 |
Contents:
ISRAEL'S EXPEDITED EXPULSION POLITICS
The Israeli government has formed an special team was to formulate the outline for carrying out an immediate handover of land. The team includes high-ranking officials in the Foreign and Defense Ministries, and high-ranking representatives of the Israeli army and Israeli intelligence also involved in the process. Israeli Foreign Minister Tzippi Livni and the director-general of her ministry, Aharon Abramowitz, appointed a high-ranking official who will coordinate the effort - diplomat Yossi Amrani, the former Israeli consul in San Francisco. The choice of Amrani could not have been coincidental. In November, 2003, this reporter revealed that Amrani, despite his official position as the Israeli consul, organized fund raising events for Israeli opposition leader Yossi Beilin, who then led the Geneva Initiative on December 1st, 2003, which called for the unilateral establishment of a Palestinian entity within temporary borders, under the unchallenged rule of the PLO. Now Amrani has been given the task of formulating, within several weeks, an official working paper of the Israeli government which will give a detailed outline of Israel's immediate surrender of land to the PLO Among other things, Amrani will deal with the question of how Israel should sell the plan to AIPAC and to the US administration. During the Summer 2006 Lebanon War, Prime Minister Olmert was quoted as saying that the war would contribute to his plans for carrying out a withdrawal plan. The statement, which was denied by the Prime Minister's Bureau, aroused a great deal of criticism, mainly because thousands of religious soldiers, many of them inhabitants of the settlements, were risking their lives on the front at that very time. Olmert therefore had to clarify that the option of unilateral withdrawal was frozen, and even said that it had never been adopted as Israel's official policy. He said that the only policy in effect was that of negotiations with Abu Mazen and the continued boycott of the Hamas government. Olmert is consistent in this position, and has reiterated it several times since the cease fire in mid-August. Ironically, a previous commission was established by Israeli Foreign Minister Livni to evaluate the idea of a unilateral withdrawal from most of Judea and Samaria. That commission's report, leaked to the HaAretz newspaper on August 15th, 2006, concluded that " Israel has no security solution to the threat of rockets launched from the West Bank against population centers". The report's authors assumed that following any unilateral Israeli pullout from any part of Judea and Samaria, Hamas will takeover and deploy rockets against Israel's population centers on Israel's coastal plain. The report emphasized that the only solution to the missile threat that the Israel Defense Forces has to offer is its actual presence in the territories and control of the high ground of Judea and Samaria, also known as the "west bank" Another conclusion of the report commissioned by the Israeli Foreign Minister is that Israel will not gain international recognition for an end to the occupation if it continues to hold significant portions of the West Bank. Foreign Ministry Director General Aharon Abramovitch, headed that commission. Israeli Member of the Knesset has asked for a copy of the previous Israeli foreign ministry report which warned against any unilateral surrender of territory to the PLO. The spokesman of the Israel Foreign Ministry has informed MK Alon's aide that this was an "internal report" that it would not be released.
Commentary: Abbas adopting Hamas . . .
After on-again, off-again scheduled meetings, PA president Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal finally met in Damascus last night, with the Syrians playing peacemaker between the factions. This meeting is ostensibly to lead to a unity government, although it has been conceded that a political platform has yet to be formulated. According to Hamas legislator Mushir al-Masri, the key issue is Hamas's refusal to recognize Israel: "Abbas wants us to recognize the Zionist entity, but we swear that even if we are all killed, we will never change our ideology." Now . . . in the unlikely event that a unity gov't really is formed, whom do you imagine it will be that has caved? (Hint: It isn't Mashaal.) There would be some fancy footwork, some language that skirts the issue, and Hamas would be allowed to avoid actually recognizing Israel. At every juncture until now, it has been Abbas who has caved; he will not take on Hamas. The lesson here: A unity gov't would not bring with it moderation, only the pretense of such. I see it as dangerous because the world is all too eager to accept the pretense as reality. Mashaal and Abbas are now saying that they will be working on formation of that unity gov't over the course of the next two weeks. They concurred that the PLO should be strengthened (which leads to the supposition that Hamas, which has been invited by Abbas, the PLO head, to officially join, will do so). And they are agreed that a Palestinian state with temporary borders is to be totally rejected. ~~~~~~~~~~ A high ranking IDF official has told The Jerusalem Post that the political echelon has "tied the IDF's hands" and is preventing military operations to stop Hezbollah from rearming. This is hardly the first time that our particularly inept political echelon has stood in the way of what the military believes must be done; what I am observing, however, is an increased tendency for the military to go public with this. The frustration must be incredible. The officer described the almost daily shipments of arms coming to Hezbollah from Syria (this is the Syria that wants peace, please remember). However, said he, "This is not up to the IDF. The government is responsible for making these decisions and for now they are holding us back." According to Director of IDF Strategic Planning, Brig.