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

Posts Tagged ‘ynetnews’

IDF Lt. Col. on Beit Hanun Massacre: ‘Artillery Least Effective Against Qassams, Most Likely to Harm Civilians’

Wednesday, November 8th, 2006


Thanks to Sol Salbe for informing me of this article. Lt. Col. (res.) Ron Ben Yishai, Defense columnist for Yediot Achronot (and serving in the paratroopers), provides a primer in Ynetnews on the IDF’s uses of artillery and why it is the least effective and most liable to error in situations like the one faced in Beit Hanun. If you read the following closely (paying special attention to the italicized passages) you will find that, whether he intended to or not, Yishai is laying out the strongest case that can possibly be made for the ultimate failure of the entire Gaza counter-insurgency operation.

And lest anyone doubt the utter horror of this heinous massacre, please view this short, but devastating Reuters video at Ynetnews (Firefox users will need install the Active-X plugin to view it; IE users should have no problem).

Please note that this is not the dovish raving of a peacenik (though many erroneously accuse me of being one here). This is the hard headed realism of an experienced military commander who understands the effectiveness of his weapons and chooses them carefully. This is someone who, while he may fight Palestinian militants to the death, understands that there are moral and tactical constraints that must be respected whether Israel wishes to or not. He is precisely in the Rabin mold. But he is precisely not in the mold of today’s IDF officer. Or at least not the ones I’m reading about in the Israeli press exemplified by Dan Halutz. It is both surprising and gratifying to read of such an IDF officer’s hard-headed pragmatism regarding this horrid incident. In short, he should be the next IDF chief of staff. And precisely for the reasons I outlined above he will never be.

Yishai begins by saying despite the fact that there may be alternate extenuating explanations for what happened:

These facts make almost no difference in the grave overall picture that is already…entrenched in Palestinian and world public opinion, which accuse the IDF of committing a massacre. This should not come as a surprise to anyone. In the dozens of years the IDF has been dealing with rocket fire from Lebanon and Gaza, one thing has been proven beyond any doubt: Artillery fire (using cannons) is the least effective means in preventing rocket and mortar fire. On the other hand, it is most susceptible to end up hurting innocent civilians. Moreover, preventive artillery bombardments that missed their targets entangled Israel in the international arena more than any other means employed by the IDF. On more than one occasion, they forced the State of Israel and the IDF – in the face of international pressure – to halt operations and actions that were essential in thwarting terrorism.

There’s no point in listing all those cases. The list is long and grim. It is enough to recall the bombing of Qfar Qana, during the Grapes of Wrath operation in 1995, which left more than 100 innocent Lebanese civilians dead. Following the incident, Israel was forced to halt its operations against Katyusha rocket launchers, accept Hizbullah’s ceasefire terms, and explain its actions to a United Nation commission of inquiry. Another case involved the Gaza family killed on a beach several months ago…

Amos Harel notes in Haaretz the disturbing fact that:

By sheer coincidence, the artillery battery that erroneously killed 19 civilians in Beit Hanun, belongs to the battalion that killed 100 Lebanese civilians in the first Kfar Kana massacre. That was the hitch that stopped Operation Grapes of Wrath in April 1996.

Uh, the IDF might want to consider disbanding this unit. Or do they want to wait for yet another massacre before they do something to curb its grievous mistakes?

The reason for the above is that artillery bombardment in proximity to residential areas, as accurate and careful as it may be and even employing large safety margins, will always be susceptible to errors. Some of those errors are a result of the lack of eye contact, at the time of the firing, between the cannons and the target. Many other errors result from the shells’ natural distribution.

Artillery is a weapon system designed to “cover” territory and not hit specific targets, particularly when it is used as “preventive fire” at territories rather than a specified target.

Another common reason for tragic incidents where innocents are hurt is errors in calculating the point of impact and technical failures in the armaments involved, which lead to the shells missing the target. Even shell duds that failed to explode threaten civilian populations no less than shells that were properly aimed and exploded.

Directly aimed tank fire is more accurate than artillery fire, but is also risky when employed in residential areas, because such fire is susceptible to missed shots and errors in identifying the target, particularly during nighttime. These facts are well known to IDF officials, particularly after the recent Lebanon war where about 130,000 artillery shells were fired. Now it is clear that the effectiveness of this weapon against Hizbullah fighters was marginal, while the economic cost was astronomical and reached millions of dollars.

Even before the Lebanon war, it was proven that artillery fire failed in preventing or even minimizing Qassam rocket fire from the Gaza Strip. This is the reason why the IDF Southern Command decided recently, on the recommendation of Gaza Division Commander Moshe Tamir, to stop or at least highly limit the use of preventive artillery fire. The trouble is that this recognition of the limits and risks associated with artillery fire were not implemented and so we got another horrifying testament to the dubious effectiveness and needless danger of hurting innocent civilians that is inherent in such fire near residential areas.

