Image 01 Image 03
Sign In or RegisterLogout

Author: David Gerstman

Profile photo

David Gerstman

David Gerstman blogged as Soccer Dad from 2003 to 2010. Formerly a computer programmer, he is now a blogger for The Israel Project's The Tower blog.

Posted by David Gerstman on June 29, 2014 12 Comments
The primaries are over and Maryland's nominees for governor are Lietenant Governor Anthony Brown for the Democrats and Larry Hogan for the Republicans. Despite having failed at his most prominent job as Lieutenant Governor the state's Democrats want to give him a promotion. I previously critiqued the Washington Post's endorsement of Brown. The Baltimore Sun too endorsed Brown.
As for Mr. Brown, we'll address his flaws first. We have been consistently critical of his lack of transparency in discussing his role in Maryland's disastrous health insurance exchange launch. His explanations have been guarded and convoluted; a simple apology and a pledge to learn from the experience would have been much better. Mr. Brown was, officially, Maryland's point-person for health care reform. Had the website been a success, he would have taken credit; thus, he must accept a share of blame for its failure. That said, the buck stops with Gov. Martin O'Malley, not Mr. Brown, whose actual role appears to have been more symbolic than managerial.
That's an endorsement? He wasn't incompetent he really wasn't supposed do anything? Worse the Sun called Gansler, "able public servant during his long career." The Sun's criticisms of Gansler stemmed from his campaign not for his governance. To endorse the guy whose managerial role they described as "symbolic" over someone with a track record is ridiculous. I bring up the endorsements again even though the race is over, because it shows the lengths that Brown's supporters have to go to get past his failure. Either they ignore it or they say he was a no show. Neither one is a ringing endorsement for the guy's leadership. But the failure isn't just Brown's, or the O'Malley/Brown administration. It's the failure of Maryland's Democratic party - as nearly the entire leadership of the party in Maryland endorsed Brown. And the leading newspapers in Maryland endorsed him too. So the Democrats want power without responsibility. And the media that should be serving as a check on government's power have failed miserably in their civic responsibility. Look at Brown's last ad before the primary, called "Step up." Brown comes across as confident, but even as he asks viewers for their help to "build a better Maryland," he offers no qualifications for the job, only that he is driven by the value his father instilled in him that "service to others comes first." He sounds like it is his convictions not his record that should be the criterion for choosing him. He wants us to forget his record.

Posted by David Gerstman on June 27, 2014 3 Comments
Thursday, Israel's internal security service, the Shin Bet, released the names of two suspects in the abduction of Gil-ad Shaar, Eyal Yifrach and Naftali Fraenkel two weeks ago. The suspects were said to have disappeared prior to the abductions. The two kidnappers are Amer Abu Aysha, a 32 year old locksmith who is married with three children, and Marwan Kawasme a 29 year old barber. Both have long associations with Hamas and, according to a report published in The Times of Israel, both attended the same mosque. Yaacov Lozowick observed: 2014-06-27_024146_Lozowick While Abu Aysha's mother described her son as a devoted family man, she also told the Times that "if her son did take part in the kidnapping, she was proud of him and hoped he would continue to evade capture." Abdullah Kawasme, an uncle of the latter, was killed in a fight with Israeli security forces in 2003. The IDF blog tells more of the ties both suspects had to Hamas:

Posted by David Gerstman on June 23, 2014 6 Comments
One of the frustrating aspects of following the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is the "blame Israel first" syndrome. Writing in the Telegraph, Alan Johnson articulates the dynamic that is at play in It's time to Stop Infantilising the Palestinians. (h/t Elder of Ziyon)
First, by granting only one side to the conflict agency and responsibility, the dichotomy distorts key events of the conflict (e.g. the war of 1948, the collapse of the Camp David peace talks in 2000, Gaza after the 2005 disengagement). The Palestinians are cast as passive victims; a compelled people (Haaretz writer Yitkhak Laor claims the second intifada was “instigated” by … Israeli policy); a duped people (activist Tikva Honig-Parnass writes of “Barak’s pre-planned collapse of the Camp David talks in October 2000”); and a people beyond the reach of judgement. Academic Jacqueline Rose views Palestinian suicide bombers as “people driven to extremes” and argues that Israel has “the responsibility for [the] dilemma” of the suicide bomber. Second, the dichotomous understanding of Palestinians and Israelis distorts our understanding of Israel’s security. The threats Israel faces are discounted and the security measures taken by Israel reframed as motiveless and cruel acts.... The third consequence of this dichotomous thinking about the nature of the two peoples is the infantalisation of the Palestinians: they remain perpetually below the age of responsibility; the source of their behaviour always external to themselves, always located in Israel’s actions.
By the way, Alan Johnson was the Professor shouted down with abusive profanity at U. Ireland - Galway, by anti-Israel BDS protesters. A case in point of this dynamic is the common complaint that Israeli security checkpoints impede Palestinian economic progress. It's a common refrain but it ignores the reality on the ground. Aaron Menenberg observed the inner workings of the Palestinian Authority for two years recently and wrote about his experience in Terrorists & Kleptocrats: How Corruption is Eating the Palestinians Alive at The Tower Magazine. Menenberg dealt with regular Palestinians and contrasted their willingness to work for the betterment of themselves and their society with their political leadership's interest in maintaining their perks and positions.