-Gen. Udi Dekel, the cabinet and the IDF are facing the "constant dilemma" of whether to attempt to thwart arms build-up or to prepare for a new war instead. Now, I'm not an army strategic planner, and it may be that I'm missing something of enormous significance, but it eludes me as to how we could even consider opting to prepare for war and sit and wait for it to happen, rather than pre-empting and taking out enemy weapons now. The decision to do this would most assuredly be political. One can only hope and pray that the current political echelon charged with making these decisions is on its way out in the very near future. ~~~~~~~~~~ The prestigious Herzliya Conference is currently running. The most promising thing coming out of the Conference that I've heard yet is a statement by US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns, who said yesterday that "We have to confront Iran." He added that while the US did not seek a confrontation with Iran, it was clear that Iran had a radical agenda and played a negative role in all the recent Middle East conflicts, and so "no options were off the table." This follows the news last week of a second US aircraft carrier to be deployed to the Middle East. ~~~~~~~~~~ The urgent need to confront Iran before it is too late was highlighted by other speakers at the Conference. Bernard Lewis, historian and Islamic expert, sounded a warning that could hardly have been more dire: "I have been told by Iranian friends that Ahmadinejad is indeed crazy, but not stupid. He really believes in the end of days that he is heralding. There is a widespread belief among Shiites that the time has come. Mutually assured destruction is not a deterrent to Ahmadinejad, but an inducement." ~~~~~~~~~~ Although it is not yet quite official as I write, the word is that the next IDF Chief of Staff will be Major General (Res.) Gabi Ashkenazi. ~~~~~~~~~~ Well . . . Hillary has thrown her hat in the race. Not exactly a surprise, but you'll surely not see me dancing in response to her announcement. As the time is right, I expect that I'll have a good deal to say about her. ~~~~~~~~~~ see my website www.ArlenefromIsrael.info
Commentary: Abbas adopting Hamas . . .
After on-again, off-again scheduled meetings, PA president Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal finally met in Damascus last night, with the Syrians playing peacemaker between the factions. This meeting is ostensibly to lead to a unity government, although it has been conceded that a political platform has yet to be formulated. According to Hamas legislator Mushir al-Masri, the key issue is Hamas's refusal to recognize Israel: "Abbas wants us to recognize the Zionist entity, but we swear that even if we are all killed, we will never change our ideology." Now . . . in the unlikely event that a unity gov't really is formed, whom do you imagine it will be that has caved? (Hint: It isn't Mashaal.) There would be some fancy footwork, some language that skirts the issue, and Hamas would be allowed to avoid actually recognizing Israel. At every juncture until now, it has been Abbas who has caved; he will not take on Hamas. The lesson here: A unity gov't would not bring with it moderation, only the pretense of such. I see it as dangerous because the world is all too eager to accept the pretense as reality. Mashaal and Abbas are now saying that they will be working on formation of that unity gov't over the course of the next two weeks. They concurred that the PLO should be strengthened (which leads to the supposition that Hamas, which has been invited by Abbas, the PLO head, to officially join, will do so). And they are agreed that a Palestinian state with temporary borders is to be totally rejected. ~~~~~~~~~~ A high ranking IDF official has told The Jerusalem Post that the political echelon has "tied the IDF's hands" and is preventing military operations to stop Hezbollah from rearming. This is hardly the first time that our particularly inept political echelon has stood in the way of what the military believes must be done; what I am observing, however, is an increased tendency for the military to go public with this. The frustration must be incredible. The officer described the almost daily shipments of arms coming to Hezbollah from Syria (this is the Syria that wants peace, please remember). However, said he, "This is not up to the IDF. The government is responsible for making these decisions and for now they are holding us back." According to Director of IDF Strategic Planning, Brig.-Gen. Udi Dekel, the cabinet and the IDF are facing the "constant dilemma" of whether to attempt to thwart arms build-up or to prepare for a new war instead. Now, I'm not an army strategic planner, and it may be that I'm missing something of enormous significance, but it eludes me as to how we could even consider opting to prepare for war and sit and wait for it to happen, rather than pre-empting and taking out enemy weapons now. The decision to do this would most assuredly be political. One can only hope and pray that the current political echelon charged with making these decisions is on its way out in the very near future. ~~~~~~~~~~ The prestigious Herzliya Conference is currently running. The most promising thing coming out of the Conference that I've heard yet is a statement by US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns, who said yesterday that "We have to confront Iran." He added that while the US did not seek a confrontation with Iran, it was clear that Iran had a radical agenda and played a negative role in all the recent Middle East conflicts, and so "no options were off the table." This follows the news last week of a second US aircraft carrier to be deployed to the Middle East. ~~~~~~~~~~ The urgent need to confront Iran before it is too late was highlighted by other speakers at the Conference. Bernard Lewis, historian and Islamic expert, sounded a warning that could hardly have been more dire: "I have been told by Iranian friends that Ahmadinejad is indeed crazy, but not stupid. He really believes in the end of days that he is heralding. There is a widespread belief among Shiites that the time has come. Mutually assured destruction is not a deterrent to Ahmadinejad, but an inducement." ~~~~~~~~~~ Although it is not yet quite official as I write, the word is that the next IDF Chief of Staff will be Major General (Res.) Gabi Ashkenazi. ~~~~~~~~~~ Well . . . Hillary has thrown her hat in the race. Not exactly a surprise, but you'll surely not see me dancing in response to her announcement. As the time is right, I expect that I'll have a good deal to say about her. ~~~~~~~~~~ see my website www.ArlenefromIsrael.info