Read that carefully, a division commander ordered a policy of “highly limiting” artillery fire and the policy was “not implemented.” Amos Harel describes the situation a bit differently. He claims that Tamir himself approved the deviation from his own policies. This indicates an IDF commander so desperate for results that he rescinded his own policy, probably against his better judgment. This shows an army so lacking in discipline that it deviates from standing policy in the hopes of achieving a specified result. And of course it fails. If you can’t achieve a result following SOP then you’re highly unlikely to achieve it by violating them.

This is precisely the IDF that failed so miserably in Lebanon. Lucky for the IDF Palestinian militants cannot punish them as severely for their failures as Hezbollah did. But this is a gang that literally can’t shoot straight. Consider another grievous operational error noted by Amos Harel:

Veteran artillery men were terrified to discover that the battery had fired at Beit Hanun on the basis of range aiming from the previous night. The corps’ artillery procedure demanded that before firing at a designated target, the unit had to reset range and bearing that morning, because changes in the weather and humidity could affect the shell’s trajectory. Without such resetting, a 450-meter deviation from the target is not so radical.

They used coordinates for their firing based on test firing 12 hours earlier! This is like an airline pilot making an instrument landing and then 12 hours later, instead of doing it again, he decides that the coordinates he used for his last landing would work just as well this time. What he doesn’t take into account is that the wind’s direction and force could’ve changed dramatically thus causing him to crash.

And consider this statement from one of the IDF Gaza officers, which vainly attempts to portray artillery as an effective means of interdicting rocket fire:

IDF GOC Southern Command Yoav Gallant told Channel 2: “Israel’s citizens don’t know how many times artillery fire has prevented Qassam [rocket] launches. When you fire at the launching area area two or three hours in advance, there is a good chance of preventing the Qassam fire.”

Or not. Based on the results, I think I’d trust Yishai’s judgment before I’d trust Galant’s. Besides which, you’ll notice Galant doesn’t address the grievous error rate in such blanket artillery attacks. That’s because he doesn’t care about Palestinian casualties. He’s only interested in results. Or supposedly interested in results. If he were really interested in results he’d examine how successful such tactics are. Yishai doesn’t believe what he’s saying about artillery’s “effectiveness.” Why should we or any Israeli?

Israel will have to address the results of the disaster not only on the moral plain but also in terms of the damage to its position in the international arena. We must also recognize the fact that every such disaster boosts the motivation of Palestinian terror groups to continue the Qassam fire and terror attacks as well as the legitimization they receive on the Palestinian street.

If an IDF lieutenant colonel understand this why can’t Ehud Olmert and Amir Peretz? If you needed any proof that Yishai is right, read this Haaretz subheadline: “21 Qassams said fired at Israel in wake of IDF shelling on Gaza.” Or consider this wise, but sad testimony from a massacre survivor:

At the Kamal Adwan Hospital, Maali Athamnah, 27, the aunt of the newly orphaned Isra and two other siblings who survived, Islam, 14, and Muhammad, 3, who broke both his legs, broke into tears reading a list of the dead, nearly all of them relatives. Another 80 people were wounded.

Ms. Athamnah said she did not support the militants’ firing rockets into Israel. But she said: “Just think who is firing them: those who lost family members to Israel. And think about these kids now. They will be the rocket firers in the future. No mother, no father. No house. They will be the next ones to fire the rockets.

Yishai asks why the IDF would pursue such flawed tactics as artillery barrages in densely crowded urban areas knowing of the possible disastrous consequences:

So why does the IDF still continue using artillery fire? It appears the answer stems from the frustration of IDF commanders after military operations considered successful do not curb or significantly reduce Qassam fire.

Again, a return to the IDF’s lack of discipline borne of the utter failure of its military ‘strategy’ (if one can call it that).

Such operations, like “Autumn Clouds” at Beit Hanoun and “Defensive Shield” in the West Bank in 2002 are supposed to create an intelligence infrastructure that would bring results in the long run. Yet meantime, the IDF and political echelons are slammed in the media and by residents of Sderot and Ashkelon. The pressure exerted on commanders in the field as a result of the ongoing Qassam fire, and the frustration that stems from it, lead them to ignore professional considerations .

Experience shows that even if it ultimately turns out that the civilians killed in Beit Hanoun Wednesday were hurt by a “work accident” in a Hamas weapons warehouse in town [ed., Haaretz and Ynetnews quote many IDF sources which concede that it was a result of an artillery assault, not a "work accident"], the Palestinians and international community will continue to blame Israel.

Therefore, the required conclusion is that the IDF must completely end preventive artillery fire. Foregoing this means would not fundamentally change the results of fighting Qassam fire, but at the same time will prevent severe physical and perceptual damage among innocent Palestinians and diplomatic damage to the State of Israel that will curb its ability to act against terrorist rocket fire.