Posted by David Gerstman on June 22, 2014 3 Comments
In it's campaign to rescue the three yeshiva students who were kidnapped June 12, Israel has been carrying out operations against the Hamas infrastructure in the West Bank, including arresting prisoners it had previously released. The kidnappings have evoked a feeling among Israelis and Jews worldwide. On the other hand the Palestinians, as a society, have demonstrated callousness toward the victims, if not seeing the kidnappings as a victory. According the Times of Israel the 'noose is tightening' around the kidnappers.
A senior Israeli government official said Friday that the noose was tightening around the kidnappers of the three teenagers who were abducted last Thursday from a hitchhiking post in the Gush Etzion area in the West Bank, as a large-scale, ongoing IDF operation to locate the trio continued through its eighth day. Speaking to Channel 10, the official said that, based on security assessments, the teens were still somewhere in the West Bank and that their abductors were unsuccessful in moving them in the direction of Jordan, Gaza, or Sinai. ... Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with the families of the three earlier Friday and updated them on the progress of the search. Frankel’s uncle was later quoted saying that all indications were that the three are alive. On Thursday Netanyahu said Israel knew more about their fate than it had done a few days earlier, and Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon said the operation to find the three was making progress. Also Thursday, an Israeli official named a deported Hamas terror chief, Saleh al-Arouri, as a suspect in orchestrating the kidnapping.
Palestinian Authority Foreign Minister Riyad Al-Maliki, one of the "moderate" technocrats of the new Fatah-Hamas government suggested that the kidnappings are an Israeli fabrication:

Posted by David Gerstman on June 18, 2014 6 Comments
Last Thursday night, three Israeli teenagers Eyal Yifrach, Gil-ad Schaar and Naftali Fraenkel were abducted setting off a massive manhunt for the three and their captors. Israel has mobilized its reserve units to assist in the search. Palestinian society is showing support ... for the kidnappers. The Jerusalem Post reports:
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on Wednesday praised the Israeli security services for their overnight roundup of dozens of Palestinians, including 50 Hamas operatives, in the West Bank search for three kidnapped Jewish teens. The IDF arrested 64 Palestinians in overnight raids across the West Bank on Wednesday, including 50 former Hamas prisoners who had been released by Israel in the Schalit exchange in 2011.
Another article at the Post says that if any of these suspects is found to have violated the terms of their release, he will be sent back for the "remainder of [his] original sentence." A Hamas leader hails the kidnapping as a "heroic capture operation."

Posted by David Gerstman on June 12, 2014 17 Comments
As Bryan Jacoutot documented here three months ago, Maryland's health exchange was a complete failure. In private industry or nearly any other field of endeavor, an employee who is responsible for such a visible failure would be subject to demotion or firing. But this is politics. And this is Maryland. So the Washington Post recommended that the employee responsible for this fiasco ... should be promoted. In its endorsement ahead of the June 24 primary the paper with the largest circulation in Maryland endorsed (Lieutenant Governor) Anthony Brown for Maryland governor. The key paragraph in the endorsement is here:
No doubt, Mr. Brown, who is Gov. Martin O’Malley’s anointed successor, is a mainstay of the Democratic establishment and a paragon of the status quo. That status quo includes the state’s blatant failure to build a functioning online market for private health insurance — a failure over which Mr. Brown presided, or was supposed to preside. It also includes substantive accomplishments, including making the state more welcoming to gays and immigrants and replenishing the transportation fund in support of public transit.
So let's see if I get this. Despite the fact that Brown messed up his most significant assignment as Lieutenant Governor - concrete failure - that should be balance out by the fact that he made Maryland more welcoming - an ephemeral accomplishment at the best? As far as the transportation fund, taxing people is what government does best. Had he (and his boss, Governor O'Malley) replenished the fund while limiting the growth of government, that would have a real accomplishment. But taxing and spending is hardly a defining skill for an executive. Then there's the previous paragraph that's also kind of baffling.