Haniyeh addresses crowds in Gaza on the occasion of the new Hijri year Date: 22 / 01 / 2007 Time: 10:45 www.maannews.net/en/index.php?opr=ShowDetails&ID=18842 Gaza - Ma'an - Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh has declared that there will be no concessions made in regard to the principles of the Palestinian lands. He confirmed that his government values having relations with all countries and mentioned that Mahmoud Zahhar will be visiting many countries in Latin America soon. Haniyeh added, "We are not against reopening dialogue with anyone, even the USA. We don't have anything to be afraid of or to hide; our problem is with the Israelis and negotiations with them, as this experience has proven to be a failure." Speaking in a festival on the occasion of the new Hijri (Islamic) year in Gaza he said, "We will be honest about the heritage of this nation and will not give up any inch of the Palestinian land." He called on the Palestinians to stand firm and face the siege imposed on them. The festival was organized by the ministry of religious endowments and Islamic affairs ('Waqf') at the grand Omari Mosque in Gaza City. Many ministers and Palestinian Legislative Committee members attended the celebration. Haniyeh, who delivered a long speech in which he spoke about the occasion and the immigration of the prophet Mohammad to Mecca, spoke also about politics and the current events in the territories and called on Palestinians to be patient. He said, "We are working in order to satisfy God, we are not seeking posts or ministries, but we will not give up any of our rights in Palestine or Jerusalem, or the right to return." He stressed the role of the mosques and the religious people and said that they are the source of faith and hope. He also said that the Palestinian government is a "Muslim government project on Palestinian land." He also said that his government will accept a state on the pre-1967 lands, or within the Green Line, with Jerusalem as its capital. He stressed the right of return for the refugees and the release of the detainees as a precondition for a truce, not for recognition of the Israeli state. Haniyeh said the national dialogue to end the chaos and disorder will be resumed soon in Gaza and expressed hope that it will achieve the formation of the unity government. He also spoke about the oppression that Palestinians are facing at the hands of the Israelis and also spoke about the Palestinians in Iraq and what they are facing at the hands of militias. He called on the Iraqi government to protect them. He also urged the Arab countries to protect the Palestinian refugees in their countries. The prime minister spoke about the dangers which the Al Aqsa Mosque is facing and Israeli plans to judaize the holy city of Jerusalem. He also urged the Arab and Muslim countries to intervene in this issue and to pressurize Israel to halt its plans in the city. In the end of his speech, Haniyeh called upon Palestinians to abandon the use of weapons and to be united.
Consequences of a sovereign Palestinian Arab state
1. Encirclement. Will a proposed sovereign Palestine not swallow up Jordan, most of whose population is Palestinian, leaving Israel with a hostile state from the Iraqi border to the Mediterranean Sea, with a corridor across the Negev between Gaza to Hebron? 2. Israeli Arabs. Will the Arabs of the Galilee and the Triangle not sue for "autonomy," and then l demand the fulfillment of UN Resolution 181-an Israeli withdrawal to the 1947 borders (evacuation of Nahariya, Acre, Nazareth, Jaffa, Ashdod, Ashkelon, Kiryat Gat and Beer Sheva)? 3. Terror. Why will a new Palestinian entity disband terrorist organizations? After all, Mahmud Abbas has so far refused to dismantle or disband the Al Aksa Brigades of the Fateh which continue to fire missiles into the Western Negev. 4. Armament. Why should there be any expectation that a sovereign Palestine will uphold any commitment for demilitarization, since the Palestinian Authority never upheld any such commitment since the Oslo accords? 5. Refugees. Based on Israel's surprising agreement to view the Saudi plan as a basis for a state, does that not mean that Israel will have to absorb descendents of refugees and displace thousands of Israelis from places like Haifa, Tfzat and Jaffa and 80 kibbutzim which rest on Arab neighborhoods or villages from where Arabs fled in 1948? 6. Air space. Will the Israel Air Force be forbidden from flying over the "West Bank," just as it was banned from the Lebanese skies? 7. Alliances. Based on diplomatic experience with the Palestinian Authority, will a Palestine not violate every prohibition on signing military agreements with countries hostile to Israel, placing the Iranian Revolutionary Guard on Israel's borders? 8. Water. Like the Palestinian Authority before it, will a sovereign Palestine not carry out pirate drillings, and threaten the mountain aquifer of Judea and Samaria? 9. Jewish sovereignty. Will the momentum of a Palestine not erase the right of the Jews to the land of Israel in international consciousness? 10. Loss of independence. Will Israel not become a protectorate that is subject to the Quartet -- the US, the EU, the US and the UN?
The Israel Resource Review is brought to you by
the Israel Resource, a media firm based at the Bet Agron Press Center in
Jerusalem, and the Gaza Media Center under the juristdiction of the Palestine
Authority. |
Printer
friendly version of this article