Ehud Yaari: Syrian Peace Offer ‘Nothing Short of Sensational’
Uri Savir: ‘Say No to U.S.’ Rejection of Syrian Talks

Monday, October 23rd, 2006

Thanks to Sol Salbe for once again pointing out two sizzling stories in the Israeli media about Israel’s tortured relations with Syria. Both point to the absolute bollocks Ehud Olmert is making of that relationship by refusing outright to even discuss peace with the Syrian leadership.

Haaretz’s TV critic writes about an appearance by senior Arab affairs correspondent, Ehud Yaari (Hebrew version), on an Israeli public affairs show, Ulpan Shishi (Studio Six). The critic writes that according to Yaari:

“Syria has presented Israel with an offer which is nothing short of sensational: In return for a withdrawal from the Golan Syria is willing to sign a peace agreement, distance itself from Iran and Hezbollah, give up its demand for access to the Sea of Galilee, and even accept a “lengthy process” for the Israeli withdrawal from the Golan’s major town of Katzerin. No matter which way you look at it, this is a surprisingly generous offer, one that simply cannot be refused. It is difficult to see how Ehud Barak would have knocked it back were it the offer of the table during his negotiations with the Syrians. Even Ya’ari himself recommends accepting it.”

Yaari described his source as a senior Syrian military officer involved with the earlier 2000 round of Israel-Syrian peace talks. I’d say a pretty reliable source.

But a curious thing happened on the show. No one engaged Yaari in serious discussion about the subject. No government representative was invited to respond to his report. Basically, the report sunk like a lead balloon. And this is precisely the problem with the current situation. As the Bible says: “Peace, peace–but there is no peace.” As far as peace is concerned, Israel doesn’t know the meaning of the word (to paraphrase Mose Allison).

One of Israel’s foremost enemies, with whom it has fought two outright wars and several proxy wars, has done the equivalent of walking from Damascus to Jerusalem, standing on bended knee outside the PM’s residence, ringing his doorbell and presenting him on a silver platter the peace that Israel claims it has longed for since 1967. And what does Olmert do? He says: “Uh, could you hold on a minute. I need to talk to my boss (the U.S.) and get his permission before I can even talk to you.” Does this make sense? And when an Israeli commentator like Yaari with impeccable and sober credentials buttresses this view his fellow media pundits yawn and go on to the next subject. There is something wrong with this picture.
The Process: 1,100 Days that Changed the Middle East
Which brings us to Uri Savir‘s warning against sticking with the U.S. demand that Israel turn a cold shoulder on Assad:

Former Israeli governments always announced they would not bow to American pressure…[on] Israel to make far-reaching concessions in order to advance peace.

Today America is applying a different type of pressure aimed at preventing Israel from making concessions that would enable moving the peace wagon forward. But we shouldn’t succumb to pressure of this type either

Regarding Syria, President Bush and US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice unequivocally oppose Israeli-Syrian negotiations. We, however, have a strategic interest in dismantling terror in Iran, Syria, Hizbullah and Hamas. This we can do by means of diplomatic negotiations with the Syrians, a proposal occasionally being made by Syrian President Assad.

…We would do well to engage in negotiations with Syria in order to create leverage for a comprehensive settlement in the Middle East, which would guarantee Israel’s security.

Bush administration’s policies are aimed at…[promoting] democracy and ridding [the world] of terror so that…countries…become part of the pro-Western spectrum. To this end, pressure is being exerted on various countries [Iran and Syria] and attempts are being made to undermine their legitimacy.

Israel’s interests, however, are different, particularly after the second Lebanon war when diplomatic settlements potentially became Israel’s defensive shield. Once again we must not succumb to American pressure. In today’s reality, we have to demonstrate more flexibility than is expected by our great friends.

Israel and the U.S. have a very strange relationship. When Israel feels it is in its own interest to be more hawkish and bellicose than the U.S. would wish it goes its own way and essentially thumbs its nose at us. But when conditions call for Israel to be dovish and make concessions it first feels it necessary to ask U.S. permission before taking any action. I don’t quite understand why there is obstreperousness in the first case and obsequiousness in the second.

Is it possible that Olmert is worried that if he goes against Bush’s directive and does negotiate with Syria and there is another conflict with an Arab party like Syria or Lebanon–that the U.S. will wash its hands of Israel and force it to go it alone? If that does enter into Olmert’s calculations, then he is not taking into account that there will be a new president in power in two years. That president will likely not be influenced in his attitude toward Israel by its refusal to heed a command from the Bush Administration. In fact, if it’s a Democratic Administration, Israel’s refusal to heed Bush might be a plus rather than a demerit.

In any case, I urge Olmert to get fire in his belly and sit down and talk with Assad. It’s unlikely he has the political vision or courage to do so. But stranger things have happened.

I hesitate to say I understood the mind of Ariel Sharon enough to predict what he’d do in this situation. But it’s nice to think that a man with enough guts to disengage from Gaza after maintaining for decades he would never do so; would have the smarts to negotiate with Syria after he personally fought in two wars against it. Sharon was a far from ideal political leader. But he was willing to do the surprising and gutsy thing if he thought it would be good for Israel. Even he would see, I believe, that it could be good for Israel to talk to Syria.