Posted by David Gerstman on June 08, 2014 8 Comments
When Mahmoud Abbas's "moderate" Fatah movement first reached out to make an agreement with the terrorist Hamas movement, the response in the United State was "mostly nonchalant." Now that the two sides have announced the creating of a unity government, the response has continued to be muted. Certainly not outraged. Last week, of course, the administration didn't wait a day before endorsing the blatant violation of the American sponsored peace process. This was disappointing but hardly surprising given Barry Rubin's observation last September that the United States had gone to "backing the 'bad guys.'” In major American newspapers there was little initial editorial comment. However later in the week, the Washington Post endorsed the American response as did the New York Times. Though, surprisingly, the Times actually qualified their endorsement warning that "the United States has to be careful to somehow distinguish between its support for the new government and an endorsement of Hamas and its violent, hateful behavior," without actually offering a practical suggestion how distinguish that support. There are three main reasons why the administration was wrong to support the unity accord. 1) It is unpopular in the United States In the middle of May, The Israel Project conducted a poll of likely voters and their views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. One question dealt with the formation of the Fatah-Hamas unity government. When those originally saying they were undecided offered an opinion, the poll showed a massive rejection of the Palestinian reason for the cooperation.

Posted by David Gerstman on June 04, 2014 11 Comments
David Horovitz, the editor of the Times of Israel has written a scathing critique of the Obama administration's treatment of Israel. In the aftermath of the administration's acceptance of the Fatah/Hamas unity government in defiance of the letter of American law, Horovitz wrote yesterday,  12 ways the US administration has failed its ally Israel. Horovitz's criticisms can be broken down into three categories: mistakes in proceeding with the peace process, primarily blaming Israel for the failure of the peace process and other breaches of faith with Israel regarding Israel's enemies in the Middle East. In that last category (the last three of Horovitz's examples) he observes that rather than keeping quiet about reported Israeli air strikes against Syrian arm shipments to Hezbollah, the administration attributed the strikes to Israel risking possible Syrian retaliation against Israel and blasts the administration for "rushing to support Islamic extremists ... when they come to power in a neighboring state," referring to the Muslim Brotherhood's brief stint as rulers of Egypt. But he's harshest in his criticism of the Obama administration for its handling of Iran arguing that "[t]he central goal of US policy in this regard should not be merely denying Iran nuclear weapons but denying Iran the capacity to build nuclear weapons." Regarding the peace process Horovitz faults the administration for looking to solve the conflict in just nine months instead of just working on trying to build a climate of trust:

Posted by David Gerstman on June 02, 2014 3 Comments
A little more information is available now about Mehdi Nemmouche, the gunman who killed three people - including an Israeli couple - and gravely injured one other in the Jewish Museum of Belgium on May 24. Nemmouche is a French citizen (he was arrested in Marseille, France) with a long arrest record, was known to have extreme religious beliefs and reportedly joined the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS while fighting in Syria last year. Nemnouche was captured during a customs check carrying a revolver and AK-47 thought to have been used in the attack as he arrived in Marseille from Belgium this past Friday. The New York Times reported:
He had been convicted seven times, on several occasions for driving without a license but also for violent robbery, and began a series of imprisonments in 2001, according to François Molins, the state prosecutor in Paris. Mr. Nemmouche appeared to have become radicalized during his time in prison; during his final stay, a five-year sentence, “he distinguished himself by his extremist proselytism,” Mr. Molins told reporters on Sunday, and fell in with other “radicalized Islamists.” Prison administrators “signaled” Mr. Nemmouche to the French intelligence services upon his release from prison, on Dec. 4, 2012, Mr. Molins said. Within about three weeks, however, Mr. Nemmouche had left France, bound for Brussels, London, Beirut, Istanbul and, ultimately, Syria, Mr. Molins said. French intelligence services believe it was there that he joined ISIS.
The Times reports further that "3,000 Europeans, including more than 700 French, are thought to have fought or to be fighting in Syria." The Washington Post included more details including statements from Belgian federal prosecutor, Frederic Van Leeuw.

