon his return from there, he will address Israeli university students at the Binyanei HaUma International Convention Center in Jerusalem, this being part of his efforts to speak directly to the people of Israel. (note: you may want to look at 2 Kings 18:26-36) But, even here, there is politicking, as students from “over the green line” were not invited to attend, because they are from what is considered “occupied territory”. On Thursday evening, Obama will visit the American Consulate in east Jerusalem and then meet with American and Israeli figures for dinner. The following morning, he will lay wreaths at the grave of Theodor Herzl, who led the Zionist movement, and then at the grave of assassinated Prime Minister, Yitzhak Rabin. From there, he will visit the National Holocaust Museum at Yad Vashem, following which he will meet with the leader of the Knesset opposition and move on to the Church of the Nativity, in Bethlehem in the West Bank. He will leave Israel Friday afternoon.
Much can be said about each stop of the President’s visit. Many would like to read into them Obama’s affirmation of Israel’s history as the “People of the Book”, who have a long-standing connection with the land, with Jerusalem as its Biblical and perpetual capital. Some see the laying of the wreath at Herzl’s grave as his affirmation of the Zionist movement that led to the eventual establishment of the State of Israel, as well as a slap in the face to those who want to equate Zionism with racism. And so on. In reality, however, there is little international, political significance to his visiting this place or that. It won’t affect the hearts and minds of anti-semites, nor of our regional enemies, nor of those who would not blink twice if Israel were to no longer exist and who would even encourage her demise. The visits to this site or that, be it Biblical, or otherwise historical, cannot be seen as giving tacit assent to any fact, other than Obama being a distinguished tourist in and around Israel.
Obama never enjoyed high ratings among the people in Israel. His background and relationships with those opposed to the Jewish state has always been a cause for genuine concern. The fact that he visited the region during his first tenure as President, but avoided making a stop here, also did not warm the hearts of the people to him. So, why a visit and why a visit now? Certainly not to cater to potential, U.S. Jewish voters in 2016. When Netanyahu visited the U.S., he was not treated by Obama with the respect that is due to a head of state and, particularly, to a leader whose country is strategic friend of the U.S. 
The Iranian threat endangers not only Israel and the region of the Middle East, but the entire world. Irrespective of how much dislike and/or distrust may exist between the present leaders of both the U.S. and Israel, there is an overriding realization that they need one another, at least as regards the potential for a military strike upon Iran. The U.S. has, in the past, favored diplomacy, but has also indicated that there is a limit beyond which even it must act. Obama’s deadline is October, 2013. If no one does anything by then, we may all awaken one day to the reality that we’ve all missed it and that Iran has gone “nuclear”. Israel has indicated that it has its own “red lines” that are rapidly being approached and is committed to act for the protection of our nation, whose very existence is threatened by the religious zealots in Iran. A nuclear Iran, added to a nuclear North Korea, cannot be ignored by the U.S., by Israel or by the rest of the world.
Given the way that Obama behaved during his first administration, namely, with an attitude of “let’s get all of the governments of the world to sit down and talk, so that we don’t have to get involved in fighting”, it could be that he will follow the same line and make an effort to convince Netanyahu not to try to “go it alone” against Iran. It could be that he will try to buy more time for his diplomacy to work. It could also be that he would be barking up the wrong tree and that Netanyahu will back up his “red line” with action. Then again, he may have a different strategy this time – a strategy of making promises that he hopes he’ll never have to fulfill.
But, this is the Middle East, where almost everything is negotiable. One hand washes the other. Obama knows it and Netanyahu knows it. What will move the U.S. to abandon diplomatic efforts to get Iran to cease its nuclear ambitions and to actively, or passively, pursue a military stance vis-a-vis Iran? A trade off sounds reasonable. “We’ll help you with Iran and in return, you help us to bring about an end to the Middle East conflict, by agreeing to the establishment of a ‘Palestinian’ state in the heartland of Israel.” Pressure will be placed on Netanyahu to agree, whether immediately, or by an understanding, followed by an agreement with the U.S., by a specified date that will still be during the second term of Obama’s presidency, so that he can be in the center of the photo of another “historic hand-shake”, this time regarding the time-table for establishing a “Palestinian” state. There is a good possibility that there will be an “undisclosed agreement” between the two leaders regarding this eventuality, the exact terms of which will be put into a formal understanding and agreement sometime after Obama leaves the region. The task of overseeing that agreement will probably fall on Secretary of State John Kerry, will be responsible to follow it through and “make it happen”. But, the reality of the “understanding” concerning this agreement and the outworking of the agreement itself will be seen in the intensified efforts here to get the “peace process” back on track, even though almost everyone realizes that it needs to be raised from the dead. We must also have the understanding that the world as a whole is tired of the Arab-Israeli conflict and is involved more and more in other, pressing national and international issues. The ones who are primarily concerned are Israel and the “Palestinians”, along with our immediate neighbors. And so, the inclusion in the coalition of Tzippi Livni, who is ready to sign “yesterday”, takes on added significance. Then again, this is all speculation, isn’t it?