And Sharon, who had sixth sense for appraising his enemy’s strong and weak points, would easily size up Bush’s current feeble position and realize that bucking him would cause Sharon and Israel no long-term harm.

Support for Olmert’s War Leadership Plummets; 40% of Israelis Support Hezbollah Negotiations

Friday, August 11th, 2006

As always, polls of Israeli opinion produce seemingly contradictory findings and the latest ones by Haaretz and YnetNews are no exception. Haaretz finds that Olmert’s approval rating has dropped from 75% to 48%. YnetNews finds his approval at 70%. One should note that it appears YnetNews asked different questions than Haaretz and this certainly can mean disparate findings. Amir Peretz’s approval ratings sank ever lower–from 65% to 37%. Ynetnews places his approval rate at 60%. Haaretz reports that most of this decline occurred in just the past week.

Interestingly, the one cabinet official who continues enjoying high popularity is one who’s been relatively silent on matters pertaining to the war: Tzipi Livni. Her approval rating is at 61%. More on Livni in a later post. Only 47% approved of Chief of Staff Dan Halutz’s performance–very low marks for such an officer in time of war. Ynetnews finds much higher marks for the IDF, but doesn’t seem to have polled about Halutz’s individual performance.

According to Haaretz, 30% of Israelis believe that Israel is losing the Lebanon war and 44% believe that neither side is winning. This is a stunning finding when you think of what the entire nation must’ve expected when the war was first declared: a relatively easy IDF victory over a small terrorist group.

Haaretz finds only 39% back the Cabinet’s recently announced expansion of the war, while 28% support an immediate ceasefire. 26% support continuing the war in its present form. Ynetnews reports 90% of Israeli Jews believe that the war is justified and that 66% support its continuation.

YnetNews tells us that 48% of Israelis are in favor of direct negotiations with Hamas (are you listening Olmert?) and 39% support such negotiations with Hezbollah. In essence, what the latter figure tells us is that a significant minority of the Israeli public is in favor of negotiations for the return of its two kidnapped soldiers rather than continued war to get them back. This would be another repudiation of current government policy.

Nine Israeli Dead as Hezbollah Katyushas Hit Haifa–Tel Aviv Next?

Sunday, July 16th, 2006


First it was a bold guerrilla strike against IDF forces resulting in eight dead and two kidnapped soldiers. Then, yesterday saw the rocketing of an Israeli ship resulting in four dead sailors. Today, Hezbollah continues to ratchet up the pressure as it rained Katyushas down on Haifa (which had never been hit before by such fire). Each day sees a further. seemingly calibrated escalation from Israel’s enemy. Haaretz reports:

At least eight people were killed Sunday morning as Katyusha rockets fired from Lebanon hit three cities along Israel’s northern coast, including Haifa.

Most of the fatalities were in an Israel Railways garage located near an Israel Electric Corporation installation on Haifa Bay, according to the Magen David Adom director general.

Following the strike, Israel Railways announced it was halting train traffic north of Binyamina.

Two salvos of several rockets hit Ahuza, a central residential and business district of Haifa. Rockets also landed in the city of Acre and in Nahariya. A rocket also struck the town of Kiryat Haim, located north of Haifa, Channel 2 television reported…

A strategic installation on Haifa Bay was hit by another rocket, Channel 10 said.

A subsequent attack hit a major street in Haifa, causing further casualties, police said.

Some 30 casualties were reported…

lebanonairstrikevictim1.jpgChild victim of IDF airstrike at Marwahin (photo: Yahoo! News)

If Israel were smart it would grab the ceasefire offer presented by prime minister Siniora today which would provide for Lebanese army deployment in southern Lebanon, a position Israel has strongly advocated for years. But Israel is not smart. It is stubborn. And stubbornness can be deadly as in this case.

And as ghastly as these casualties are, we must not forget the pain on the “other side.” The AP reports:

–Fleeing refugees, including women and children, were cut down on a road adjacent to the Lebanese-Israeli border in an airstrike as they left the village of Marwaheen. The bodies of several children, one headless, were sprawled on the ground. Police said 15 were killed in the afternoon attack and an Associated Press photographer counted 12 bodies in the two cars.

The photo I display here I first saw at Blogging the Middle East. I am sorry to display such a graphic and deeply disturbing image here as he was in his blog. But this is horror which MUST be seen before it can galvanize the world to end it. Here is his commentary:

Terrible massacre pictures being shown on TV (but you won’t see that on CNN or Fox News, they will instead show the complaints of Israelis in Tiberias – they apparently are bothered by the sounds of IDF artillery shells being fired from nearby). Charred bodies. Unrecognizable. Babies. Children.

What possible threat can civilian vehicles pose to Israel that they be targeted in this way? This is a war crime waiting to be charged if you ask me. Though as Ran Hacohen points out, Hezbollah’s capturing and holding hostage of two IDF soldiers for ransom is also a violation of international law. Where does all this horror get us? What can it possibly gain for either side?

