Muslim and Jewish Women in Nazareth

'We can live in peace'...John Lennon (photo: Dafna Tal)

Mahzor

Mahzor

New York Public Library

Churches

Sarajevo Haggadah

Mah Nishtanah

Sarajevo haggadah

Antaea Darom

Israeli women's art

Action

Torah as music

Ben Heine

Action

ceramic bowl

Mohammad Said Kalash, "Offering Reconciliation" exhibit (photo: Ilan Amihai)

Action

Punch and Judy/Pinchas and Jamila

Avi Katz

Action

David Grossman

Ben Heine

Action

Eldrige Street shul

Lower East Side

Action

Dove

Ben Heine

Action

Two birds

Hoda Jamal

Action

Israeli and Palestinian boys

from documentary, Promises

Action

Cat in the Hat

Yiddish version

Action

Daylight through the Wall

Banksy: graffiti art on Separation Wall

Action

Maurice Sendak's Brundibar set

New Victory Theater (photo: Nan Melville/NYT)

Action

Daniel Barenboim, West-Eastern Divan Orchestra

Palestinian-Israeli musical ensemble (photo: Kerstin Joensson/AP)

Action

Great Day on Eldrige Street

N.Y.'s klezmer greats celebrate shul rededication (photo: Leo Sorel)

Action

Joint Appeal for Peace

(Avi Katz)

Joint Appeal for Peace

Ketubah, Ancona, Italy (1772)

(Jewish Theological Seminary library)

Ancona ketubah

Archive for the ‘Mideast Peace’ Category

Who Killed One of Russia’s Top Spies?

Wednesday, September 1st, 2010
yuri ilanov

Russian top spy assassinated?

The Telegraph is reporting that Maj. Gen. Yuri Ivanov, deputy head of Russian intelligence service known as GRU, died in Syria recently.  Speculation is rampant that he was assassinated.  He had been staying in the northwestern Syrian resort of Tartous when he disappeared, with his body later hauled in by Turkish fishermen.

Here is some background on Ilanov:

Major-General Yuri Ivanov, 52, was the deputy head of Russia’s foreign military intelligence arm known as GRU which is thought to operate the biggest network of foreign spies out of all of Russia’s clandestine intelligence services.

…Reports have suggested he was on official business and the location where he is reported to have disappeared was only about fifty miles from a strategically vital Russian naval facility in the Syrian port of Tartus which is being expanded and upgraded to service and refuel ships from Russia’s Black Sea Fleet. The facility is Russia’s only foothold in the Mediterranean Sea, and Mossad, Israel’s national intelligence agency, is known to be concerned that Moscow will use the upgraded facility as a base for spy ships and electronic espionage directed at the Middle East.

One wonders whether this is another variant of the U.S.S. Liberty episode in which Israel is warning the Russians not to stray too far into Israel’s business and its “sphere of influence.”  I have written here about the possibility of an Israeli attack on Syria.  Given this, the Mossad cannot have liked one of Russia’s top spies setting up a new base in Syria.  Israel undoubtedly feels it has its hands full anticipating attacks by Hezbollah or Syria on its northern front.  To add Russian mischief to the mix would be even more dangerous for Israeli interests.

The Guardian further adds that Ivanov was the architect of several spectacular assassinations of Chechen separatist leaders on foreign soil, one in Qatar.  It seems perfect justice for Ivanov himself to have died in similar circumstances.

Of course, this is speculation.  But given the dearth of facts, it seems credible speculation that awaits further confirmation or repudiation.

This incident recalls a not dissimilar one in 2008, in which a Syrian general and confidant of Pres. Assad was assassinated by a sniper while sunbathing at his southern Syrian coastal villa.  In that case too, if I recall correctly, the Syrians originally reported that Gen. Suleiman died in a “swimming accident.”  The general was Syria’s main liaison with Hezbollah and responsible for supplying it with sophisticated weaponry, and as such would’ve been a desirable Mossad target.

Furthermore, Israel, if it killed Ilanov, is sending Assad a message that it has penetrated his circle and those of his closest allies.  No one is safe.  It seems a sad recompense for Assad’s repeated offers to negotiate a peace agreement with Israel.  But there you go…if it’s inconveneint for Israeli political machinations to make peace with you, it would just as soon make war on you or kill you or your closest advisors and allies.

Both assassinations (if the Ilanov death was such) also happened in very close proximity to Tartous (Ivanov’s in Latakia and Suleiman’s in Tartous itself), which is not only a playground for the Syrian elite, but also, as the Telegraph story notes, a Russian naval facility.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Israel’s ‘Curtis LeMay’: IDF Attack Iran Before U.S. Mid-Term Elections

Wednesday, September 1st, 2010
oded tira

Brig. Gen. Oded Tira: Israel's Curtis LeMay (Tvika Tishler)

Israeli Brig. Gen. (res.) Oded Tira, former IDF artillery chief, has the unmitigated gall and impudence to urge that Israel attack Iran just before the Congressional mid-term elections when Pres. Obama’s hands will be tied in terms of any punishment he can mete out for the country’s misbehavior.  Here’s a little taste of what the Israeli Curtis LeMay proposes:

The clear conclusion is that we must attack.  The best timing would be in October before the U.S. Congressional elections.  The punishment that can be meted out to Israel on the eve of elections will be limited, if at all.  After November, it appears we will get, or so I hope, a Republican majority which will repay us handsomely for the attack and its aftermath.

I only wonder whether Haaretz has the guts to translate this garbage for its English edition.   This is not just incitement for war, it is egregious interference in U.S. political affairs.  Apparently, Tira and his IDF buddies have been sucking on the U.S. teat for so long they think they’re Americans with a right to topple our government at will.

The folks at Aipac might want to tamp down this sort of lunacy lest it enter into U.S. electoral politics and serve as a backlash that could put Jewish Republicans on the defensive. Lest you say that Tira is a loose cannon, he is a loose cannon who was head of the Israeli Manufacturer’s Association and is an influential figure in business and military circles.

Besides this particular bit of nuttiness, last April Tira wrote in Haaretz that Israel should not only attack Syria due to the SCUD missiles it supposedly supplied to Hezbollah, but that Israel should topple the Assad regime.  In other words he advocated another 1982 Lebanon style invasion and usurpation of Syrian sovereignty.

To a hammer, everything looks like a nail.  To an artillery officer every nation that blocks Israel’s interests looks like a target to be bombed into submission.  Whether or not you argue that Tira is a warmonger, you can’t argue that his views aren’t common among the Israeli generalariat.  Even more than in the U.S. army, Israel’s current crop of generals welcomes war and the opportunity to redeem themselves for their past failures, and the ability to test out new weapons systems on the Muslim enemy.  To warriors like this, an Israeli holy war against Islam undoubtedly looks almost attractive.

What I don’t understand and never have understood is how an Israeli general can argue that Israel would effectively be able to fight on so many military fronts simultaneously when during the Gaza and Lebanon wars it didn’t fight effectively on a single front.  Has he given the least thought how Israel would assault Iran and invade Syria, all the while withstanding the tumultuous reception such news would receive among Palestinians, in Lebanon, etc.  These guys are generals.  They’re supposed to have brains and use them.  Where is the intelligence?

Reader Ariel Shatil draws our attention to other aspects of Tira’s hard-right oddness:

He retired from the military service as Chief of Artillery before I was drafted but lets just say that opinion of him voiced by reservists that I met wasn’t very positive. Two things worth mentioning – Early in the decade he was the Manufacturers Association President and as such was rabid anti-worker, which went well with his general right wing theories.

He faded away mid decade but resurfaced after operation “Cast Lead” when he appeared on national news claiming that the white phosphorus in the photos from Gaza were actually phosphorus tipped pieces of felt that were generally harmless. As someone who served in Artillery for over twenty years (regular and reserves) as a Master Sergeant and has fired thousands of shells, I can tell you that there he described a non-existent munition.

Hamas Terror Attack Unmasks Fatal Weakness of Peace Talks

Tuesday, August 31st, 2010
hebron terror attack

Israeli police examine car attacked by Hamas gunmen (Tomer Applebaum)

There have been so many miscalculations going into the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks one hardly knows where to begin in portraying them.  First, let’s start with Hamas’ military wing, to whom we owe thanks for their gruesome point-blank killings of four Hebron Hills settlers including two women, one of whom was pregnant.

Thanks to the foolhardy campaign of isolation against Hamas engineered by Israel and the U.S., Hamas believes the only way to make its voice heard is through the barrel of a gun.  But if the gangsters who planned this killing had bothered to think about anything more than drawing Israeli blood, they would’ve realized the peace talks are destined to fail.  They don’t need killings in order to ensure this.  In fact, that the Hamas military wing butchers headquartered in Damascus felt the need to kill indicates how insecure and desperate they are.  If they had been smart, as in any political campaign, when your opponent is about to fall flat on his face you don’t do anything to make him more attractive to voters.  This is precisely what Hamas did.

Further, in Israel an intense debate was underway provoked by theater artists about boycotting Israeli settlements.  Their refusal to perform in the new Ariel cultural center was drawing sympathy from many Israelis.  Now, any sympathy engendered has been drowned by preservation instincts that kick in whenever there’s a terror attack.

One might suspect that the Hamas extremists who executed this attack don’t want peace at any price.  And that’s just what they’ll get if they continue on this road.  Endless war and a struggle to the death ending perhaps in mutually assured destruction of both Israel and Palestine.  Do they want the region to be a smoking rubble?  Will that satisfy?

But let’s not leave the Israelis and Americans off as passengers on this ship of fools.  Bibi Netanyahu is about to embark on peace talks when he has nothing whatsoever to offer the Palestinians.  He’s refusing to renew the settlement freeze.  Along with his U.S. partner in grime, Dennis Ross, he’s preparing a proposal that would be a freeze in name only and allow Israel to continue building in settlements it is “likely” to control after a peace agreement.  Of course, such a proposal would undermine any negotiation since it would de facto assign Israel control of territory on whose behalf it is supposed to be negotiating.

If I were Abbas I would demand in return for approving this sham freeze a parallel set of building permits for building in Israeli Palestinian towns, which almost never can get Israeli approval for new construction.

What will Bibi offer the Palestinians?  A few less roadblocks and checkpoints, a few more towns under Palestinian control.  What will he not offer Abbas?  Dismantling of illegal settlements, Right of Return (in even a modified form), return to ’67 borders.  In short, he’s got nuttin’.  Another sham.

As for the U.S., what is Obama thinking?  How can he possibly want to invest political capital in such a shambles of a negotiation?  My impression of presidential power is that it should be wielded when there is a reasonable chance of success.  There isn’t in this case.  So Obama is wasting his time and energy.   Here is a perfect example of the Alice in Wonderland quality of the administration’s thinking going into the talks:

…The Obama administration, according to officials, is calculating that once the two leaders are in face-to-face negotiations, neither side will be willing to take actions that would capsize the talks in the first month. Mr. Netanyahu, this thinking goes, will offer a compromise that, while it may fall short of an extension of the moratorium, will satisfy the Palestinians that construction will be curbed.

Of course Bibi will be willing to capsize the talks.  What does he stand to lose from doing so?  His job?  His coalition?  His power?  Of course not. And what can Obama do to threaten him politically or otherwise?  Nothing.  Will Obama dare to cut aid in an election year?  Will he dare to anything that has teeth in the face of Israeli recalcitrance?  Of course not.  So who are we kidding here? Nothing good will come of this.

If you should doubt that proposition, just read Ethan Bronner’s “good time Mahmoud” account in today’s Times, Outlines Emerge of Future State in West Bank, you’ll see why the talks are bound to fail.  Bronner’s eternal sunshine of the Zionist mind reels off his typical tedious list of Israel-Fatah West Bank “successes”: the requisite man in the street interview with a satisfied Palestinian customer praising the new found economic boom.  The tantalizing prospects of the removal of a few checkpoints and a few new areas in which Palestinian police will be permitted to patrol (until Israel needs to pursue a terrorist or criminal, in which case it forgets it no longer has control and does whatever the hell it wishes anyway).  All of this of course equals that “emerging Palestinian state.”  That is if you’re in a drug-induced stupor that prevents you from seeing what is in front of one’s nose.

What is missing from Bronner’s account (except in a single-paragraph dismissive aside)?  One word: Hamas.  And that one word was reintroduced to the political landscape by today’s terror attack.  What the terror attack showed to anyone with a brain and eyes in their head is that Hamas will shatter any arrangement unless it includes them in some meaningful form.  Negotiating a peace agreement or proclaiming an emerging state as Bronner and his buddies Obama, Abbas and Bibi are trying to do, will founder on the rocks if it attempts to do so without a significant proportion of the Palestinian population, those who support Hamas.

This is not a promotion of that group.  I don’t agree with Hamas’ agenda.  But I do understand democracy and governing with the permission of the governed.  Obama should too since that is the basis of American democracy.  Hamas may not be what I’d prefer to govern Palestine and they may not do so if there is a future election in Palestine.  But it is clear as day that they are a force that must be reckoned with in some form.  Otherwise, all will be lost.  That’s why the current formulation of peace talks is destined to fail.

And before any readers hop on the “beat up Palestinians” band wagon, note this telling passage from the N.Y. Times article linked above:

…The attack took place in an area of the West Bank that is under full Israeli security control, and where the Palestinian security forces have no responsibility and are not allowed to operate.

‘President Peres: Save Us from Ourselves’

Monday, August 30th, 2010
Israel iran war scenario

Notice that the 'scenarios' make no provision for Iranian counter-attack. Do they think there will be none?

Noted Yediot Achronot columist, Yigal Sarna, writes a plaintive “letter to the President,” asking Shimon Peres to intercede to stop war with Iran.  It is a touching and deeply- felt piece:

A Letter to the President:

Save Us from Ourselves ["from our own hands"]

Mr. President:

I turn to you because you are the elected official I’ve known best since I was a boy, standing on Keren Kayemet Boulevard with my father, I was shaking hands with a very short, white-haired man who got out of a big car.  This was the great man of the nation who founded it all, your rabbi and teacher was David Ben Gurion.  You were a young man then, but involved in everything.  Architect of diplomatic relations with France, the first atomic reactor [Dimona], armaments and construction, relations with the Persian Shah.

A generation comes and a generation goes.  You remain with us.  Full of lofty plans, you made a mess and fixed it, supporting the Hilltop settlers and compromise.  You were an oracle and accomplished as much as the chief of staff.

In a country in which everything shone at the height of its glory and then disappeared as if it never was, you remained at the heart of things.  The world turned upside down.  Empires were lost.  The globe was completely different.  And you who were active in the days of Eisenhower are still with us.  As popular as ever.  Perhaps because a country that has no father embraces a grandfather.  In a country which ruined so many opportunities, they are drawn to the last of those with deep experience.

I turn to you as a citizen because more than once when things were rough and no one could save us from trouble, you appeared and did. you saved us…

You and Yitzhak [Rabin] tried to save us from ourselves, from our zealotry, from our weakness.  Like Yitzhak, you knew that our military power would wane in a country moving from ideology to material greed as its motivating idea; that if we did not solve the conflict–we would be sunk.

Now I turn to you with a desperate plea.  Not to pronounce a polished, multi-faceted plan at the age of 87; not to exhaust yourself with a thousand deliberations as in the days of Oslo, but instead to put on the brakes.  To prevent a folly, dangerous and pointless as no other; to stop the war with Iran.  Use all your influence with the security apparatus, its advisors, its senior officers and those so brilliant at reading maps, to stop the air assault which will rain down on us a catastrophe to last generations.

Stop this ruinous miliary idea, whose source is in the reflex of those who devise new weapons systems and generals to make us forget the wounds of the past.  You know better than all of us that no bombing of Iran will eliminate its nuclear capacity, if it even exists.  This [Iran] is a land as vast as a continent, hidden and closed, which can buy whatever it needs.  Anything that is blown up will bloom anew.  The damage will be erased in a heartbeat, but the war of vengeance will begin, which Iranian forbearance and its ability to absorb hundreds of thousands of casualties and great suffering–will be something we’ve never before known in the history of this conflict.

Even according to the most optimistic scenario, the air bombing will instill Iranian vengeance which will lead to the deaths of thousands of Israelis.  I turn to you because there is no one else to turn to.  Overseeing the security services, which are consumed [obsessed] by conflicts are two elected officials, a prime minister and [defense] minister each thrown out of their jobs by the electorate in the past because of their serious failures.

The military service has already inflicted on us a series of failed, impotent military operations against mere rockets.  This is an institution unsuited to return a lost soldier home, one imprisoned in Gaza.

I turn to you, Mr. President as a man sentenced to life in prison turns to his president, as a last resort: save us from our own hand ["what our own hand might do"].

What is especially touching and aggravating about this piece is that Sarna turns to Peres because he knows there is no other address in government for his entreaty.  He does so out of desperation, that of a man who knows his world is about to implode and that there is precious little he can do about it.  He reminds me of one of those desperate characters that Rod Serling portrayed so brilliantly in the Twilight Zone, men filled with terror and aware of their impending doom.

God [or Obama?] help us and Israel if Sarna’s nightmare comes to pass.

New Israel Fund ‘Jewish Homeland’ Controversy

Monday, August 30th, 2010

I posted here about the controversy concerning NIF’s new guidelines as reported by Nathan Guttman in The Forward.  He reported that the group would require grantees to acknowledge Israel as a Jewish homeland.  On that basis, I wrote a post harshly critical of what I perceived as a one-sided set of rules which would discriminate against Israeli Palestinian grantees.

Apparently, according to an authoritative source, Guttman portrayed the guidelines incompletely.  The sources he used for his report appeared interested, again I have this from a reliable source, in guidelines that would’ve forced grantees to acknowledge Israel as a Jewish state.  That isn’t going to happen.

Leonard Fein, in fact, said in my last post when I noted that NIF was considering compelling grantees to acknowledge Israel as a Jewish state, that I had lied.  And then he had the chutzpah to wish me a healthy New Year!  In fact, there were those within the NIF who proposed just that.  But their proposal was not successful.

My source tells me the proposed guidelines will include a provision acknowledging Israel as a Jewish homeland.  But the language will also affirm that Israel is:

…A democracy dedicated to the full equality of all its citizens and communities.

I want to make clear that while I’m not fully satisfied with this new wording, it’s less offensive than the incomplete language suggested by Guttman.  And I believe that those who negotiated this wording did so in good faith and attempted to conciliate both a Jewish and Palestinian perspective on the issue.

The reason I’m less than content with the above quoted language is that it does not offer Israeli Palestinians what it offers Israeli Jews.  If you are dedicated to the full equality of all citizens and you’ve conceded to Jews that their nation is their homeland, but refuse to concede this to Palestinian citizens, then they still aren’t equal to Jews.  You’ve come awfully close, but close isn’t equal.  There are some things you just can’t finesse and this is one of them.

There is absolutely no reason that Israel cannot be a single state in which two separate ethnic groups see it as their respective homelands.  For any who would claim that this formulation indicates a bi-national state, that is not the case since Israel will still be a unitary state containing two major ethnic groups.  It will not be two states and will not divide into two separate ethnic enclaves.  While there are some especially on the Jewish side who would prefer to see Israel as a state rid of Palestinians, most Israeli Jews want a state in which the two groups co-exist within a single state of Israel.  Palestinian citizens, of course, want a unitary, and not bi-national state.

Israeli Intelligence Leaks Syrian-Hezbollah War Defense Plans to Arab Media

Monday, August 30th, 2010

The Kuwaiti newspaper, al Rai, reports that Syria and Hezbollah have agreed to a wide ranging intelligence sharing operation which also includes a joint operations center staffed by Hezbollah and Syrian military officers in the event of a war with Israel:

Hizbullah concluded “field understandings” with the Syrian army, [in] which both sides will cooperate at the military level, including “combat cooperation” in the event of an outbreak of a war with Israel. The understandings include intelligence cooperation. Both sides agreed to exchange data on the “bank of Israeli targets” and dividing responsibility to bomb these targets between Hizbullah and Syria.

The two sides agreed to establish a joint “operation room” which will be occupied by Hizbullah and Syria officers.  This room is intended to fill all the intelligence gaps that can emerge in the battlefield, the report said.

The newspaper added that via this cooperation, the Syrian army makes available all the intelligence its units gather regarding the Israeli air force and its flights. The idea is that Hizbullah will be bombing…the Israeli airports before the flights. According to the report, the most important thing in this cooperation…is to damage the Israeli Air Force and reduce its capabilities.

There is very little that is unexpected in this news since Hezbollah is essentially a Syrian proxy on the Lebanese battlefield.  But what is interesting is that a confidential source has revealed that this little news nugget was supplied by none other than Israeli intelligence.  It wanted both the Syrians and Hezbollah to know that it knew about their war plans.

It seems part of an elaborate game of psychological warfare and intimidation that the Israelis are playing with Iran and the other potential war parties.  Israel’s spooks want the enemy to know that Israel knows of their plans the moment the enemy decides upon them.  There is nothing they can do Israel won’t know about, etc.

All this strikes me as a little like boys pretending to be spies and soldiers and playing mock battles, with each child hissing and pawing at the ground to frighten his opponent.  With the difference that neither Israel nor its enemies are children, but rather nations playing games that will end with death and mayhem potentially for thousands, if not tens of thousands.  Can we afford to let these boys play their games at the expense of the peoples of the Middle East who will suffer if the game goes awry and becomes real?

I have written before about the unstoppable momentum for war that happened in the run-up to the 1967 war in which Nasser and Israel’s leaders exchanged ever more bellicose threats which eventually convinced Golda Meir that she had to pre-empt an Egyptian strike by hitting first.  Thus political rhetoric and grandstanding led to fateful military decisions leading inexorably to war.  The question for today is: are we in the run-up to the next major Israeli-Arab war?  Is that where we want to go?  Where we want to let Israel go?  Because from my vantage point Israel is hellbent to get there.

Who can stop it?  Obama?  Will he?  Can he?  American liberals have to put the president on notice that if there is a war, we will blame him as the figure who could have stopped it and didn’t.  In other words to paraphrase Harry Truman, the rap stops here.

New Israel Fund Caving to Im Tirzu Pressure?

Saturday, August 28th, 2010
New Israel Fund
New Jewish Israel Fund or Not Arab Israel Fund

The Forward brings distressing news that the New Israel Fund has prepared draft funding guidelines that would bar any Israeli NGO which did not endorse Israel as a Jewish state:

The New Israel Fund, the target of attacks by right-wing organizations accusing it of supporting anti-Zionist groups, is discussing the possibility of specifying in its guidelines that grants will be given only to groups that accept the idea of Israel as a Jewish homeland.

…According to three sources who have either seen the new proposed guidelines or were briefed on their content, the debate has also touched on the issue of defining the not-for-profit organizations that are eligible for receiving NIF grants. Board members and major donors are grappling with whether to require that grantees accept the idea of a two-state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, thus agreeing to the principle of Israel as a Jewish state.

I have had my share of disagreements with New Israel Fund, most significantly when it expelled Shammai Leibowitz from one of its fellowship programs after he spoke publicly on behalf of BDS and the story was picked up by Maariv’s resident red-baiter, Ben Caspit.  But I have, throughout the Im Tirzu attacks, stood by NIF and championed its cause.  But if it follows through on such guidelines it will have succumbed to the venom spewed by Im Tirzu.  It will have caved to pressure from the Israeli right to conform its mission to a pro-Zionist one, rather than one that embraces the notion of Israel as a state that empowers all its citizens, including those who are not Jewish.

There can be no doubt that there is any Israeli Palestinian group which NIF currently funds that can support the notion of Israel as a Jewish state.  Besides, this very notion is a condition demanded in the past by Bibi Netanyahu before he would negotiate with the Palestinians.  So in effect, if the NIF “goes there,” it will have adopted Bibi Netanyahu’s political agenda.  Can this be possible?  Is this what things have come to?  That the NIF, under enormous pressure from the Israeli right, determines that it must compromise with its values in order to appease its enemies?  Does NIF really believe this will protect it from the worst of the hatred coming its way?  Does it believe such policy changes will inoculate it from attack?

If this is what NIF’s leaders are thinking they are sadly mistaken.  If they cave, the right will see this as a sign of weakness and it will crowd in for what it hopes to be the kill.  And such compromise will destroy the organization’s credibility among its Arab donees.  Who in the Palestinian community will want to accept money from it under such conditions?

Thus, under attack from its right flank and its left, NIF will be buffeted by the political winds and have no clear course.  It will be a sad day if it happens.

The Forward mentions that there is compromise wording under consideration:

According to individuals who are involved in the process, one formulation being discussed is recognizing Israel as the “homeland” of the Jewish people — a description that falls short of the definition of Israel as a “Jewish state” but would avoid alienating Israeli-Arab not-for-profits that are on NIF’s grant list.

I should mention that this indeed is wording that I sometimes use in explaining my own Zionist philosophy with the addendum that I see Israel as the homeland of its Palestinian citizens as well.  Unless this proviso is included then even the compromise wording is offensive.  Besides, why should the NIF determine within its funding guidelines the nature of the Israeli state.  This, it seems to me, takes NIF far afield from its core mission which is to build Israeli democracy and social justice.

This quotation from a former president of the group indicates a leadership that has become unnerved and unmoored in response to the onslaught against it:

Peter Edelman, a former president of the NIF board, said in a brief interview with the Forward that revising the guidelines was “not necessarily in response” to criticism. Edelman added, however, that “when there is unjust criticism, then you want to be as clear as possible about the issues.”

This is a clarity that is unnecessary and which will not diminish the attacks.  It is a clarity that will drive away the Palestinian NGO community and render NIF less effective and less relevant in an Israeli context.  It is the NIF playing by the enemy’s rules–and losing.

Finally, the headline of the Forward article is: New Israel Fund Considering Red Lines, which should have much more appropriately been, New Israel Fund Considering Blue and White Lines. If it adopts these guidelines I’d suggest it change its name to the New Jewish Israel Fund or the Not-Arab Israel Fund, unwieldy perhaps, but very descriptive.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Israeli Preparations for War With Iran, Hezbollah AND Syria?

Saturday, August 28th, 2010

I cringe when I have to write blog posts like this because with every fiber of my body, I do not want a war between Iran and Israel and the concomitant regional hostilities likely to break out thereafter.  I realize that any reporting that encourages such speculation only fuels the interests of Israel as I’ve noticed in the Psy-Ops activities discussed here along those same lines.  But then again, as Trita Parsi mentioned to me the last time we spoke, it is possible that Israel DOES intend to attack Iran and that the games its intelligence operatives are playing are part of this weird scenario.  So I put this out there with foreboding and a warning that posts like this may be just what Israeli intelligence wishes to be posted to scare the shit out of the Iranians, Syrians and Lebanese (specifically Hezbollah).

A week ago or so I reported a major IDF training exercise in the north involving major movements of armor from home bases farther south to staging areas in the north.  I speculated that if the armor remained in the staging areas after the operation concluded this might mean that Israel was preparing for actual military operations either in Lebanon or Syria.  I have not heard about movements of the equipment after conclusion of the operation.  But I have received further reports that, depending on how they’re interpreted, could be cause for alarm.

An Australian aeronautical engineer notes that the US Defence Security Cooperation Agency, as required by law, three weeks ago publicly announced that Israel completed a massive purchase of military fuels (official order) including jet fuel worth $2 billion.  He notes that Israel would require an enormous quantity of jet fuel to mount an Iran attack and that this purchase gets Israel most of the way there.  But he also notes other types of fuels in the order which are not for aircraft:

If Israel were planning to strike Iran then that would explain the requirement for the large amounts of JP-8 fuel. However, it does not explain Israel’s need for such large amounts of gasoline and diesel fuel since an Israeli strike against Iran is unlikely to include any type of ground incursion into Iran for which these fuels would be used. The only conclusion one can draw, if Israel is not planning to actually invade Iran, which, clearly, it could not, is that Israel is planning to use the gasoline and the diesel fuel for some other ground incursion – and that can only mean an invasion of Lebanon and possibly the Gaza and West Bank when an attack against Iran is launched.

This massive order begs the question; is the final confrontation imminent? And, if not, then what is all this fuel for?

Time will tell. Jet fuel, if it’s going to be used in peak condition, doesn’t have a very long shelf life.

So, as I mentioned in my earlier post about the training exercise, it could be that Israel IS planning to attack Iran and is preparing for the accompanying border unrest with Hezbollah in Lebanon and possibly Syria (one strange purpose of the exercise according to the press was to prepare for massive unrest amongst the Israeli Palestinian population which has never, to my knowledge, engaged in unrest during any previous Israeli military operations).  I have to say that I find all of this highly difficult to credit considering the enormous amount of personnel on multiple military fronts that the IDF would be required to coordinate.  Not since the 1973 War has Israel fought on such multiple battlefields and I can’t imagine it would relish the prospect of doing so now considering it hasn’t shown itself terribly competent recently fighting on even one front (cf. Lebanon and Gaza).  While militants in Gaza could not mount any more than a symbolic resistance with rocket attacks on southern Israel, Hezbollah could, as it did in 2006 throw the fear of God into the entire region of northern Israel and send 1 million Israelis once again into shelters for weeks on end.

Haaretz reports, based on a Kuwaiti story, that Israel is preparing to attack Hezbollah military targets inside Syria which, if true, fits into the narrative I’ve outlined above:

Israel is planning to attack Hezbollah arms depots and weapons manufacturing plants in Syria, the Kuwaiti newspaper Al Rai reported on Saturday.  The report is based on Western sources who asserted that Israel has increased its military force level along the northern border in the Golan Heights and Mount Dov areas.  The report cited European sources who claimed that recent Israeli unmanned aerial drone flights over Lebanon and Syria signal Israel’s intentions to carry out operations in the area…According to the report, Israel plans to attack Hezbollah weapons depots, including ones deep inside Syria that store long-range rockets.

The Al Rai report said that the situation on the Israel-Syria border is tense and that Syria could respond immediately to any Israeli attack and not demonstrate the restraint that it did after the Israeli Air Force bombed a suspected nuclear reactor in Syria in the fall of 2007.

According to the report, Syria’s military is on high alert and is strengthening its anti-aircraft defenses along the border with Israel and at strategic sites within Syria.

The original Al Rai story includes this telling piece of information:

“Western military reports reveal that Israel massed in the last days an armed division, in addition to a similar division that was already in place in the Golan Heights and around Shebaa farms.”

If Israel does attack Iran, it goes without saying that Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts are dead probably for the remaining duration of Obama’s term.  That’s one reason I can’t imagine that the U.S. would begin to consider allowing such an Israeli attack.  Which is why I scratch my head at the U.S. facilitating the fuel purchase.  How can we provide Israel with the necessary tools for an attack when it would undermine our stated policy supporting peace talks?

A further caveat: all of the information presented here except the fuel sale is speculative and prone to various interpretations.  So I hesitate to shout from the rooftops about a coming Israeli Middle East military adventure.  But we must be prepared for the eventuality should such a disaster occur.

Enhanced by Zemanta