Or is it? Last Monday, Obama met with Arab-American leaders, who urged him to encourage   the “Palestinian” people during his trip to Israel, Judea and Samaria (“the West Bank”) and Jordan. There is disappointment among the “Palestinians” that Obama failed to advance a peace agreement, even though Middle East “diplomacy” was supposed to rank high on his list of priorities when he took office. So, while he’ll be in our neighborhood, Obama will meet not only with Netanyahu, but with P.A. President Mahmoud Abbas and King Abdullah, of Jordan. Last Monday, a White House official reported: “He (Obama) underscored that the trip is an opportunity for him to demonstrate the United States’ commitment to the “Palestinian” people in the West Bank and Gaza, and to partnering with the “Palestinian” Authority as it continues building institutions that will be necessary to bring about a truly independent Palestinian state.” Then again, maybe Obama just wants to tell them that one day in the future, everything will work out, but not to hold their breaths until that happens. On the surface of things, we need to ask the question whether Obama’s visit to Israel at this time is good for us. Everything in my gut tells me that it will not be.
Before leaving this subject, here are a few words that express my personal opinion about Obama’s visit. You should be able to pick up the melody line fairly quickly. The emphasis should be on the first syllable – O’ ba ma:
Obama is coming to town!
We’d better be good, we’d better not cry,
We’d better not pout, they’re telling us why:
Obama is coming to town.
He’s gonna arm twist, he’s gonna insist,
“If you want my assist, then follow my list”,
Obama is coming to town.
He’ll help us with Iran now, and give us what we need,
To remove its threat from o’er our head, if we’ll agree to bow our knees.
Oh, we’d better be good, we’d better not cry,
We’d better not pout, they’re telling us why:
Obama is coming to town.
Don’t try to complain, he’s gonna explain,
He’s making it plain that it won’t involve pain, 
Obama is coming to town.
He’ll lay out his plan, he’ll claim “yes, we can”,
It’s to trust in him to divide our land,
Yes, Obama is coming to town.
He’ll push to have two states now, who side by side will live,
They’ll take and take and take some more ’till we’ve nothing left to give.
Oh, we’d better be good, we’d better not cry,
We’d better not pout, they’re telling us why:
Obama is coming to town.
So, don’t be drawn in and don’t lose your cool,
Reject the smooth speech and don’t be a fool,
‘Cause Obama is coming to town.
If we stand our ground, if we take a stand,
If are hearts turn to God, He’ll save also our land,
Even if Obama is coming to town!
Israel threatened by Syrian rebels
On the whole, with minor incidents here and there, the border between Israel and Syria has been quiet since 1974. Now, Yigal Palmor, a spokesman for Israel’s Foreign Ministry, expressed concerns about the potential for a radical Sunni Moslem take-over of Syria, after President Bashar al-Assad is removed. The reason for the concern is that Syrian rebels threatened that after getting rid of Assad, they will focus their attention on “regaining” control of the Golan Heights from Israel. An on-line video showed one of the rebel fights, who said: “[We] are in the occupied Golan Heights, which the traitor Hafez Assad sold to Israel 40 years ago. These lands are blessed and the despicable Assad family promised to liberate them, but for 40 years the Syrian army did not fire a single bullet. We will open a military campaign against Israel. We will fire the bullets that Assad did not and we will liberate the Golan.”
In an interview with the Turkish Hurriyet Daily News, in Jerusalem, Palmor said: “There is a great concern that uncontrolled elements at the service of extremist ideas will manage to take over smaller or bigger separate territories inside the Syrian borders … The ‘Somalization’ of Syria is a great concern. We hope that this war ends as quickly as possible, with a central power emerging that will rule all Syria … We don’t have any pretext to [militarily] intervene in what is going on in Syria. Nobody wants us to do that and we don’t want to do that. We stay on the sidelines, except where our vital security interests are threatened. We reserve our right to limited intervention.” Palmor further disclosed that Israel coordinated with the Red Cross in an effort to send humanitarian aid into Syria, but was told that the refugees refused to receive Israeli aid. 
In July of last year, IDF Director of Military Intelligence Maj. Gen. Aviv Kochavi warned: “The Golan area is liable to become an arena of operations against Israel in much the same way the Sinai is today, and that’s a result of the increasing entrenchment of global jihad in Syria”, while another senior Israeli intelligence official reported last December that jihad groups were preparing near the Israeli-Syrian border and were “stockpiling huge amounts of lethal weapons for a fight with Israel … The main problem is not the local rebel groups but fighters coming from outside Syria. Hundreds of fighters have begun streaming into Syria from Jordan and Iraq. They come from countries like Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Libya, and many other countries. We’re talking about very dangerous people with experience fighting the U.S. army in Iraq as well as fighting the regime in Libya. We estimate that there are between 3,000 to 4,000 rebel fighters belonging to radical Salafist groups who all belong under the al-Qaida umbrella … We expect these rebels to stockpile a large amount of rockets, a situation which will return the northern Israeli communities into the line of fire. We assess that once the foreign rebels have finished fighting Assad’s army they will all turn their attention to the border with Israel. There is no question about it. Once the Assad regime falls, we will start seeing incidents on our border. I assess that it will start with a trickle of incidents, like we see on the Egyptian border, and further down the line we’ll start seeing the firing of anti-tank missiles at IDF vehicles, roadside bombs against patrols, and these are only the incidents I can reveal. I believe we will see much worse things.”