Posted by David Gerstman on May 28, 2014 11 Comments
For years many the feeling was that Europe had unquestioned leverage with Israel and therefore could take sides without losing its clout. But trade and tech have taken their toll on this assumption. Israel is building alliances in Asia, and European leverage is sure to suffer. Former Israeli foreign and defense minister, Moshe Arens, explains in Ha'aretz Why Israel is shifting eastward.
On reflection this is not totally unexpected. For many years the economic development of the countries in East Asia has been outpacing the economic development of Europe. Japan made giant strides in the years after World War II. South Korea followed suit. China has become the economic wonder of the twenty-first century. There are, as well, indications of accelerated economic development in India, the world’s largest democracy. It is natural that Israel’s economic relationship with these countries would begin to rival its relationships with the countries of Europe, a Europe which seems to be in permanent economic crisis and lagging behind the Asian tigers. ... Despite the centuries of anti-Semitism that marked most European nations and the guilt borne by them for their actions during the Holocaust, Europe, in recent years through the machinery of the European Union, has waged a constant campaign of criticism and condemnation of the policies pursued by Israeli governments, going so far as to impose economic sanction against Israel.
The second point was made in an op-ed in late February by Clemens Wergin in the New York Times, Why Israel no longer trusts Europe.
To Europe, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the root of all problems facing the region — a view in no way altered by the Arab Human Development Reports published by the United Nations since 2002, which showed that Arab autocracies and cultural backwardness were the root of the region’s woes.

Posted by David Gerstman on May 18, 2014 2 Comments
In 1994 terrorists struck the Asociación Mutual Israelita Argentina (AMIA) in Buenos Aires, Argentina. 85 people were killed. In 2003, an Argentine judge issued arrest warrants for four Iranian officials (but denied warrants for twelve others) for their involvement in the terror attack. In 2007 INTERPOL, an international police organization, issued warrants for five Iranians and one Lebanese for the involvement in the AMIA bombing. Early last year Argentina's government reached an agreement with Iran to form a "truth commission" to investigate those who were responsible. The agreement was immediately controversy because, in the words of former Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon, it was "inviting the murderer to participate in the murder investigation.” Last week, an Argentine federal court struck down last year's "truth commission" agreement with Iran to investigate the AMIA bombing. Several senior Iranian officials and Hezbollah have been implicated in the attack that killed 85 people in that Jewish community center.
Thursday's ruling declared the agreement unconstitutional and ordered Argentina not to go ahead with it. The deal had been delayed anyway by Iranian reluctance to move forward in implementing it. ... Israel and world Jewish groups had denounced the "truth commission" deal with Iran, calling it a diplomatic win for Tehran that offered no benefit to Argentina. The deal would have let Iran review Argentina's investigation into the bombing.
Alberto Nisman, the prosecutor who took over investigation of the case, established responsibility to the highest level of Iran's government. Among those implicated were then President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and Iran's previous defense minister Ahmed Vahidi. Vahidi and intelligence officer Moshen Rabbani were among five Iranians who were flagged by INTERPOL for arrest in the case. (Video from March 2013) While current Iranian President was a member of the group that ordered the attack, Nisman told David Horovitz of the Times of Israel last year that Rouhani was not present at the meeting where the attack was planned. An English version Nisman's indictment is here (PDF). An op-ed in the New York Times at the time of the Argentine-Iranian agreement accused Argentina's government of doing "an about-face on terror."

Posted by David Gerstman on May 15, 2014 8 Comments
On May 14, 1948 David Ben Gurion declared Israel's independence and the modern state of Israel was born. And every year at this time the Palestinians commemorate Nakba. Not surprisingly, Jodi Rudoren, Jerusalem bureau chief of the New York Times spent May 14, writing about the iNakba app which was launched by the Israeli NGO, Zochrot. In Rudoren's account:
Zochrot, Hebrew for “remembering,” has for 13 years been leading tours of destroyed villages, collecting testimony from aging Arabs, and advocating the right of return for millions of Palestinian refugees and their descendants. But it preaches almost exclusively to the converted. Israel is a country where government-funded organizations can be fined for mourning on Independence Day, and where the foreign minister denounced as a “fifth column” thousands of Arab-Israeli citizens who marked the Nakba last week by marching in support of refugee return.
The disconnect in this paragraph is unbelievable. Rudoren writes blithely about the Palestinian "right of return" and suggests the lack of Israeli acceptance of the right of return is due to the close-mindedness of Israeli society. But there is nothing benign about the right of return. It means the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state. In fact a founder of Zochrot is rather explicit about his intent. (Strangely Rudoren hasn't reported that a Palestinian professor who took his student to Auschwitz was ostracized by the union at his university.) People aren't usually receptive to ideas that involve their own destruction. This is the New York Times so I hardly expect to read a corrective article. Maybe the paper will deign to publish a few dissents in the letters sections, but the case that Israel's war of independence is an ongoing disaster will remain the prevalent view at the New York Times.
Accessibility by WAH