Meanwhile, Ynetnews reports that an Iranian military official claims that Hezbollah has other missiles with up to a 150km range that would put it within striking distance of Tel Aviv:

The official also said Hizbullah is in possession of four types of advanced ground-to-ground missiles: Fajr missiles with a range of 100 kilometers, Iran 130 missiles with a range of 90-110 kilometers, Shahin missiles with a range of up to 150 kilometers and a 355 millimeter rockets with a 150 kilometer range.

It’s no accident that Israeli civil defense officials have warned Tel Aviv residents to prepare for possible attack. Unfortunately, this will take the battle right to Israel’s heartland, its largest city. The prospect is absolutely ghastly. But can we not anticipate this will happen when Israel lays waste Beirut and other Lebanese population centers?

Kidnapped Soldier’s Father Demands Israeli Government Negotiate Deal for Son

Thursday, July 6th, 2006

Noam Shalit, father of kidnapped IDF soldier Gilad Shalit, has spoken to the press almost every day since his son’s capture by Hamas militants. Yet he has never questioned the government’s position that it will not negotiate with the kidnappers for fear of encouraging more such kidnappings. Shalit pere has basically been a good solider like his own son. Until today.

Ynetnews reports that Mr. Shalit has blasted the government for its refusal to negotiate a deal to save his son’s life:

“Everything has a price,” he responded. “I don’t believe there can be any process to gain Gilad’s release that won’t cost a price. That’s not how things work in the Middle East. The question is only – why are they still waiting? I want to believe that negotiations are being held, in some secret channel, that we just haven’t been told about.”

“The release of prisoners was on the agenda before the incident, as a goodwill gesture, so there is no reason to remove it from the agenda after it with the aim of releasing a soldier sent by the country to the frontlines,” Shalit said.

He added, “I’m ready to speak with the kidnappers if it were possible. I have nothing to offer or give them, but we could talk. In the end, we will have to speak with these organizations directly or indirectly.”

The concerned father called on Hamas to make a concrete offer to the Egyptian mediators, and not via their Internet sites or their associates. “It has to be a serious offer that Israel can agree to, not a humiliating offer,” Shalit said.

In response to a question from a Ynet reporter on the effect of the IDF operation in Gaza on Gilad’s situation, Shalit said he was not familiar with the intricate details of the operation, but as far as he knew, the operation intended to combat Qassam fire and not solve the kidnapping affair. “But every additional factor causes concern for further endangerment. Of course we are more and more concerned about Gilad’s fate,” he added.

So there you have it. The human being who has the most to lose and is suffering the most from the kidnapping (after his son and wife, of course) tells Israel to get up off their asses and do what needs to be done to free him. The outline of a deal has been on the table for days (written about at least twice here). The only thing holding Israel back seems to be its cloud cuckoo land stance that we won’t negotiate with terrorists; plus their wish to take care of unfinished business regarding suppressing Qassam rocket fire (which may be delaying a resolution). It is interesting to note Shalit’s implicit criticism of that aspect of the miltary plan as a distraction that might impair the chances of his son being released. He is of course right. The entire Gaza incursion is a laundry list of IDF strategic objectives all mixed together in a hash of an operation making it much more likely to drop in failure like a lead balloon.

My fond hope is that Shalit’s powerful statement will resonate in Israel and put added pressure on the decision-makers to do the right thing instead of dithering. For if, God forbid, anything bad happens to Gilad Shalit the Olmert government will have Hell to pay for ignoring the express wishes of the boy’s father to avoid a bloodbath by negotiating in good faith.

Palestinian Kidnappers: We Will Not Kill Soldier

Tuesday, July 4th, 2006

We all of course grasp the hopeful news, meager though it is, emanating from Gaza during the current crisis. Ynetnews reports that one of the three groups responsible for kidnapping Gilad Shalit, the Army of Islam, released a statement claiming it would not kill him because it violated Islamic precepts:

Islamic Army, one of the groups behind Gilad Shalits’ kidnapping, says it will not kill the IDF corporal despite the expiration of an ultimatum issued Monday. ‘Islamic principles stipulate that prisoners should be respected,’ a group spokesman states.

“Some think that the groups who conducted the operation can kill him, but our Islamic principles stipulate that prisoners should be respected,” said Abu al-Muthana, spokesman for the Islamic Army, small group involved in the operation.

Given how confusing and chaotic the current situation is–and there are reports that the Egyptian mediators are having great difficulties finding any interlocutors among the kidnappers even capable of negotiating a deal and making it stick–one doesn’t know precisely what this statement means. But it certainly isn’t unreasonable to interpret it favorably.

A Jerusalem Post story last Friday also reports that Al Hayat indicates that the framework of a potential agreement is taking shape under the auspices of Egypt:

The agreement that Mubarak claimed to have reached with the kidnappers involved an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and the release of prisoners scheduled to be released anyway in the next year, in exchange for the release of Cpl. Gilad Shalit.