Two of Israel’s finest died in a helicopter training exercise.
Last Monday, the nation was alerted to the deaths of two Israel Air Force pilots, who died when the “Cobra” helicopter in which they were flying crashed during a training exercise six minutes before they were supposed to land. Because Israel is such a small country, almost everyone knows someone who was killed, or knows someone who was close to a soldier who was killed. Such is the case with one of the pilots, who was the instructor of the son of a family whom we are close with. The older of the two pilots had a brother who also served as a helicopter pilot and who died following an accident in the Judean desert 16 years ago. Both pilots were survived by their wives and children. As stated by an army reserve Colonel, who is himself a fighter pilot and aircraft accident investigator: “This is not just a helicopter that crashed. These are two families that have been crushed … Every pilot in the air force lives with the full knowledge that something like this can happen to him or his friends at any given minute … It is not something that should come as a surprise — it is extremely dangerous to be an air force pilot, even during exercises. I can guarantee that the day after the mourning period ends, the squadron will resume full activity.”
Muslim clerics “strongly condemn” terrorism against Jews.
Some 16 Muslim clerics reportedly told President Shimon Peres in France last Sunday that   they “strongly condemn” terrorism against Jews. Imam Hassen Chalghoumi informed Peres: “We would like to calm the concerns of our brothers, the Jews … We are not affiliated with terrorism against Jews, and we strongly condemn it … We believe in the sanctity of life … Life is more important than the Vatican, Mecca or Jerusalem.”
In his response to the Muslim clerics, Peres stated: “We, the Jews, have been victims of discrimination, and that is why we aspire for a world where everyone is free of it … We have a shared interest in resolving our disputes in peace rather than allowing terrorism destroy any chance for peace. The Jews and Muslims share a father, our father Abraham.”
Peres then referred to the “peace process”, stating that “when the new government is sworn in, an opportunity will arise to renew peace talks.” Either this is an expression of something that he hopes will happen, or, alternatively, he knows something that he is not sharing. He added: “We evacuated the settlements in Gaza, but the “Palestinians” turned the territory into a terror base.” There seems to be something missing in his relating to this issue. If, on the one hand, it is a given fact that the “Palestinians” used the evacuated area and turned it into a terror base, why in the world should there be more opportunities to renew peace talks? Has something happened between then and now that we’re not aware of that would change their perspective?
British Member of Parliament blames the Jews for his legal problems.
In 2009, Lord Nazir Ahmed, 55, was arrested and convicted of reckless driving, because he was sending text messages just before his vehicle was involved in a fatal crash. The court sentenced him to 12 weeks in jail. He was one of the first Muslim peers in the U.K. when he was appointed in 1998 by former Premier Tony Blair.
It was reported by the British media that Ahmed was quoted as saying that the Jews were responsible for his conviction, which was the result of a Jewish plot formed because of “Jewish disapproval of my support for the ‘Palestinians’ in Gaza”, adding that the judge who pronounced sentence upon him was appointed to the High Court following the help that the judge gave to a “Jewish colleague of Tony Blair during an important case.” Ahmed continued that his actual imprisonment was due to “pressure placed on the courts by Jews who own newspapers and TV channels.” 
Ahmed was suspending by the Labor Party pending an investigation into the above allegations. A spokesman for the Labor Party said: “The Labor Party deplores and does not tolerate any sort of racism or anti-Semitism. We will be seeking to clarify these remarks as soon as possible.” It should be noted that this was not the first time that Ahmed was disciplined by the Labor Party. In April, 2012, he was suspended following his offer of $14 million reward for the capture of U.S. President Obama and his predecessor, George W. Bush.
Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio is now Pope Francis 1.
Israel received a new government and the Vatican received a new Pope – this time, a Jesuit. I’m still trying to digest both events, especially the second one, so I’ll hold off on commenting at this time until I have more information and a clearer understanding of how this appointment will impact on Israel and the Jewish people. May God grant that we will all be like the sons of Issachar, who “understood the times” (1 Chr. 12:32).
And That was The Week That Was.
“Restore us to You, O LORD, that we may be restored. Renew our days as of old.” (Lam. 5:21)
“Yet those who wait for the LORD will gain new strength; they will mount up with wings like eagles, they will run and not get tired, they will walk and not become weary.” (Isa. 40:31)
Have a truly blessed week.
Marvin
Originally sent to email list on March 19, 2013

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