Image 01 Image 03

Israel Tag

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."

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.

We wrote about how Australia just made an enormous contribution to the Middle East peace process by refusing to refer to East Jerusalem as "occupied" territory. Australia is historically and legally correct.  "East" Jerusalem was illegally seized and occupied by Jordan during Israel's War of Independence, and the Jewish residents ethnically cleansed.  Its recapture by Israel was simply returning the territory to its rightful owner. The reason that Australia's announcement was important, I wrote, was:
Because the history of Middle East peace negotiations is the refusal to speak the truth to the Palestinians, and instead, to cower at false claims of illegal occupation and Apartheid. Such diplomatic cowering, evidenced by John Kerry’s futile shuttle diplomacy, simply encourages even more unreasonable and unrealistic Palestinian demands. If peace ever is to be achieved, it will be when the Palestinians accept that they can get no more from international boycotts and pressure than they can get through direct negotiations and meaningful concessions. The Australian announcement brought that moment a little closer.
True to form, Palestinian Authority through one of its most senior leaders and negotiators is calling for the Muslim world to reevaluate ties to Australia, as reported by The Times of Israel, PA to seek wider Arab reprisal against Australia:

Australia has announced that it no longer will refer to East Jerusalem as "occupied" territory. This is an enormous and important contribution to Middle East peace, as it corrects the false narrative that Israel's recapturing of territory illegally occupied by Jordan from 1948-1967 is not justifiably part of Israel. For the historical and legal background of why Israel's recapture of East Jerusalem and other territories is not illegal under international law, see Prof. Eugene Kontorovich's recent article at Commentary Magazine, Crimea, International Law, and the West Bank, as well as his lecture, The Legal Case for Israel. The Times of Israel reports, Australia drops ‘occupied’ label from East Jerusalem:
The Australian government will not refer to East Jerusalem as “occupied, territory” the government said in a statement on Thursday, in what one legislator called a “massive shift” in foreign policy Attorney General George Brandis explained Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop’s position that using the word “occupied” was judgmental and does not contribute to the dialogue about the contested area, the Australian Associated Press reported.
The move came, in part, as an Australian reaction to the verbal abuse Palestinians heap on anyone who supports Israel (been to a campus lately?):
Australia’s decision to stop referring to East Jerusalem as “occupied” territory and to adopt additional similar steps that will likely please Israel and anger the Palestinians came as a retaliatory measure against Palestinian officials who in recent months repeatedly and ferociously attacked Canberra’s Middle East policies in public, The Times of Israel has learned “The Australian government is irritated by how the Palestinians have chosen to pursue their disagreements with us in public,” a senior Australian source told The Times of Israel Thursday. “This is the kind of behavior you’d expect from the leaders of a student union but not from a government-in-waiting.”
As expected, the Palestinians heaped even more abuse on the Australians:

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:

We previously wrote about a partial victory at the Modern Language Association House of Delegates during the annual meeting in January.  An anti-Israel resolution regarding alleged travel restrictions on academics was significantly watered down, and another resolution defending the American Studies Association's academic boycott of Israel was rejected. The Executive Council of MLA decided to send the travel resolution to the membership for an online vote.  The final travel resolution read:

Resolution 2014-1

Whereas Israel has denied academics of Palestinian ethnicity entry into the West Bank; Whereas these restrictions violate international conventions on an occupying power’s obligation to protect the right to education; Whereas the United States Department of State acknowledges on its Web site that Israel restricts the movements of American citizens of Palestinian descent; Whereas the denials have disrupted instruction, research, and planning at Palestinian universities; Whereas the denials have restricted the academic freedom of scholars and teachers who are United States citizens; Be it resolved that the MLA urge the United States Department of State to contest Israel’s denials of entry to the West Bank by United States academics who have been invited to teach, confer, or do research at Palestinian universities.
There were complaints that the MLA leadership was not evenhanded in distributing materials to the membership, to the prejudice of pro-Israel members. Also, an online chat forum was disclosed in which gross anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic statements were made by MLA members. The results of the vote were just posted, and it failed to pass because less than 10% of the 30,000+ members voted.   Any resolution must be ratified by a majority vote in which the number of those voting for ratification equals at least ten percent of the association’s membership, which was 2,390 votes this year. There were 1,560 votes in favor of ratification and 1,063 votes against ratification. This is, in many ways, even more devastating than a simple loss.  It shows that the anti-Israel agenda of some radical academics simply isn't of much interest to the broader academic community.  The lack of interest by the overall membership is most telling of all. Prof. Cary Nelson of the University of Illinois issued the following statement on behalf of MLA Members for Scholars' Rights, a group opposing the resolution:

And so it continues. All eyes have been focused on the increasingly bizarre facts of the exchange of 5 top Taliban Gitmo detainees for Bowe Bergdahl, someone who may very well be a deserter if reports by soldiers who served with him are accurate. Yet an even bigger event took place just yesterday, as the State Department announced the U.S. was embracing the new Palestinian Authiority coalition government which for the first time includes Hamas, a recognized terrorist group which remains sworn to the destruction of Israel.  Reuters reports, U.S. says to work with, fund Palestinian unity government:
The United States said on Monday it plans to work with and fund the new Palestinian unity government formed after an agreement by the Fatah and Hamas factions, and Israel immediately voiced its disappointment with the U.S. decision. he United States views Hamas as a "terrorist" organization and the U.S. Congress has imposed restrictions on U.S. funding for the Palestinian Authority, which typically runs at $500 million a year, in the event of a unity government. Senior U.S. lawmakers said on Monday Washington should suspend aid to the new unity government until it is sure of the Islamist group's commitment to pursuing peace with Israel. In its first comment since the Palestinian government was sworn in, however, the State Department stressed that it regarded the new Cabinet as made up of technocrats and that it was willing to do business with it.
Following the U.S. lead, the EU and U.N. quickly announced acceptance of the coalition. We now have open conflict between the U.S. and Israel based on the U.S. backing out of understandings with regard to Israeli refusal to negotiate with the PA if Hamas were part of the coalition. Via The Times of Israel:

While the IRS assault on Tea Party groups is well known, another equally disturbing development is taking shape at the beleaguered agency. Alana Goodman of The Washington Free Beacon reported...
Lawsuit Alleging IRS Discrimination Against Pro-Israel Groups Moves Forward A lawsuit alleging that the IRS discriminates against pro-Israel groups will be allowed to move forward, a federal judge ruled this week in Washington, D.C. The IRS has been fighting to quash the lawsuit filed in 2009 by pro-Israel group Z Street, claiming the court does not have jurisdiction to hear the matter. However, Judge Ketanje Brown Jackson rejected the agency’s request to dismiss the case on Wednesday and ordered the IRS to respond to Z Street’s complaint within the next 30 days. Z Street says its constitutional rights were violated by an IRS policy that allegedly singles pro-Israel groups out for stricter scrutiny when they apply for tax-exempt status. According to the lawsuit, an IRS official told Z Street’s lawyer in 2009 that the group’s application for tax-exempt status would be “sent to a special unit in the D.C. office to determine whether the organization’s activities contradict the administration’s public policies.”
Eugene Volokh provides more insight at The Washington Post...

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.

Because of the time difference, I was not able to watch the Pope's visits in Israel today to the Temple Mount, Western Wall, memorial to terror victims and the Yad Vashem. Here are some tweets and video of the events: The Pope's stop at the memorial to terror victims is a good contrast to the Pallywooded stop at the security barrier in Bethelehem yesterday:
“The Vatican officials explained to us that the pope didn’t pray against the separation barrier, but he prayed against the situation that forces such a wall to be built,” diplomat Lior Haiat said. “Therefore, we thought we need to show him why we built the wall. It’s obvious that the barrier is a result of something, it is not the reason.”
It also was significant that this was the first time a Pope has visited the grave of Theodor Herzl, the founder of modern Zionism:

Pope Francis is in Israel this afternoon (Israel time) and tomorrow. The itinerary today, after a trip to Bethlehem, included arrival at Ben Gurion Airport and a trip to the Church of the Holy Sepulcre in Jerusalem. Tomorrow will be visits to the Temple Mount and Western Wall, meetings with Israeli political and religious leaders, and a visit to Yad Vashem. Here are some images I grabbed from the live video feed: [caption id="attachment_87188" align="alignnone" width="609"](Pope Francis speaking at Ben Gurion Airport) (Pope Francis speaking at Ben Gurion Airport)[/caption]