The London-based Al-Hayat newspaper said that Cairo has proposed that the swap would not be simultaneous but that the Palestinian prisoners would be freed later. Al-Hayat’s sources, whom it did not name, said Hamas’ leadership outside the Palestinian territories has not responded to the proposal.

Mubarak told…Al-Ahram that Shalit’s kidnappers have agreed to his conditional release, but Israel has not yet accepted their terms.

Mubarak said, “Egyptian contacts with several Hamas leaders resulted in preliminary, positive results in the form of a conditional agreement to hand over the Israeli soldier as soon as possible to avoid an escalation.

…The Egyptian president also demanded from his Syrian counterpart Bashar Assad to deport the Syrian-based Hamas leadership unless it agreed to Shalit, Palestinian sources said. He warned Mashaal that by insisting that thousands of Palestinian detainees be released in exchange for Shalit, he was leading the Palestinians to disaster, Israel Radio reported.

The last paragraph is certainly captivating as it would mean that pressure (possibly even effective pressure) is being brought to bear on Khaled Meshal to allow the agreement to go forward. Of course, one wonders what Basar Assad would gain by making such a threat to the exiled Hamas leader. Why would Assad want to do anything on behalf of Israel after it sent four jets screaming over his summer home trailing sonic booms in their wake?

Ynetnews adds further detail to the story:

Shalit will he handed unharmed to Egypt or France, and in return both states would vouch for an Israeli commitment to free Palestinian prisoners, halt its activity in the Gaza Strip and withdraw its forces from the area. Israel will also be required to remove its embargo on Gaza and put an end to targeted killings.

In exchange, the Palestinian factions would cease all Qassam fire at Israel. The sources said they believe Egypt would agree to this offer.

One hopes that the Olmert government will realize that if the kidnappers accept this agreement it would hand Israel much of what it’s been attempting and failing to deliver for the past months–an end to Qassam rocket fire. One assumes also that if the agreement is realized that Hamas would reinstitute its ceasefire. In that case, Israel would have close to the best of all possible worlds in terms of its security. No more suicide attacks (at least not one orchestrated by Hamas) and no more Qassam attacks.

But even if the agreement is accepted and implemented by both sides (a very large ‘if’), I must remind everyone that it is at best a short term solution. For if Israel does not take the bull by the horns and agree to bilateral final status negotiations, then the violence against Israel will resume. It has to because Israel will not have addressed the root causes of the violence.

Israel Responds to Gaza Beachfront Massacre; Eighth Body Recovered

Saturday, June 10th, 2006

infant victim at gaza funeralAt funeral, relative holds aloft body of infant murdered in Israeli artillery massacre (photo: Hatem Moussa/AP)

Israel has nothing short of a disaster on its hands with yesterday’s bloody massacre of eight Palestinian beachgoers enjoying a day with their family at the seaside. Yesterday, there were seven victims but the NY Times reports that the body of an eighth washed ashore earlier today.

Israeli government sources say that it’s likely that an errant shell fell 400 meters off course and landed amongst a Palestinian family. However, the IDF isn’t prepared to say what precisely happened and how. According to Haaretz:

“We still do not have an exact analysis of what happened there,” military sources told Haaretz on Saturday. “The most reasonable explanation that has been heard is that it was a firing of a shell which veered off its path, however all data relating to the pinpoint location of the shells’ landing are not consistent with this [theory].”

IDF figures show that six shells were fired in the direction of open fields in the northern Gaza Strip near the time of the explosions. The six shells, however, landed hundreds of meters from the site of the blast.

IDF officials requested that the Palestinian Authority provide exact information as to the location of the explosion and the time it occurred, however the PA has yet to accede.

Conversely, the odds that a Qassam rocket caused such extensive damage appear extremely slim. It is difficult to see why Palestinians would attempt to launch an explosive device from the Gaza coast, an area visited by hundreds of civilians.

I find it laughable that the IDF is asking the PA for the time and location of the explosion. Israel has the best surveillance system in the Middle East. Doubtless it has video reconnaissance footage of the entire incident. With such resources, why the hell would it need the Palestinians to confirm what it already knows. It’s yet another insult to one’s intelligence.

If six IDF shells were fired at the precise time when the family was killed and they all hit their intended target as the IDF sources seem to say, then what the hell happened? Where did the shell come from? Yesterday, the army suggested outrageously that perhaps a Palestinian bombmaker had an accident. The concluding paragraph above implies that perhaps the IDF is now trying to say that an errant Qassam rocket fired by Palestinian militants (which are notoriously inaccurate and unreliable) hit the civilians. Both of these explanations lack credibility and insult the intelligence.

In fact, I’d like to take the issue one step further. Sol Salbe, an Australian progressive Zionist Mideast analyst wrote this:

It may well be the case that somebody in the IDF (if not higher) has decided to scuttle the Palestinian Prisoners Document by pressing Hamas button till it reacts.”

I know Sol to be a usually careful, thoughtful writer about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But this does seem conspiracy-crazy and far-fetched. That being said–how does an Israeli artillery shell land 400 meters from its target? That’s something like a half-mile off target and the artillery is not firing at the target from a great distance. It just doesn’t seem plausible unless someone screwed up royally and criminally.

But what if an artillery gunner or entire battery has extreme right-wing sympathies and decides that it’s going to take matters into it’s own hands? Someone willing to do such a thing would also know that Israel has a terrible record of investigating and punishing such deadly incidents. So that would make you likely to get away with such an act.

Peretz has appointed a general to open an investigation. Big deal. They almost never lead anywhere or accomplish anything. But who knows, maybe this time it will be different. But I’ll tell you something–Israel needs answers. Real answers and not bullshit like the Palestinians did it themselves. The world demands answers too.

Eyewitness Accounts

Haaretz carries eyewitness accounts of the actual incident. This is depressing, infuriating, grisly reading but we MUST read it, we must confront this horror if we ever hope to stop it:

Eyewitnesses reported that a barrage of shells landed on the northern coast of the Gaza Strip on Friday at approximately 5:15 P.M. local time, causing the deaths of seven members of the Ghalia family and injuring close to 40 others, among them many children as well as five other members of the Ghalia family.

Ayham Ghalia, 20, told Haaretz that, initially, a hollow shell landed almost 300 meters away from the family, causing a loud noise which prompted beachgoers to begin to flee the scene. Ghalia’s family, however, did not manage to run away in time.

“Suddenly, an explosive shell landed on us and his us directly,” Ghalia said. “I got up and I couldn’t believe it. Body parts were [flying] in every direction. My sister’s hand was dismembered. My father was already dead, lying face down on the sand.”

One of the television cameras at the scene shot footage of seven-year-old Huda Ghalia running in the sand in search of a family member who was still alive.

Upon discovering her father’s dead body, she screamed: “My father is dead, my father is dead.”

Prime Minister’s Daughter Demonstrates Against Gaza Bombing

I’m delighted to read the Ynetnews report that Ehud Olmert’s daughter, Dana Olmert, was also so outraged by the incident that she joined a leftist demonstration previously planned outside the IDF chief of staff’s home. She joined 200 other Israeli peace activists protesting against Israel’s punitive policies against the PA and Hamas:

The demonstrators chanted slogans such as “Tzahala [the chief of staff's neighborhood] residents, there’s a murderer in your neighborhood,” and raised signs calling on the government to “put a stop to the murder of civilians” and stating, “Halutz is a killer, the intifada shall prevail.” Activists also shouted, “neighbors, ask Halutz why he’s killing children and how many.”

I applaud Ms. Olmert’s courage in taking a public stand diametrically opposed to that of her father’s government. It takes guts and I’m glad she has them. But why were there only 200 demonstrators? What would it take to bring 100,000 demonstrators to his house? Dropping a nuclear weapon on Gaza??

Meanwhile, Hamas’ military wing has angrily announced the resumption of hostilities against Israeli targets. The Qassams are now flying from Gaza against Israeli targets. But they are not what Israelis really fear since they are more nuisance than anything else. Sol Salbe reports that the Israeli independent online news site, Inyan Merkazi commented on the latest events:

Expect our buses to start blowing up again

And it grieves me to say: they will, they will.

Abbas Sets July 26th for National Referendum

Mahmoud Abbas announced today that the national referendum on the Prisoner’s peace plan would take place on July 26th. All I can say is that after this outrage, the fact that Abbas is plowing ahead with the referendum shows he has guts. He believes that despite the incredible anger within the Palestinian polity against Israel that the peace plan will still carry the day. I hope he’s right.

Apparently, Aaron Miller, a former Clinton Mideast analyst, warns in the Times that the Prisoner’s plan may be a trap for Abbas:

….The referendum could commit the Palestinians to positions that would make a final peace treaty even more difficult to achieve, which could give Israel more justification to move ahead unilaterally. The basis of the referendum…is a step back from previous commitments by the Palestine Liberation Organization that Mr. Abbas heads.

While the prisoners’ document speaks of a Palestinian state, it is much less explicit about a two-state solution than the Oslo accords and United Nations resolutions that the P.L.O. has accepted on behalf of the Palestinians. The document also insists on the continuation of resistance to the Israeli occupation outside the 1967 boundaries and the right of return of all refugees and their descendants who fled or were pushed from their homes in the 1948 war.

As such, the document itself does not meet the standards that the international community insists Hamas meet: to recognize the right of Israel to exist, renounce violence and accept previous agreements.

“The prisoners’ document is a kind of fantasy,” said Aaron David Miller, a former Middle East negotiator for the United States who is now at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington. Mr. Abbas, he said, “will find himself locked into positions he’s already renounced, in particular the support for armed struggle and a less explicit recognition of Israel’s right to exist, all of which was laid to rest before or should have been.”

The document, Mr. Miller said, “locks him into positions and potential partners — Hamas and Islamic Jihad — that undermine the very approach that made him such a credible interlocutor with the Israelis and will undermine his credibility in Jerusalem and Washington.”

I’m sorry but this to me is punditry run slightly amok. A number of Israeli and American progressives have raised objections to the plan on the grounds that it lacks this or that. What all of the objections neglect to take into account is that the plan is not intended as a final status document. Rather, it is a first draft, an opening position. What negotiation between two opposing parties ends with an agreement that reflects precisely the opening position of one side or the other?

What Miller loses sight of in his comment is that what is really important about the Prisoner’s plan is that it attempts to lock Hamas into positions it has never embraced before regarding acceptance of Israel and a reduction in violence. Everyone knows that the majority of Palestinians accept Fatah’s (and NOT Hamas’) positions regarding making peace with Israel. But Hamas has never even come close. With this document, the two groups (if Hamas can ever be persuaded or compelled to accept it) will have moved infinitely closer to each other. This creates a more unified and stable Palestinian position regarding Israel and makes peace more possible than it has ever been.

Gaza: IDF Killing of Innocents Continues Under Guise of Counter-Terrorism

Sunday, May 21st, 2006
Muhammad Dahdouh assassination (photo: from Reuters video feed)

On Saturday, the IDF fired rockets at a truck carrying Muhammad Dahdouh, an Islamic Jihad commander. He died at the scene (see video). Israel accused him of organizing the firing of Grad rockets into Israel. But the IDF rockets also killed members of a Palestinian family driving in a nearby taxi: Fadi Amman, 4, his mother Hanan Amman, 29, and his grandmother, Naima Annan, 45. Another family member was seriously wounded along with four others.

I’m not here to tell you that Israel has no right to be concerned about Palestinian rocket fire; nor to say that this threat is not serious (especially after a rocket just blasted through he roof of an empty Israeli classroom in Sderot). It is. But how can Israel justify the killing of so many innocents in order to kill one allegedly guilty man? Is it worthwhile killing so indiscriminately for the sake of ridding Israel of yet another enemy? After all, Islamic Jihad will only fill its ranks with a new recruit who will easily take his place. Organizing rocket firings isn’t exactly nuclear physics and there will certainly be many lined up to replace Dahdouh’s.

palestinian girl injured in israeli attackIDF price of counter-terror: indiscriminate mayhem against girl wounded in air strike (photo: Jordan Times)

But who will take the place of the poor Fadi, killed today along with his mother and grandmother? How will the father replace the affections of his son, wife and mother, all killed by a rocket aimed at another man? Won’t the family’s bitterness help create another ten Dahdouh’s?

I’m pleased to say there is at least one guilty conscience within the Israeli Knesset. The NY Times reports:

Yossi Beilin, the leader of the dovish Meretz party, called for the government to stop its policy of assassination strikes that kill innocent people as well. He said on Israeli radio that the killing of Mr. Dahdouh was insufficient justification for the killing of a small boy, his mother and grandmother.

I find it interesting that currently neither Haaretz‘s nor YnetNews‘ English-language website are carrying Beilin’s statement. Unfortunately, Beilin doesn’t necessarily have the ear of Ehud Olmert or Amir Peretz. He sits in the minority in Knesset. But I hope to God someone will listen to reason. For the sake of its moral reputation (tattered as it is), the blood of the innocent should be honored by ending this horrible counter-terror policy.

And I have a few choice words for the militants who fired that rocket that landed on an Israeli classroom in Sderot. Luckily, the school was holding a morning prayer session so the room in question was empty. A few minutes earlier or later and there would have been indiscriminate mayhem. Speaking of which, how different is it between indiscriminately killing a Palestinian family via IDF rocket fire and indiscriminately killing Israeli schoolchildren via Palestinian rocket fire? Will someone please tell the idiots on both sides that they’re both despicable murderers of innocents. How does killing schoolchildren advance the cause of Palestinian freedom? When will the militant morons wise up? When will Hamas tell Islamic Jihad and the Popular Resistance Committees (who provide many of the rocketeers) to wise up and shut up?

After Peretz ordered an investigation into the incident, the IDF released this pro forma statement quoted by YnetNews:

The IDF said it was continuing to investigate the unintended killing of three Palestinian civilians last night. “The IDF is distressed by any harming of citizens uninvolved in fighting, and if Palestinian civilians were killed by IDF gunfire, the operational lessons will be learned with the aim of continuing to decrease the risk of harming innocent civilians in the futures,” an army-issued statement read.

Blah, blah, blah. They’ve been there, done that and said that when innocents have died before. They continue to die. Nothing’s changed. Peretz was supposed to bring a change in IDF policy. He was supposed to help the IDF present a more human face than his bloodthirsty predecessors like Shaul Mofaz. We’ll see if any real change is in store.

Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE