Israel For Real

American Jews and Israel: Identity?

2010-09-06T11:39:00.000-07:00

ISRAEL AND THE IDENTITY OF AMERICAN JEWS
WHY? WHAT? WHERE? HOW?

(Based on a joint project of Hadassah, The Women’s Zionist Organization of America and ARZA, The Association of Reform Zionists of America)

In the current international political climate, with Israel under fire from every direction, American Jews are facing a challenging question: “should I be engaged in the complicated process of thinking through how Israel might be meaningful to me.” If so, how? There is no single answer that will appeal to each of us. Please join us in an interactive discussion program exploring the various possible relationships with Israel. You are invited to consider the history of the relationship between American Jews and Israel. Explore together where Israel is today and how she got there.
Listening to various views, challenging ideas and learning to talk about Israel effectively:
This six-session curriculum to explore your relationship with Israel, will meet monthly at Portland Chapter of Hadassah office on Second Sunday of each month beginning September 12, 2010.

• Dual Identity and dual loyalty—what is a “Jewish State”?
• Background of the Israel—U.S. relationship
• Israel and the International Community
• Law of Return—what it really is, defining Jews-- a people? A nation? A religion? A culture?
• Slogans & Reality—Jerusalem—Occupation—Settlements—Two-States/one state
• Contemporary Issues—what’s going on in Israel today and how does it relate to the past, the future and your relationship with the Jewish State.
• How to talk about Israel effectively. What you wanted to say but didn’t know how.

6 Sessions beginning Sunday, September 12 from 10:00 to 12:00 am.

Drinks and snack to be provided

RSVP as soon as possible, we would like to keep the group small enough to keep discussion effective and to ensure adequate space and materials.

WHOSE ZOOMIN' WHO/ Obama's peace initiative

2010-09-06T11:14:00.000-07:00

WHO’S ZOOMIN’ WHO?
With apologies to Aretha Franklin, this seemed most appropriate to describe what happened in Washington on Wednesday. The start of the face to face “peace” talks between Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas.
The amount of diplomatic hot air in the room could have been mistaken for a חמסין (an extremely hot desert wind).
Starting with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who opines, unconvincingly, “I understand very well the disappointments of the past”. If she did, she would not be sitting in that room drawing moral equivalency between the participants. Dante’s idea that the “hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in time of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality” describes the current situation. A group of people sitting in a room, none of whom want to be there, while all are fully aware that they will come to no acceptable agreement except the agreement to participate in this charade. Telling the truth would not be acceptable as it would force reality in and neutrality out.
What is the truth?
Mahmoud Abbas, as President of the Palestinian Authority, is unelected. His term as President expired in January 2009. No elections have been held, because he knows he cannot win. He is so weak politically that even if he wanted to sign a peace deal, which is doubtful, he has no power to enforce it. In his remarks he refers to his organization as the PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) not the Palestinian Authority, which the West pretends is an actual governmental entity.
His statement that “we are not starting over” takes him back to the 1993 Oslo accords which he refers to as a “document of mutual recognition”, when have they actually recognized Israel? The Oslo Accords cost Israel over one thousand lives from terrorism. Yitzhak Rabin paid with his life for this attempt at peace, while Yasser Arafat was rewarded with power and prestige from the international community, while continuing his thuggery against his own people as well as Israel.
What this tells us is that the west is so desperate to have a “moderate” to deal with it is willing to grasp any straw, even in this case, a “strawman”. Abbas cannot hold an election for fear of losing it and his second in command Salaam Fayad received only 2% of the vote in the last election. Hamas, it is widely reported, would take over the West Bank if an election was held. It is clear the contest right now is not between Israel and the PA but between the PLO and Hamas. There are regular reports in Israeli and Arab news media that Hamas is gaining strength in the West Bank. If Hamas succeeds in its goal to take over this territory what will the U.S. do? Perhaps name Mahmoud Zahara, the leader of Hamas in Gaza, as the moderate. So far that is as realistic as any idea coming from either America or Europe.
Zahara states today on the Hamas website, that “Abbas does not represent the Palestinian people”. He sites the cowardly murder of four Israelis driving on a road (from which Israel removed checkpoints as a gesture of goodwill) as a “heroic operation”. Calls over the loudspeakers in Gaza to come out and celebrate this brutal action, were acted on immediately as we saw Palestinians in Gaza dancing and celebrating in the streets. Of course, Abbas had no choice, he had to denounce this, as his life and presidency exist because of the protection and support of the west’s unreal views on the Middle East.
Major Garrett, of Fox News reported on Thurday morning one of the silliest ideas coming from these “talks”. Divide Jerusalem in three, one part Arab, one part Jewish and the third part would be some type of international or third party controlled entity. This is indicative of the kind of nonsense these talks can inspire. Let’s examine this one idea, obviously presented by someone completely bereft of knowledge of Jerusalem’s recent past, as well as its ancient history.
Under the 1947 United Nations partition plan, the territory of Israel, the West Bank and Gaza, would be divided into one part Arab, one part Jewish with Jerusalem internationalized. Did that work? Only the Jews agreed (unhappily) but still they agreed. The Arabs said NO and war ensued. The result was Jerusalem, no longer an internationalized city, falling into Jordanian hands during which time every Jew had to leave or die. Jewish property was confiscated and/or destroyed. The Jewish quarter was destroyed, the historical Hurva syngogue blown up, Jewish access to holy places forbidden. This situation remained until Israel reunited the city in 1967. From then until today it is open to all faiths equally although Jews have a little less equality in their effort to please everyone, a Jewish disease.
Jews may be slow learners, it did take nearly 2000 years to understand we cannot live without sovereignty, nonetheless we do eventually learn. There is overwhelming consensus among Jews that Jerusalem will not fall again.
Abbas and the PLO leadership say “We want a Palestinian state”. Let’s examine that: An Arab state in that area was declined in 1948. By 1967 it was determined by the Arabs that a different tactic was needed, as military attacks weren’t working. From now on they will call themselves “Palestinians”. Fine, call yourself whatever name you want even though the records of discussions in the United Nations concerning this area drew angry disagreement from these same people claiming they were not Palestinians but Arabs or Syrians (this area was once Greater Syria)
Up to this point, no one in the Arab world was calling for a Palestinian state, however we will accept they changed their minds as well as their name. What it takes to build a state if they really want one, is for another blog. For now the Palestinians have done very little except to depend on the west and oddly, Israel to provide for their economic well being. If we focus on what Abbas says he wants it is:
1: All settlement activities to cease, no Jews can live in Arab areas although there is no problem with Arabs living in Jewish areas where many do, in fact, live.
2. Gaza Embargo totally removed, although Abbas has no control over Gaza. How would he guarantee offensive weapons would not be shipped in to be used against Israel?
3. Remove the IDF from the West Bank. This is not serious since Abbas is well aware that the IDF presence is what keeps stability, thus keeping him alive.
4. All final status items, borders, refugees, etc should be debated now rather than at the end. This of course, is impossible without solving the most significant issue, the recognition of the Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people, first.
Compare these requirements to those of Prime Minister Netanyahu:
1. No potential for mass smuggling of arms into the West Bank, and demilitarization.
2. Recognition of Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people as the Arabs want Palestine recognized as the nation state of the Palestinian people.
3. Complete end to conflict, including incitement in schools and public places.
What does President Barack Obama want? This is difficult to discern. He hasn’t expressed any specific goals other than a “peace agreement”. Two thoughts President Obama should consider. First from Rabbi David Meyer: “Compromise and dialogue are not goals in themselves, if with whom is not asked.”
If, as it seems, President Obama is looking for consensus, this could happen in the manner that Abba Eban famously described it. “A consensus means everyone agrees to say collectively what no one believes individually.
John F Kennedy understood negotiations well, when Nikita Kruschev billdozed him in their first meeting in Moscow, he learned a valuable lesson. Know your adversary, don’t just think you know him, learn all you can from original sources. JFK: “Peace does not rest in the charters and covenants alone..it lies in the hearts and minds of all people.”
Do the Arabs want peace with a country they cannot bring themselves to recognize as a legitimately, sovereign country?
I know Israel wants peace, but not at any price and certainly not to please the International community or even the United States. Jews are not suspicious of their detractors because of the Shoah, but because of Arab and World behavior.
If President Obama wants an agreement, he must first convince Israel that he is attuned to the moral values of democracy, human rights and trustworthiness that the United States and Israel embody.

ISRAEL & KURDISTAN, VICTIMS OF TURKEY

2010-06-06T11:34:00.000-07:00

June 06, 2010

Israeli and Kurdish victims of Turkey
By Victor Sharpe

Sometime ago, before Turkey chose to lurch further into the deadly embrace of Islamism, I received a plea from a Kurdish friend who remains supportive of Israel's epic struggle to survive among its hostile Arab neighbors. He is also devoted to the Jewish people for he knows of the shared ethnicities believed to exist between Jews and Kurds dating back millennia.

Here is some of my Kurdish friend's impassioned letter from two years ago, which uncannily warned against any alliance with Turkey:

"I wish the Jews in Israel and abroad would know better about the policy of their leaders concerning the Kurds, because it happens in the name of Israel, and that should matter to all Jews. Turkish oppression of the Kurds is unknown to most Israelis. It is hard for me to understand how Israel's cooperation with Turkey does not take into account the misery that it imposes upon the Kurdish people who yearn, as the Jews have for centuries, to be free from terror and persecution?

"Not so long ago, the Jews in Europe endured the Shoah (he used the Hebrew term for the Holocaust -- VS) and they know better than anyone else the horrors of that experience.

"Of course it's not only Israel but the whole world that is pro-Turkish and anti-Kurdish. It is not fair to criticize Israel only, but given the history of the Jewish people, there should be a heightened sensitivity towards Kurdish suffering.

"We Kurds have shared so much culture together and we still remember fondly the Jews who lived with us for centuries. But the Turks waxed and waned in their attitude towards the Jews; sometimes they were tolerant and sometimes hostile. There are many Turks today who share Islamist ideas and proclaim hostility towards the Jewish state. Within Turkey lies the same pestilence of anti-Semitism that exists throughout the Arab and Persian world.

"I remember your moving article in which you categorically made clear that the people who truly deserve an independent sovereign state are the Kurds; not the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians. I also feel deeply that one day there will be an abiding and honorable alliance between the Jewish state and a free and independent Kurdistan. But arming Turkey, our people's oppressor, is morally and geographically not to Israel's advantage. Israel's cooperation with Turkey is, in reality, a misguided support for political Islam and its oppression of the Kurds. It undermines Israel's credibility with the only true friend it has in the Middle East."

Now in hindsight, it is glaringly obvious how correct my Kurdish friend's warning at the time was.

Turkey is now an enemy of both Israel and the Kurdish people. In a previous letter, as Turkish troops were invading Kurdistan and jet aircraft were bombarding Kurdish villages in northern Iraq, my friend was more pointed in his criticism of the Israeli leadership's shortsightedness. He defended without question what he called, "Israel's cause and the undying truth that Jews are the rightful owners of the historic Jewish lands -- now partially occupied by the Arabs. But he also pointed out that, "the legitimate arguments and rights Israel has are the same rights and truths it denies in its official policy towards the Kurds. For now and for the future, everything looks black. I fear the worst for us. The whole world is against us, and on the Turkish side there is no change...."

Coincidentally, Ruth King, a freelance writer who is a columnist for several magazines, urged those who read, "feelgood stories about Turkey" to remember the ship, Struma. In 1941, while carrying 769 Jewish refugees fleeing from the Nazi German killing machine, it was not permitted to land in Turkey and sank with appalling loss of life.

With the reality of Israel's reconstitution as a sovereign nation in its ancestral and biblical homeland has come the equal reality of its uniqueness and isolation within a hostile world.

The rush to bash Israel by hypocritical national leaders and the falsehoods perpetrated by international news agencies such as the Associated Press (AP) despite the video tapes and pictures showing pipe wielding, masked thugs, screaming "kill the Jews," while beating up Israeli soldiers -- armed at first only with paint ball guns -- is despicable. Thugs, Islamists, and jihadists claiming to be "peace" activists aboard a Turkish ferry boat, with the Turkish Prime Minister's own direct collaboration, should be an indictment of Turkey, not Israel. But this is not a moral world.

The international outpouring of imbecilic hatred towards the embattled Jewish state for merely trying to defend its citizens from a future maritime pipeline delivering lethal weapons and deadly missiles into Gaza to be used to kill Jewish civilians is one of the most depressing indictments of humanity. In this, Israel shares with the Kurds a familial fate. Both endure relentless aggression from their neighbors. Even though it lives in a terrible neighborhood and desperately seeks friends, Israel must not evade its unique responsibility towards the Kurdish people, who also suffer from the depredations of their hostile neighbors -- especially Iran, Syria, and last but not least, Turkey.

The Jewish state, now undergoing what individual Jews endured for centuries -- a bloody and irrational persecution - must now, more than ever, not ignore the Kurds, who remain stateless and shunned by the world and who seek, at last, the historic justice they have craved for centuries but have been denied; an independent state of their own.

According to an article titled "Can Israel make it alone?" written some years ago by James Lewis in the American Thinker, Lewis wrote: "Nations have no permanent friends, only permanent interests -- like survival." With the stark reality now of a profoundly less friendly Obama Administration, it is more important than ever to see what he wrote: "If the United States abandons the Jewish State, Jerusalem will have to seek new alliances."

Turkey has now chosen to break its alliance with Israel and instead has sought alliances with rogue states such as Iran and Syria, along with the Hamas occupied and terrorist infested Gaza Strip. It has turned on Israel with a viciousness that is desolating to watch. It is a nation turning its back upon the Ataturk secular revolution of the 1920s. Instead, it is sliding remorsefully back to the 7th century mindset and cesspit that so many of its neighbors wallow in.

The Turkish regime is allowing ant-Semitic films and documentaries to be broadcast relentlessly, thus poisoning the minds of both its secular and Islamist population. One need only hark back to the demonization and vilification spewed against the Jews for years under Hitler in Nazi Germany to see how most Germans behaved and what horrors resulted.

Whether or not President Barack Obama continues to act negatively towards the Jewish state, any new Israeli alliances should include the restoration of a profoundly just, moral and enduring pact with the Kurdish people, and assistance towards creating a future independent State of Kurdistan. That may be the silver lining from the present international flotilla of xenophobic hatred presently sailing towards Israel's shores.

I STRONGLY RECOMMEND VICTOR'S BOOKS FOR AN EXPOSITON OF THE POLITICAL REALITIES OF THE AREA:

Victor Sharpe is the author of Volumes One and Two of Politicde: The attempted murder of the Jewish state, available at LuluPress or on Amazon.com

Barack Obama and the Jews Part I

2010-05-06T01:42:00.000-07:00

Tuesday, July 28, 2009
BARACK OBAMA AND THE JEWS

Barack Obama and the Jews Part 1

It’s said that to maintain power one must be trusted by his friends and feared by his enemies. We are now in an exercise to determine if that is an absolute truth. The current stand-off between the Obama administration and the State of Israel may be a test of this adage. The long standing friendly relationship between Israel and the United States has not been an even one, but at this moment it is more than strained. The level of Israeli trust in the Obama administration is at its lowest point (6%) since the relationship with the U.S. began to develop after the 1967 Six Day War.

In the early years of the States’ reconstitution, we remember that President Harry Truman was strong and decisive in recognizing the State immediately after its Declaration of Independence. He followed immediately with an arms embargo fully aware that the tiny country would be attacked by seven Arab countries, since the Soviets were supplying the Arabs with whatever they wanted, it was in effect, an embargo only on Israel. In desperate straits, Israel found a way; buying rifles from Czechoslovakia, with permission from Russia, not withstanding that Russia was solidly supporting the Arabs. France, in the nick of time, sold the nascent state mystere jets and the Zionists prevailed with no help from the U.S.

In October 1955, Egypt’s closure of the Straits of Tiran, an act of war in International law, was responded to with a few raised eyebrows, but the international community simply looked on even with the awareness that this move was a break in International law while crippling Israeli shipping. Only in July of 1956 when Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal, owned by the French and the British, was there an uproar, if only from the owners. The French and the British then came to Israel for help in correcting this illegal act. Israel agreed, as this was an additional blow to Israel’s security and shipping. Immediately after the success of the Israel-British-French success in capturing the Canal, the United States, in a fit of pique over not being informed of the operation put all its diplomatic efforts into demanding that all three countries withdraw and return to the status quo. The British withdrew quickly with virtually no consideration of its partners in this venture. Once they withdrew, the French followed, leaving Israel holding the bag. Israel at this point had no choice but to withdraw, no negotiation occurred. Lesson for Israel: even the most engaged ally cannot be trusted when the chips are down.
President Lyndon Johnson, probably the most emotionally supportive President Israel has worked with, was unable to help in the run up to the Six Day War in 1967. Congress and the American people were unwilling to get involved in any foreign entanglements in their drive to disengage from the Vietnam War. While Johnson was verbally supportive there was little he was able to do in supplying arms or other support. He was relieved to receive American intelligence estimates of the overall situation that indicated Israel would win handily.

While Johnson was emotional in his support of Israel, Richard Nixon was practical in looking at cold, hard facts. The immense losses to Israel in blood and resources in 1973 were of concern but the interest of the Nixon administration centered on the Soviet relationship with the Egyptians and the Syrians. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger made an equally unemotional evaluation in his recommendation to help Israel with arms supplies. At the time the Cold War was the most important issue to the Nixon administration, certainly not Israel. Not allowing a victory by Russia’s’ allies was strategically important. Nixon being distracted by the Watergate scandal allowed Kissinger to take the lead and eventually Israel turned the war around. The Arabs, however were unforgiving and cut off oil supplies to the U.S. This was an unexpected turn, creating the most serious gas shortage since WWII. Oil became among the most important issues for all American politicians after this politically unfortunate event. Israel without oil or any natural resources to fill the gap left by the boycott had few cards in her hands.

The U.S. has opposed Israel many times, even threatening arms embargoes and military sanctions. Think of President Kennedy’s fierce opposition to Israel building a nuclear reactor, and the denunciation from the U.S as well as many other countries for bombing Osirak (Iraq's nuclear reactor), the demand from the U.S. to not strike first in the days preceding the Yom Kippur War, a pressure that cost Israel nearly 3000 lives and over 7,000 wounded. In each case Israel’s leaders made the decision they thought best for Israel’s security and in each case the country survived and thrived. In any relationship the junior partner cannot be the servant of the senior partner, by bowing to the wishes of the U.S. we make ourselves the junior partner, but are we? How many Israeli and Arab lives could have been saved if Israel had acted without the permission of the U.S.?

Certainly the three billion dollars of U.S. military aid are important, but how would we manage without them? This is less than 1% of Israel’s total budget; we are required to spend 75% on American products. This is leveraged to keep Israel out of competitive bidding on sales of products to other countries, in which American companies are also bidding.*(see below) Israel benefits from a strong relationship with the U.S. but when administrations change so might the relationship and as we are not the 51st state, we must be prepared. We are an independent sovereign state which is obligated to meet the needs of our own people first, not the wishes of a foreign power no matter how powerful.

We can say much more about the U.S.—Israel relationship especially the contributions to the U.S. from Israel. That is for another blog. The point here is that allies for our little country have not had a record of dependability even so, we have continually found a way to not only survive but to thrive and build, continuing to integrate refugees and new immigrants even though in 61 years there has not been a moment in time to relax from Arab violence against us.
The decision of Barack Obama to flip the relationship with Israel from a solid if argumentative one is obvious. Starting with the ambush of Prime Minister Netanyahu in Washington and the very public demands on Israel without negotiation or warning was shocking to Israelis. Although Israel was accustomed to the European Union telling Israel what its policies should be on issues of defense, diplomacy and even what kind of government it should have, it was new coming from the U.S. Past pressures had been quiet and behind the scenes. After the Cairo speech President Obama left no doubt his goal was a warm and loving relationship with the Islamic world and if that didn’t work for Israel well Israel is expendable. We have kept our face towards Jerusalem for two thousand years and I don’t expect that to change, rarely have the Jewish people been able to feel safe and secure.
It seems this administration is moving in the direction of every European country in saying “Israel has a right to defend herself”, until she does, then the true feelings come out in accusations from “disproportion” to “war crimes”. It is obvious that the Arab world has many more people, much more wealth and most importantly large oil reserves. The continual question that comes up in discussing this turn of events is why is Obama so adamant about “settlements”? The only logical answer is that “settlements” are one of two non-negotiable issues, first, “Jews should be allowed to live where they choose” as Arabs are allowed to live wherever they choose in Israel, not allowing Jews to live among Arabs is the definition of racism, Jews have been subject to racism enough to recognize it, secondly, the division of Jerusalem is non-negotiable. No Israeli government can stand while agreeing to divide Jerusalem. Picking out non-negotiable issues, demanding from Israel what she cannot give, while asking nothing from her opponents sounds like the Obama administration throwing down the gauntlet. A Nationalist government was elected by the Israeli people because they are sick of war but can find no peace partner.
To stand up vigorously to the overthrow of the unconsitiutional Honduran government and at the same time tell Israel its democratically elected government is not satisfactory to the U.S. and should be changed is not a demand typical of allies. The weak response to Iran’s undemocratic process, while making public demands of Israel that are simply not possible to fulfill fits into the strategy of attempting to win the affection of the Muslim world, even at Israel’s expense. The U.S. must act in its own interest as all nations, including Israel, must. The road the President is taking is sure to fail as it did when a previous President, Jimmy Carter, tried that path.

Israel must do what it can, without damaging itself, to hold together a good relationship with the U.S. but also she must look for other partners. Many nations want to do business with Israel and she should pursue those allies. Israel today is under perhaps the greatest existential threat since 1948 and she must stand up for her own best interests. This is why the Israeli electorate voted for a decidedly nationalist government, having confidence in Prime Minister Netanyahu’s strong leadership, and with the backing of the cabinet he has chosen Israel will, as a country, exercise the creativity, industriousness and courage necessary to continue to build this miraculous work that is the State of Israel.

*. Pentagon Halts Israeli Fighter Jet Bid, US a Rival on Tender (Arutz Sheva, 2009–07–06) --- by Malkah Fleisher
A scandal has arisen out of the United States military establishment after Pentagon pressure on Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) to withdraw from a massive aircraft tender for the Indian Air Force leaves competing American aerospace companies in prime position to win it.On the table: a $12 billion Indian Ministry of Defense tender for 126 multi-role combat aircraft (MRCA) for the Indian Air Force.In a bid to win the tender, IAI was offered a partnership with Sweden's Saab AB to jointly develop an advanced model of the JAS-39 Gripen jet fighter. Israel was to build the electronic systems for the craft, including communications, electronic warfare and radar systems.The Pentagon contacted Israel's Ministry of Defense, ordering them to force IAI out of contention, citing concerns that Israel would integrate American technology into the fighter jets.However, two of the remaining four bidders are American companies, leaving Israeli officials speculating that the actual reason for the demand was America's interest in winning the bid without having to compete by lowering prices, according to Israeli officials quoted in Israeli mediaLockheed Martin's F-16 and Boeing's F-18 Hornet are still in the running, as well as Russia's MiG-35 and the UK's BAE Eurofighter.The United States has a history of intervening to thwart Israeli military contracts, to America's benefit. Last summer, Israel's defense establishment backed down from a $500 million Turkish tank tender in order not to compete with the Americans.In 2006, the IAI lost a $2 billion South Korean Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) tender after the US imposed technological and commercial restrictions, which prevented Israel from meeting the terms of the tender.In 2003, the US opposed a $1 billion AWACS contract between Israel and India, citing India's stance against the US war in Iraq. The US offered Israel $1 billion in US military goods to back down from the agreement. However, Israeli officials speculated that the US may have opposed the deal for commercial reasonspART 1

Obama and Israel-Imperialism or ignorance?

2010-04-27T01:39:00.000-07:00

BARACK OBAMA’S AGENDA FOR MIDDLE EAST PEACE

ALL POLITICIANS HAVE AN AGENDA, SOMETIMES FOR THE GOOD AND SOMETIMES NOT, SOMETIMES THEY ARE UP FRONT AND HONEST ABOUT IT AND SOMETIMES NOT.

Stealth agendas work in a democratic society when the public isn’t paying attention. Here is where Barack Obama’s Middle East “peace agenda” comes into play. He and his Secretary of State and other acolytes are making constant public pronouncements towards Israel using words such as “rock solid”, “unbreakable” and many other words swearing commitment to Israel’s security. His actions speak differently and unfortunately we often do not see the dangerous intent behind his actions.

An honest difference of opinion is settled between “friends” privately and through discussion in which each helps the other to understand their differences and why. When Barack Obama publicly and loudly makes demands that are potentially destructive and show a callous disregard for Israel’s needs and spiritual issues, he is showing either ignorance or an ominous warning that his desire to be loved and accepted by the Muslim countries is more important than Israel’s continued existence.
Kind words mean nothing when used as a cover for attendant attempts to demean and denigrate. The President has shown repeatedly a strategy to demean and denigrate when faced with disagreement with his policies. Review this strategy in action against opponents to his policies on stimulus, health care, financial regulation, tea party participants. Instead of mature discussions of differences we get attempts at adolescent schoolyard derision.

Even after Prime Minister Netanyahu instituted compromises that were difficult and unpopular, such as dismantling hundreds of roadblocks and checkpoints and opening the Allenby Bridge 24 hours to allow greater flow of goods, the Presidents attitude was dismissive while making even more demands of Israel. What demand was made from the Arab side? What action was taken? Would they stop teaching hatred of Jews in their schools, glorifying terrorists in their streets? These are not very difficult things to do if their leadership cared one iota about a true peace. How can you have peace with a populace that has been taught virulent hatred from birth for the other side? There is no sign the President has even tried to pressure PA President Abbas and his minions.

What if the Abbas-Salaam Fayyad government did show honest signs of wanting peace, what would Hamas do? What would happen in Gaza? Has President Obama thought even momentarily what that would mean? Certainly no public demands have been made by the President on the Arab side, in the manner he has insisted on from Israel. Insinuating that Israel is responsible for the violence of the Arabs is a clear sign that either the American administration is ignorant of the past history or has decided Israel has no right to exist thus accepting the Arab narrative.
While the United States is large, wealthy and rich with natural resources, Israel has none of those advantages. Israel cannot take chances with the survival of her people and their sovereignty and the sooner President Obama understands that truth, the sooner he can come to some agreement with Israel, the most earnest and loyal of allies. There are many advisors close to President Obama who do not wish to continue the alliance with Israel and have written and publicly spoken to that idea. To name just a few, Jimmy Carter’s former advisor Zbigniev Brzezinski, Jim Jones, Robert Malley, Samantha Power, Rashid Khalidi and others. Jews all over the world have a stake in Israel’s survival, whether or not they realize it or wish to admit it. More importantly the democratic world has a stake in the survival of the only open, democratic society in that region of the world. Israel is surrounded by some of the most regressive and oppressive regimes on the planet. Can we afford to lose the tiny wink of freedom and democracy for the sake of appeasing dictatorships whose primary value to the outside world is oil?

Former Ambassador Martin Indyk’s recent diatribe clearly threw down the gauntlet “Israel has to adjust its policy to the interest of the United States or there will be serious consequences” to Israel. The absolute arrogance of this statement demanding Israel put its own interests on the backburner in order to do the bidding of President Obama overlooks the fact that Israel is not a colony of the United States. Indyk’s interview with Israel Army Radio and his op-ed in the NY Times were designed to verify Obama’s policy and let Israel know clearly how enraged the President is with Israel’s lack of obedience.

As for Mr. Obama’s rumored intent to replace Prime Minister Netanyahu with Tzipi Livni points further to the President’s refusal to face reality. Ms. Livni’s poll numbers have dropped precipitously since the last election and the Prime Minister’s have increased. Ms Livni could have formed a government after the last election if she would have agreed to protect the unity of the holy city of Jerusalem. Mr. Obama must face the reality that Jerusalem is a rare case of unanimity on the part of the Jewish people. Three Thousand years of longing and prayer will not be broken to please Mr. Obama. Apparently he does not know what happened when Jerusalem was not in Jewish hands, or has no interest in the preservation of the sanctity of the city. If he succeeds, which is highly unlikely, in unseating the current government he will see a more nationalistic government in its place.

If Mr. Obama understood Israeli society he would know that after more than 2000 years of surviving every persecution known to man, Jews have learned “we stick together or hang separately”, to steal a phrase. Nothing unites Jews more than being threatened with extinction. Some of the empires who have tried? Ancient Egypt, the Philistines, the Assyrians, Babylon, Persia, Greece, The Roman Empire, The Byzantine Empire, The Crusaders, The Spanish Empire, Nazi Germany, The Soviet Union, and now Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, El Aksa Martyrs Brigade, Iran, Syria and so on. Israel may be one of the smallest nations but it is the largest in determination, dedication and belief in a G-d given mission to improve the world. It is not an accident this tiny group of people has survived for so long against the constant tyranny of the majority. Mr. Obama, you might want to rethink where you are placing your bets.

To reward loyalty with contempt and humiliation while handling enemies with a velvet glove reverses the standard foreign policy notion of keeping the trust of friends and fear in ones enemies. With remarks that have come out of Poland, the Czech Republic and the Ukraine, it seems Israel is not the only friendly country who feels betrayed.

We all want a good relationship with this natural ally for whom we have great affection, but at what cost? How far can we travel with this partner before Barack Obama leads us down a path of destruction?

Israel’s Prime Minister has visited Washington three times, entering the White House in back doors, being treated with none of the standard courtesies toward other heads of state, such as press conferences, dinners and photo ops, which may seem unimportant on the surface if not put into a larger context. Since January 20, 2009 the list of actions that demonstrate, not just naiveté, but an intent to distance the United States from Israel to fit Mr. Obama’s larger agenda, which appears to be switching the America-Israel alliance to an Arab-American alliance.

The old children’s taunt “sticks and stones will break my bones but names will never hurt me” has been proven over and over again to not be true. Words not only can hurt, they often drive violence and death.

Land for Peace or Oblivion

2010-03-27T04:30:00.001-07:00

Land for Peace or Oblivion?
by Victor Sharpe
Immediately after the June 1967 Six Day War, a secret memorandum was issued by the United States Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS). Their conclusions were that any peace settlement between Israel and the Arab belligerents would only succeed if Israel retained certain territories vital for its continued existence and survival.
The areas the Joint Chiefs declared as the minimum defensible borders for the Jewish state included the Golan Heights, the western half of Samaria (the northwestern part of the West Bank), all of Judea (the southern part of the West Bank), the Gaza Strip and several portions of the eastern Sinai Peninsula.
This, of course, occurred before the world became obsessed with the creation of an Arab terror state within Israel’s narrow territory between the Mediterranean and the River Jordan.
Since that report in 1967, the Begin government gave away all of the Sinai. The first city that Joshua liberated during the Israelites entry into the Promised Land, Jericho, was given away by Binyamin Netanyahu during his first term as Prime Minister, followed by most of Hebron, King David’s first Jewish capital and one of Judaism’s four holy cities. Both cities are practically lost to the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians. Under Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his deputy, Ehud Olmert, Israel gave away the entire Gaza Strip in 2005, with catastrophic consequences for the Jewish state. These breathtaking concessions to the Arabs have all been made under the hope that it will bring peace with the Arab enemies. But it has not. “Peace, peace, but there is no peace.” (Jeremiah 6:14.)
Ehud Barak, Israel's present Defense Minister, had years earlier withdrawn from the southern Lebanon security strip, thus allowing the Islamist Hezbollah to fill the vacuum with dire consequences for northern Israel. A conflict broke out - the Second Lebanon War - disastrously mismanaged by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. It was launched too late and ended too soon.
After Israel endured over 12,000 incoming missiles from Hamas-occupied Gaza, Operation Cast Lead was finally launched by Israel. It ended too soon, and the Islamist Hamas continues to pursue its ambition of finally destroying Israel. Just this last week after the visit by Vice President Biden, who attacked Israel for planning to build apartments in a north Jerusalem suburb followed by a vituperative call from Secretary of State Clinton making yet more demands upon Israel, the Palestinian Authority gave the green light to launch riots by Arab mobs in Jerusalem, Hebron and throughout Judea and Samaria (the so-called West Bank). Suspicions that President Obama used an application for zoning approval for future housing in Jerusalem as the excuse to ratchet up unbearable pressure upon the Jewish state are more than persuasive. It may be that if the rioting continues, it will be henceforward known as the Obama intifada.
Israel is now under the greatest pressure in years from an American administration to give away the ancestral Jewish heartland of Judea and Samaria. President Barack Obama is perceived by many to be a clear and present danger to the very survival of the reconstituted Jewish state. His deafening silence, along with that of his lieutenants, Biden, Clinton, Mitchell and his army of anti-Israel advisors, at the disgusting ceremony held in Ramallah by the Palestinian Authority honoring a female terrorist and her grisly accomplices who murdered 38 Israeli civilians in 1978, speaks volumes about the towering anti-Israel bias of this president: Barack Hussein Obama.
In the aftermath of the Six Day War, the US Joint Chiefs were not interested in Jewish patrimony or Biblical history. They were solely concerned with the strategic necessities for Israel's survival in a very bad neighborhood. That is why they set out what the bare minimum retention of territory for Israel should be.
Col. Irving Kett (USA, ret.) also prepared an Army War College study on Israel's security needs in 1974. His study was called, "A Proposed Solution to the Arab-Israel Conflict". In it, he strongly suggested that, from a military point of view, Israel's borders should be constituted to make it a compact state with natural boundaries on all sides - the Jordan River to the east, Golan Heights to the northeast, the Litani River in the north, the Mediterranean Sea to the west and the historic boundary with the Sinai Peninsula to the south. As a direct result and consequence of Arab aggression, most of those borders had been attained by Israel at one time or another.
Colonel Kett pointed out what the IDF has always known, but what too many Israeli politicians preferred to ignore; namely, that there is vital strategic value in the mountain range which forms the spine running through Judea and Samaria. The highlands run some 54 miles from Jenin in the north to Hebron in the south and dominate Israel's coastline. The spine is 12 miles wide and Israel simply cannot afford to vacate it.
It was assumed for years by both the Israeli military and politicians that if a Palestinian Arab state came into existence it would have to permit an Israeli defense line on the Jordan River (the Allon Plan), and that such a state would have to be demilitarized.
The answer, of course, would be to have made permanent the suggested boundaries proposed in both Kett's memorandum and the earlier JCS report of some 40 years ago. Events have moved on since then. The Palestinian Authority in the West Bank would never agree to this and Hamas in Gaza would scornfully dismiss it out of hand. The Arabs have become even more vicious in their anti-Jewish rhetoric and behavior, and a jihadist Iran has all but encircled the Jewish state through its Islamist proxies in Gaza and Lebanon.
The Arab-Israel conflict is not, and never has been, merely a war over territory. It is, and always has been, a religious war. Islam will never accept a non-Muslim state, whatever size or shape it may be, within lands previously conquered by Muslims in the name of Allah. Even if Israel shrank to just one down town square in Tel Aviv it would still be a provocation to the Arab and Muslim world. “Land for Peace” and a “Two State Solution” are euphemisms that are no different to the dread slogan, which greeted the hapless Jews arriving at the Auschwitz death camp: “Arbeit macht frei – Work makes Free.”
The "Two-State Solution", so beloved of President Obama, requires Judea and Samaria to be given away to the Palestinian Arabs. Obama has upped the ante. Now he wants those Jewish suburbs of Jerusalem built on land liberated from the Jordanian occupiers to also be given to the Palestinian Arabs. We are now talking about a potential plan to expel some 700,000 Jews from their biblical and ancestral heartland of Judea and Samaria along with many suburbs of the Jewish capital city: Jerusalem.
But the Arabs have no intention of making peace whatever territorial concessions Israel makes. That should be enough for an Israeli government and Prime Minister with intestinal fortitude to defy the world's pressure for the Jewish state to slowly and surely disappear. After all, Prime Ministers David Ben-Gurion, Menachem Begin and Yitzchak Shamir all said "no" to American presidents in the past and prevailed.
Interestingly, Colonel Kett had also suggested that the Palestinian Arabs be resettled in a state in the Sinai. The other famous suggestion is that Jordan is Palestine, which is based upon the historical fact of the first "Two-State Solution" enacted in infamy by Great Britain some 87 years ago.
Even President George W. Bush, when visiting Israel as Governor of Texas, was moved to utter, "The whole of Israel is only about six times the size of the King Ranch near Corpus Christie." Yet even he, after becoming president, called for a "Two-State Solution" west of the Jordan River.
Pushing Israel back to the "Auschwitz borders", as Abba Eban called them, where the Jewish state is only nine miles wide at its most populous region, is what the "Two-State Solution" is all about. That other dread euphemism "The Final Solution" then comes to mind.
Hopefully Binyamin Netanyahu will stress the territorial insanity of that fact during his visit to Washington, DC. Perhaps he will have the opportunity to do so with President Obama; provided the president does not give the Israeli head of state the cold shoulder.
Victor Sharpe is the author of the highly acclaimed book: Politicide – The attempted murder of the Jewish state. The second volume, updated to the end of 2009, continues documenting in some 46 easily readable chapters the relentless war of the Islamist and Arab world against Israel. It has just been published by Lulu Press and can be found with Victor Sharpe’s other books on Amazon.com
Copyright ©Victor Sharpe 2010

Barack Obama , Jerusalem and the Jews

2010-03-14T08:58:00.000-07:00

Many periods of Israel and USA relations have been rocky, but never hostile to the degree we see today. (see the below posting Barack Obama and the Jews July 28,2009). After watching the news in the USA, Europe and here in Israel, I am seeing a situation that could seriously deteriorate in one of two ways. Both unfortunate, but not fatal for this little country, but very damaging to the world in general. The Obama adminstration is encouraging reckless and irresponsible behaviour on the part of the Palestinians and the Jihadists, particularly Hamas and Hizbullah. Weakening the relationship between the U.S. and Israel is their fondest dream and they already believe it is happening and so they just have to wait it out. The relationship could actually break temporarily and it would be temporary because of the affect of the unleashing of Jihadism all over the world. Any opening will be seen as a weakness and will be taken advantage of by this drive for Islamic domination.

First, let's get the facts straight, the misrepresentation of the situation in the press: which refers to the home building in Jerusalem as "new settlements on the West Bank". Jerusalem is not in the West Bank, Barack Obama agreed that Jerusalem was not included in the "freeze", and no country that I have found in my research has allowed the outside world to tell their own people where they can and cannot live. Jerusalem, as the Prime Minister has repeated many times is the undivided capitol of the Jewish Nation State of Israel. Whether the rest of the world likes it or not, this is a fact that no amount of political pressure will change.

Second, the Obama administration has shown not one sign of respect or friendship to it's most reliable ally in this region. Except for pretty words that are soon offset by unreasonable and insulting actions Israel has been of little interest. Instead of a reliable ally he seems to see an annoyance that he would like to stop buzzing around his quest to win the love and support of the Muslim countries of the region. Why we insist on taking at face value his claim that the Vice President, Joe Biden, came to smooth relations and develop a warmer connection with Israel is a mystery. The Vice President came to pressure Israel to bend to the Palestinian demands, which of course would mean suicide for us. If the building in Ramat Shlomo (a Jewish neighborhood in Jerusalem) had not come up it would have been something else i.e. Heritage sites, settlements, checkpoints,occupation, Arab humiliation. When "painful concessions" need to be made they are always Jewish, when was a "painful concession" ever made by the Arabs?

At the same time that the President and the Secretary of State were castigating Israel in the harshest manner ever, not a word appeared anywhere about the effect on peace prospects with the Arabs, when at the same time they are showering rocks down on supplicants praying at the Western Wall, or the Palestinian Authority preparing a major public dedication of a public square to honor Dalal Mugrahbi as a "courageous fighter who held a proud place in Palestinian history" according to a Fatah statement. What was this courageous fighters deed? Murdering an American photo journalist and 38 Israeli civilians including 13 children, very brave indeed.

Of course cold blooded murder is not nearly as serious as an announcemnt that a country will allow homes to be built in its own territory for its own citizens. Just weigh this: on the one hand, Jews building homes on the other hand, Palestinians making a hero out of a murderer.

Jews are banned from building because they are Jews, there is no mention of the fact that Arabs are also building and often illegally (without building permits, try that in the U.S.).

The incendiary and public nature of the remarks from the Obama administration indicate the worst of intentions. As I mentioned in my previous post, Israel unquestionably wants only the best of relations with the United States, a natural ally, but it will not be at any price. There is an old song that says "I got along without you before I met you and I will get along without you now" It will be difficult and unpleasant and even dangerous but we know that the American people and the American Congress by 75% do not support the attacks by this administration. So in time things will work out. The Prime Minister is balancing on the edge of a very sharp knife and doing it very well. We must let him know we support him in being firm with President Obama, Israel is not an American colony and that government cannot dictate her policies. She is a sovereign country and its citizens will live where they like. Israel will not tell Americans were they can live and Americans cannot tell Israelis where to live.

When Barack Obama's Presidency is over the Jews will still be here, harried, stressed and embattled, but still determined to look out for our own best interests with or without our much loved and admired ally across the ocean.

Thanks to Arlene Kushner:OK. The situation is horrendous, and every bad thing we imagined would come from an Obama administration is materializing before our eyes.
We cannot simply be horrified. We absolutely must act. And at this juncture I would like to recommend a couple of specific things, with more to follow:
First, it is absolutely imperative that we give Netanyahu as much support as possible. Please, contact him! Large numbers make a difference.
Tell him that:
[] You are behind him and will support him as he stands strong for Israel.
[] He must not be pushed into concessions that are not in Israel's best interests because of threats from the Obama administration.
[] He must take the offensive, missing no opportunity to expose the insincerity of the PA and its consistent incitement.
[] He must, at all times, remember that Israel is a sovereign state and does not answer to the US. And that there is no need to apologize for this.
Fax: 02-670-5369 (From the US: 011-972-2-670-5369)

Phone: 03-610-9898 (From the US: 011-972-3-610-9898)

E-mail: Memshala@pmo.gov.il and also pm_eng2@it.pmo.gov.il (underscore after pm) use both addresses.

Israel-why a Jewish State?

2010-03-04T04:06:00.000-08:00

THE REAL ISRAEL TODAY
As I wander around this amazingly diverse, noisy, friendly, pushy country, the things that people talk about and receive the heaviest coverage in the news media are rarely heard of overseas. This post will be a peek inside the real Israel as I previously attempted in the posts on Tu B’Shvat and The Germany colony.
Purim and Shabbat, takes us back to why Israel is, in fact, a Jewish state the questions of should she be or shouldn’t she be or why we need her is irrelevant in that she, in fact, is a Jewish state. Sometimes the most efficient road is the road to reality even though reality is often hard to accept. In regards to the Jewish people it is even counter intuitive.
Forgetting politics which rarely takes us in the right, as in righteous, direction here are some views of this country on this Purim that can only happen in a Jewish state. The fact that approximately 75% of the Jews in Israel describe themselves as “not religious” virtually 100% observe, to some extent, all Jewish holidays, major or Minor.
Even though we had rain in sheets during the Purim celebrations this didn’t daunt the holiday atmosphere. While every city had in their streets and parks events that may have been cancelled because of the enormity of the rainstorms, this was rarely considered more than a few moments before they were simply moved to shopping malls, schools, public buildings, even churches. After all here, rain is a blessing, not something that warranted costumes being unseen by their friends and neighbors. In places like the Ajami neighborhood in Jaffa, Purim was celebrated with Jews and Arabs dressing up, singing and dancing in the Arab-Jewish Community Center and simply partying together, even though this was not an Arab event, the outside world rarely sees how well Jews and Arabs live together in areas of the country in which Arabs are not pressured by politics. It isn’t perfect, but somehow they all seem to manage to separate politics from personal relationships in a manner not often seen in these emotional times.

I have attached a picture of a group of soldiers on an Egged bus. Each of them is in uniform from the neck down but above the neck one sees funny hats, face painting and other signs of Purim. The entire time they were on the bus they sang celebratory Purim songs which in no time pulled in all the bus riders. It was certainly the happiest bus ride I have ever experienced. Where else in the world would you experience this? For weeks before Purim everywhere I walked, clothing stores and variety stores featured large displays of costumes, face painting kits, Hamentaschen are everywhere and displays of gift bags and baskets(see attached pictures) of Mashloach Manot to fulfill the tradition of bringing baskets of fruit, nuts and baked goods to neighbors and friends and to the poor. Again, we have the Jewish tradition that no one should go without the basics of celebration.

I asked many people on the street and in the shops if they felt Purim was particularly significant during this time when Israel is existentially threatened by Persia (now Iran) given that Purim is a celebration of the survival of Jewish people from the genocidal threat of Persia during the 1st or 2nd century BCE. There were three basic responses, some said yes, others responded with a shrug and the comment “someone is always trying” (what Haman tried) and lastly “I never really thought about it, it isn’t really the same”. When I pursued the last answer asking “Why today is different” the response was variations of “now we have our own state” or “we have an army to defend us”. It would be interesting to ask American Jews the same question, perhaps I will do that next Purim.
Another purely Israel experience is Friday morning, it feels as though everyone is out on the street, rain or shine, last minute shopping and preparation for Shabbat---wait a minute, most of these people are not observant-- why this activity? This is a Jewish state, regardless of level of observance; Shabbat is a different day from every other day of the week. Shops begin closing around 2:00 on Friday, public transportation stops around 4:00 depending on how early the sun sets. The attached picture shows a young religious man, typical of many young men and women who appear at public shopping places or wherever there is heavy street traffic, asking men passing by, if they would like to learn to put on Tfillin, often someone stops and says yes. Women are asked if they will light Shabbat candles and are handed a set of candles, it has come to be something I look forward to as these young people are incredibly earnest.

This young man wanted to be sure I knew the blessing and as I removed the candles from the box I would notice a slit in the top of the box to use as a bank to put change into all week and then give to the poor the next Friday. He assured me that it is always a blessing and an obligation to give to the poor however on Friday morning it is a double portion as no one must go without food and wine to bless on Shabbat.
Next post will be on Jerusalem, what the Israeli on the street thinks and feels and what the news media is talking about.

2010-02-08T10:09:00.001-08:00

THE GERMAN COLONY IN JERUSALEM---Off the beaten path

The German Colony (Moshava Germanit) founded in 1873 by German Templers who had broken with the Protestant church believing they needed to be in the “Holy Land” to wait for the Messiah and salvation. They settled in Northern Israel at first and then in Jerusalem. Their homes bring their own distinctive style with German influence (see pictures below) while facing them with Jerusalem stone to blend with the environment. German design and architectural interest is visible throughout the area. The area is in a period of gentrification with upscale restaurants and boutiques but still carries the flavor of the “old city”. There are many American émigrés in the city and everywhere English is spoken with an American accent.
The neighborhood is bisected by Rechov Emek Refaim mentioned in the Tanach in both the second book of Samuel and Joshua.
The land was purchased from the Arabs of Bet Safafa by Mathaus Frank, one of the earliest Templar settlers. During WWII the British deported them to Australia because of their outspoken support for the Nazi cause.
The German Colony is centrally located in Jerusalem and borders The Jerusalem Theatre, The Islamic Museum of Modern Art, The Shalom Hartman Center and many parks.

ISRAEL--A JEWISH STATE??

2010-01-30T22:45:00.000-08:00

ISRAEL—A JEWISH STATE
This begins a series on what makes Israel a Jewish State. This being the day after Tu B’shvat it seemed appropriate to discuss the difference between this day in Israel and in the U.S.
How many non-observant Jews in the United States commemorate Tu B’shvat? Before Israel’s modern sovereignty was achieved, a city with a large Jewish population like Philadelphia, where I grew up, called it “New Year of the Trees”. As children we spent all year filling the Jewish National Fund (a Hadassah organization) and Karen Kayemet L”Yisrael blue boxes. We thought we were collecting money to plant trees in Palestine. Where Palestine was and why we needed to plant trees there was lost in the excitement of arriving at Sunday school with a blue box full of coins for the New Year of the Trees. Today Hadassah continues to furnish the blue boxes for the Jewish National Fund.
How many of us are educating our children of this important holiday which today has added an environmental or “green” component?
The awareness of this holiday in Israel permeates every part of life, observant Jews as well as semi-observant, which most Israelis are, or even the completely non-observant. How is this awareness brought about here where it is less of a religious observance and more of a appreciation of nature and the responsibility for and beauty of this amazing country.
First of all, every newspaper runs articles about the different aspects of the holiday. Tu b’Shvat is integrated into television programming especially children’s programming. Grocery stores have sidewalk displays of typical of Tu B’Shvat foods, every type of dried fruit, often in gift trays, wines, and baskets of fresh fruit. Advertisers find appropriate ways to add Tu B’shvat to their promotions. This creates an atmosphere that insures everyone is aware of the holiday and is reminded of the 7species. This is an excellent and painless way to maintain awareness, but is passive. Activities around this holiday are organized in all parts of the State. Many individual families have Tu B’Shvat Seders.
There are so many activities commemorating this day that newspapers print activity supplements. Most of these activities relate to nature. Tree planting events are common; we saw this year the Prime Minister planting trees in Judea and Samaria. Teachers take their students on tree planting field trips.
Family and adult activities abound. From January 29th (the day before Tu B’Shvat, this year the holiday falls on Shabbat) through February 28th the Scarlet South Festival in the Negev occurs. Tours through the Be’eri and Ruhama Forests that KKL-JNF has been developing for nearly 100 years. A March of the Anemones in memory of Shoshana Damari ending with a musical festival is worth visiting.
The Scenic Lookout and Trail in Adamit Park is a popular place on this day. Two huge commemorative rocks, dedicated to Eldad Regev and Udi Goldwasser at the beginning of the trail that leads to Keshet Cave in Adamit Park near the Lebanese Border, where Hizbullah crossed into Israel and kidnapped the two men on patrol there and murdering three of their fellow soldiers, the straw that broke the camel’s back, and brought about the Hizbullah war in 2006.
There are so many Hikes, bike trips and tree planting events all over the country that one can pick and choose to please many different interests. You can walk the flowery paths in Ramot Menashe Park, and on the Gilboa Road as well as the Ilanot and Beeri Forests. Interested in ecology? Visit the Martyrs Forest. Few ecological studies are conducted anywhere in the world on such a large scale and for such an extended period of time. Visiting Jerusalem Forests will give you a positive view of the future of forests that could be applied around the world.
Like Marathons? Dead Sea half marathon includes a hand bike half marathon, a 10km race and walk and a 2km children’s race. There are many other hiking and biking events.
The Jerusalem Nine-Eleven Monument, a living memorial was dedicated in time to visit it on this day. It is magnificent and one should be sure to visit it when you are in Jerusalem.
Let me know if you have stories around Tu b’Shvat to add. If you register on this blog you can add your comments or stories or ideas for future blogs.

Israel Zionist and International Affairs Event

2009-09-04T19:06:00.000-07:00

IZAIA Educational Program
“Today’s Israel”

In the current international political climate, as American Jews the challenge for all of us is to engage in the complicated process of thinking through how Israel might be meaningful to each us. There is no single answer that will appeal to each of us. Please join us and let’s explore the various possible relationships with Israel. You are invited to consider the history of the relationship, learn and understand what Israel is and how she got there. Think about the various views, challenge your thoughts and learn how to talk about Israel.

This seven-session curriculum to explore your relationship with Israel, will meet monthly at Portland Chapter of Hadassah office on Second Thursday of the month.

• Dual Identity and dual loyalty
• History of the Israel—U.S. relationship
• Israel’s other International Relationships
• Law of Return—what it really is
• Slogans & Reality—Jerusalem—Occupation—Settlements—Two-State
• Contemporary Issues—what’s going on in Israel today
• How to Talk about Israel

Session Starting:
Morning – September 10, 2009 at 10:00am to Noon
Evening – September 10, 2009 at 6:30pm to 9:30pm

Drinks and snack to be provided

RSVP as soon as possible, limited space and materials, contact Portland Chapter of Hadassah office by phone 503-244-6389 or email info@portlandhadassah.org Portland Oregon.

“To meet a people’s need through a people's own effort...this idea of self emancipation is Zionism” Henrietta Szold

BARACK OBAMA AND THE JEWS

2009-07-28T16:14:00.000-07:00

Barack Obama and the Jews Part 1

It’s said that to maintain power one must be trusted by his friends and feared by his enemies. We are now in an exercise to determine if that is an absolute truth. The current stand-off between the Obama administration and the State of Israel may be a test of this adage. The long standing friendly relationship between Israel and the United States has not been an even one, but at this moment it is more than strained. The level of Israeli trust in the Obama administration is at its lowest point (6%) since the relationship with the U.S. began to develop after the Six Day War.

In the early years of the States’ reconstitution, we remember that President Harry Truman was strong and decisive in recognizing the State immediately after its Declaration of Independence. He followed immediately with an arms embargo fully aware that the tiny country would be attacked by seven Arab countries, since the Soviets were supplying the Arabs with whatever they wanted, it was in effect an embargo only on Israel. In desperate straits, Israel found a way; buying rifles from Czechoslovakia, with permission from Russia, not withstanding that Russia was solidly supporting the Arabs. France, in the nick of time, sold the nascent state mystere jets and the Zionists prevailed with no help from the U.S.

In October 1955, Egypt’s closure of the Straits of Tiran, an act of war in International law, was responded to with a few raised eyebrows, but the international community simply looked on even with the awareness that this move was a break in International law while crippling Israeli shipping. Only in July of 1956 when Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal, owned by the French and the British, was there an uproar, if only from the owners. The French and the British then came to Israel for help in correcting this illegal act. Israel agreed, as this was an additional blow to Israel’s security and shipping. Immediately after the success of the Israel-British-French success in capturing the Canal, the United States, in a fit of pique over not being informed of the operation put all its diplomatic efforts into demanding that all three countries withdraw and return to the status quo. The British withdrew quickly with virtually no consideration of its partners in this venture. Once they withdrew, the French followed, leaving Israel holding the bag. Israel at this point had no choice but to withdraw, no negotiation occurred. Lesson for Israel: even the most engaged ally cannot be trusted when the chips are down.
President Lyndon Johnson, probably the most supportive President Israel has worked with, was unable to help in the run up to the Six Day War in 1967. Congress and the American people were unwilling to get involved in any foreign entanglements in their drive to disengage from the Vietnam War. While Johnson was verbally supportive there was little he was able to do in supplying arms or other support. He was relieved to receive American intelligence estimates of the overall situation that indicated Israel would win handily.

While Johnson was emotional in his support of Israel, Richard Nixon was practical in looking at cold, hard facts. The immense losses to Israel in blood and resources in 1973 were of concern but the interest of the Nixon administration centered on the Soviet relationship with the Egyptians and the Syrians. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger made an equally unemotional evaluation in his recommendation to help Israel with arms supplies. At the time the Cold War was the most important issue to the Nixon administration, certainly not Israel. Not allowing a victory by Russia’s’ allies was strategically important. Nixon being distracted by the Watergate scandal allowed Kissinger to take the lead and eventually Israel turned the war around. The Arabs, however were unforgiving and cut off oil supplies to the U.S. This was an unexpected turn, creating the most serious gas shortage since WWII. Oil became among the most important issues for all American politicians after this politically unfortunate event. Israel without oil or any natural resources to fill the gap left by the boycott had few cards in her hands.

The U.S. has opposed Israel many times, even threatening arms embargoes and military sanctions. Think of President Kennedy’s fierce opposition to Israel building a nuclear reactor, and the denunciation from the U.S as well as many other countries for bombing Osirak (Iraq's nuclear reactor), the demand from the U.S. to not strike first in the days preceding the Yom Kippur War, a pressure that cost Israel nearly 3000 lives and over 7,000 wounded.In each case Israel’s leaders made the decision they thought best for Israel’s security and in each case the country survived and thrived. In any relationship the junior partner cannot be the servant of the senior partner, by bowing to the wishes of the U.S. we make ourselves the junior partner, but are we? How many Israeli and Arab lives could have been saved if Israel had acted without the permission of the U.S.?

Certainly the three billion dollars of U.S. military aid are important, but how would we manage without them? This is less than 1% of Israel’s total budget; we are required to spend 75% on American products. Leverage around this is used to keep Israel out of competitive bidding on sales of products to other countries, in which American companies are also bidding.* Israel benefits from a strong relationship with the U.S. but when administrations change so might the relationship and as we are not the 51st state, we must be prepared. We are an independent sovereign state which is obligated to meet the needs of our own people first, not the wishes of a foreign power no matter how powerful.

We can say much more about the U.S.—Israel relationship especially the contributions to the U.S. from Israel. That is for another blog. The point here is that allies for our little country have not had a record of dependability even so, we have continually found a way to not only survive but to thrive and build, continuing to integrate refugees and new immigrants even though in 61 years there has not been a moment in time to relax from Arab violence against us.
The decision of Barack Obama to flip the relationship with Israel from a solid if argumentative one is obvious. Starting with the ambush of Prime Minister Netanyahu in Washington and the very public demands on Israel without negotiation or warning was shocking to Israelis. Although Israel was accustomed to the European Union telling Israel what its policies should be on issues of defense, diplomacy and even what kind of government it should have, it was new coming from the U.S. Past pressures had been quiet and behind the scenes. After the Cairo speech President Obama left no doubt his goal was a warm and loving relationship with the Islamic world and if that didn’t work for Israel well Israel is expendable. We have kept our face towards Jerusalem for two thousand years and I don’t expect that to change, rarely have the Jewish people been able to feel safe and secure.
It seems this administration is moving in the direction of every European country in saying “Israel has a right to defend herself”, until she does, then the true feelings come out in accusations from “disproportion” to “war crimes”. It is obvious that the Arab world has many more people, wealth and most importantly large oil reserves. The continual question that comes up in discussing this turn of events is why is Obama so adamant about “settlements”? The only logical answer is that “settlements” are one of two non-negotiable issues, first, “Jews should be allowed to live where they choose” as Arabs are allowed to live wherever they choose in Israel, not allowing Jews to live among Arabs is the definition of racism, Jews have been subject to racism enough to recognize it, secondly, the division of Jerusalem is non-negotiable. No Israeli government can stand while agreeing to divide Jerusalem. Picking out non-negotiable issues, demanding from Israel what she cannot give, while asking nothing from her opponents sounds like the Obama administration throwing down the gauntlet. A Nationalist government was elected by the Israeli people because they are sick of war but can find no peace partner.
To stand up vigorously to the overthrow of the unconsitiutional Honduran government and at the same time tell Israel its democratically elected government is not satisfactory to the U.S. and should be changed is not a demand typical of allies. The weak response to Iran’s undemocratic process, while making public demands of Israel that are simply not possible to fulfill fits into the strategy of attempting to win the affection of the Muslim world, even at Israel’s expense. The U.S. must act in its own interest as all nations, including Israel, must. The road the President is taking is sure to fail as it did when a previous President, Jimmy Carter, tried that path.

Israel must do what it can, without damaging itself, to hold together a good relationship with the U.S. but also she must look for other partners. Many nations want to do business with Israel and she should pursue those allies. Israel today is under perhaps the greatest existential threat since 1948 and she must stand up for her own best interests. This is why the Israeli electorate voted for a decidedly nationalist government, having confidence in Prime Minister Netanyahu’s strong leadership, and with the backing of the cabinet he has chosen Israel will, as a country, exercise the creativity, industriousness and courage necessary to continue to build this miraculous work that is the State of Israel.

*. Pentagon Halts Israeli Fighter Jet Bid, US a Rival on Tender (Arutz Sheva, 2009–07–06) --- by Malkah Fleisher
A scandal has arisen out of the United States military establishment after Pentagon pressure on Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) to withdraw from a massive aircraft tender for the Indian Air Force leaves competing American aerospace companies in prime position to win it.On the table: a $12 billion Indian Ministry of Defense tender for 126 multi-role combat aircraft (MRCA) for the Indian Air Force.In a bid to win the tender, IAI was offered a partnership with Sweden's Saab AB to jointly develop an advanced model of the JAS-39 Gripen jet fighter. Israel was to build the electronic systems for the craft, including communications, electronic warfare and radar systems.The Pentagon contacted Israel's Ministry of Defense, ordering them to force IAI out of contention, citing concerns that Israel would integrate American technology into the fighter jets.However, two of the remaining four bidders are American companies, leaving Israeli officials speculating that the actual reason for the demand was America's interest in winning the bid without having to compete by lowering prices, according to Israeli officials quoted in Israeli mediaLockheed Martin's F-16 and Boeing's F-18 Hornet are still in the running, as well as Russia's MiG-35 and the UK's BAE Eurofighter.The United States has a history of intervening to thwart Israeli military contracts, to America's benefit. Last summer, Israel's defense establishment backed down from a $500 million Turkish tank tender in order not to compete with the Americans.In 2006, the IAI lost a $2 billion South Korean Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) tender after the US imposed technological and commercial restrictions, which prevented Israel from meeting the terms of the tender.In 2003, the US opposed a $1 billion AWACS contract between Israel and India, citing India's stance against the US war in Iraq. The US offered Israel $1 billion in US military goods to back down from the agreement. However, Israeli officials speculated that the US may have opposed the deal for commercial reasonspART 1

Thank you Mr Prime Minister

2009-06-23T18:39:00.000-07:00

To Israel, with Love

An Open thank you Letter to Prime Minister Netanyahu:

On February 10, 2009 many of us voted for you and other center right parties such as Yisrael Beitanu entrusting you to be strong and wise in protecting our country, our heritage and our families. Your speech on June 14th assured us that we were right in our judgement and that you would not let outside pressures from the United States, the European Union or anyone else cause you to backdown. Thank you for that.

That you chose the Begin-Sadat Center was not only propitious in and of itself but a tribute to these two past adversaries to whom bringing peace and demonstrating that the past can be overcome, meant more than reveling in real or imagined slights. These two men showed true leadership by caring more for the good of their citizenry than their own ideologies or egos.

The three issues you spoke of—the Iranian threat, the economic crisis, and the advancement of peace were most important to all of us as we entered the voting booths, but most important our belief that you would stand strong when outside pressures attempted to steer our nations policies. Whether it is threatening remarks from the European Union against Israel’s policies or the United States demanding the our country “must” act on her wishes we know you will not succumb to policy changes not in Israel’s best interest. Thank you for that.
Although the entire world has agreed that Iran cannot have nuclear weapons, this idea is in grave danger of weakening in the face of Iran’s determination. What Israel must do is clear, how to do it is another question and we all know failure could bring disaster, failure from doing nothing or failure to act unsuccessfully. We know that in your previous military experience as a Sayeret Matkal Commander you have faced situations like this although not as International in consequence and trust you will not blink in this extremely difficult task that must be faced.
How do we make peace with those neighbors still at war with us? Your proposal to work towards a regional peace seems reasonable on paper, the effort it would take is immense and we respect your willingness to take it on. The past attempts at negotiations have failed, for sixteen years we have given away land, uprooted Jews from their homes, released terrorists from jails, provided financial aid and social services and today our security is more precarious than it was in 1970 when I first made Aliyah from the United States. Every previous agreement has failed as not one item of one agreement has been kept by our adversaries who signed off on them. Yet we are constantly urged to make more “painful concessions” to express “goodwill”, without a single “painful concession” being required of the other side. Please, Mr. Netanyahu, no more “painful concessions” without reciprocity. Your conditions for a Palestinian State tell us you agree. We will not give our birthright away without real guarantees.

Regardless of how each of us stands on the issue of a Palestinian state your conditions are unassailable. Please hold them as immovable and all of us will eventually support you even though some may be half hearted.
That you stood up in front of the world and told a truth that has not been told in such a straightforward and forceful manner by any Prime Minister before you is a cause for hopeful joy in our hearts. The world must know and accept the root cause of the lack of peace is not connected to Israel, the Jewish people or our long and tragic history in exile but to the refusal to recognize the right of the Jewish people to a state of their own, in their historic homeland. Your clear statement that Israel is and will remain the sovereign state of the Jewish people was received with a heartfelt thank you from all of us who support you and even many of those who may have voted otherwise.
Israel has been most admired and respected when it has stood up for itself with confidence and assurance. We have spent the last 16 years negotiating away our sovereignty. Offering much, receiving nothing, this may be why so much of the world feels it can command us to behave as they wish, not in our best interests. While few of us want to stand alone and hopefully we will not ever be in that situation, but the Jewish people, within the State of Israel and in exile, have had to do so in the past and we mustn’t give away our birthright for fear of losing the good opinion of others.

The history lesson you gave the world and reminded those who may have forgotten, was most welcome. The cause of violence and adversity against us, of course is unrelated to Settlements, lack of official statehood for the Palestinians, occupation or the other slogans that have been sold to the world by our adversaries, often accepted by Jews as well. Thank you for that.
Your unequivocal commitment to a United Jerusalem was more than welcome. Past history has shown that only under Jewish control does Jerusalem meet its destiny – an open and free city to all religions and all people. King David did not choose it as a Capitol without reason, then it had strategic importance, now it also is the historic home in which we came together as a united people and shall remain that way as long as we have the will to maintain it. Thank you for that.
You expressed so well the truth that Israel is a country whose development has been all but miraculous, if the Arab countries want to work with us in creating a regional peace, there is no reason the Palestinian people cannot grow and prosper with our help. The three commitments have to be made and honored for their situation to change. They must accept Israel and the Jewish State that it is, solve their refugee problem themselves as we did, demilitarize any Palestinian territories, and understand that Jerusalem, while important to other faiths, IS the Capitol of the Jewish people. The question of the settlements is why can Arabs live among Jews, but Jews cannot live among Arabs.
The return of GILAD SHALIT is of highest importance, thank you for remembering and not slighting this most important issue.

Thank you for all you have said. I stand with you in any way that can be useful to the ends your government espouses. Continue to stand strong for us and we will stand by you.

Sloganeering For Peace

2009-06-12T17:35:00.000-07:00

SLOGANEERING FOR PEACE; The meeting between President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu has occurred and the President’s much vaunted speech in Cairo has been praised and condemned endlessly, but what have we learned? I have learned that politics and slogans are most compatible bedfellows. Supporting slogans allows one to take a firm stand without dealing with what is behind the slogan. Sell a slogan and one can easily place blame, hold oneself unaccountable for results and not worry about taking the effort necessary to understand what it means. No details necessary. The slogans Israel’s adversaries have succeeded in positioning as magic—the abracadabra that will bring “peace” are: Two State Solution, Settlements, Occupation, Land For Peace and Jerusalem, capitol of Israel and Palestine.
Let’s illuminate the two most commonly argued today, Two State Solution and Settlements. Later we can investigate the others.
TWO STATE SOLUTION
What is the meaning of the word STATE in this context? According to the Encarta College Dictionary a state is “a country or nation with its own sovereign independent government.” In 1993 the European Union set the Copenhagen Political Criteria for new members, “membership criteria require that the candidate country must have achieved stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities.” Couple these definitions with the fact that each time a state has been offered the Palestinians they have responded with increased violence.
Why don’t the Palestinians have a state? The primary reason is they do not really want one. Having a “sovereign state” requires certain institutions and behaviours. Who in the disputed territories will establish a judicial system within which a citizen can receive an independent hearing with equal justice meted to all participants? Will Hamas adjudicate fair justice to a member of Fatah? Will the Palestinian Authority provide unbiased justice to a member of Hamas. This may happen but at present both sides are busy torturing and murdering, not only each other but this form of “justice” also extends to the opponents family members. Declaring a state will do nothing to bring about an independent and fair justice system. Who will build physical infrastructure? Although more aid dollars have poured into these territories, per capita, than any other place on earth does anyone know where this money has gone? Who has built schools, hospitals, a police department to maintain law and order, banks and financial infrastructure that serves the ordinary citizen and not only those with “protekzia” from the political overlords? Elections that are free and fair, a Presidential election to be held in January 2009 has not been held, because the current President knows he will not be re-elected. How legitimate is a state run education system whose textbooks are filled with hate and the pursuit of violence toward its neighbor? How long will it take to build a health care system adequate for its citizens so they don’t have to run to its hated neighbor for this care? What does it mean to have a state? Currently Judea and Samaria have independence in administration of all of its day to day affairs. Anything in the above menu is entirely up to the “Palestinian” population. Why are these responsibilities not being met when there is no interference from Israel?
The only involvement that Israel has in this territory are issues surrounding its own security. When Israel declared its Independence in 1948 most of the infrastructure was in place, informal, unofficial but in place. At that time it would have been perfectly natural for the Arabs (they were not yet Palestinians) to declare an independent state. There is an old expression TANSTAFL, “there ain’t no such thing as a free lunch”, if you want an independent sovereign state start building it. If you attack your neighbor to take over his territory and you lose, you pay a price for your aggression (this means everyone except the Jews who pay a price for defending themselves). If President Obama really wants to bring about peace and a Palestinian state he must start with a commitment to honesty with the Arab people. Even though Israel does not have oil or other natural resources, a massive land mass or an enormous population to trade with, Israel has held up its end of the alliance with the U.S. and the U.S. must do the same (more on that soon).
Prime Minister Netanyahu, Foreign Minister Avigdor Leiberman and nearly all of the people of Israel are not opposed to a Palestinian State living side by side in peace with Israel, nearly all are opposed to NOT living in peace. When the Arabs in Judea and Samaria are ready to live in peace with Israel there will be no argument from the Israeli side, no fences, no checkpoints (at least no more than every other country in the world has) and no IDF keeping the area secure. Right now we have a terrorist organization Hamas, running Gaza, (which is officially Judenrein) and Fatah running the Palestinian Authority in Judea and Samaria while fighting with each other daily, until this is solved how can one develop a sovereign state in the midst of civil war? The current government of Israel is committed to helping the Palestinians achieve prosperity and stability, first they must redevelop their educational, economic, political and police structures then we can proceed to a viable future for both peoples. Textbooks teaching hatred from the earliest grades will not help build the trust necessary for any meaningful relationship. Once the Palestinian Authority recognizes Israel as a Jewish state we are on solid ground to move to a bright and hopeful future living side by side in peace.
A model that may be considered might be Cyprus. As the Greeks and the Turks were not able to live together in peace, they separated with the Greeks on one end of the Island and the Turks on the other end, 100%. Cyprus has not declared statehood but is treated like a state and functions as a viable state including a place in the United Nations. Another example is India and Pakistan, partitioned one year before the UN partition of Palestine, even though they have fought 3 wars over the years, no one questions their legitimacy as sovereign states.
As long as the Arab goal is one state from river to sea, Israel will defend itself in whatever way necessary to protect the State of Israel and its people. A state for the Palestinians under the present conditions is impossible. The Palestinians must begin to build a functioning state that is not a threat to Israel. Until then the slogan “two-state solution” is just that, a slogan. President Obama’s push for statehood within two years will be unsuccessful in that it encourages the Palestinian fantasy of erasing the State of Israel from the Middle East. This won’t happen no matter what the European Union or the United States desires. Israel is overly concerned with world opinion, but I have confidence it will not commit suicide to win good opinion, it is in fact not a colony of the U.S. or the EU, but a sovereign state, appreciative of its alliance with America, but remembering that the existential threat is to Israel not to the United States. Your Questions and thoughts appreciated.

SETTLEMENTS
What is a settlement? Settlements are communities of people living together in every country in the world. Jewish communities, for some mysterious reason, may not exist side by side with Arab communities. Arab communities may live side by side in Jewish territory. If you have an answer to that other than Arab racism against Jews please let me know. The argument for freezing settlements voiced by Barack Obama, Hilary Clinton and others in this administration show a lack of understanding of the mindset of the Israeli population. How often do we hear that we must understand the Arab/Palestinian/Muslim mindset, but never must we understand the Jews of Israel? Natanyahu’s mindset has been clearly set out in his speeches and writings. Stopping the growth of Jewish communities means their destruction. If a family grows by having more children, or its children grow up and have children of their own, where will they live? The freeze they are describing would mean no new kindergartens or schools or even additions to existing structures. If they all have to move away, you destroy families, an extremely important part of the culture of Israeli society. Eventually as all of the young leave the community disappears. In what way are the Arabs in Judea and Samaria damaged by having Jews live among them? This is the question not being asked.
Jewish communities (settlements) have been uprooted in the Sinai, in Gaza, and several in the West Bank. Only in the Sinai has peace prevailed with the Egyptian Peace Accord, a proof of Israel’s commitment to peace, none of the other destroyed Jewish Communities has moved the neighboring Arab communities even an inch towards peace, but instead has increased the level of violence and incitement towards Israel massively.
Settlements make up 1.7% of the territory of Judea and Samaria, an area which has a great deal of vacant land that could be developed if the desire was there. Let’s stop talking in slogans. Land for Peace has never worked, the answer is Peace for Peace, when Arabs make visibly real steps toward peace we can begin to build the trust necessary to live together, as many Arab and Jewish communities inside Israel do already.
That “settlements” are somehow an impediment to peace is manufactured sloganeering to sell the notion that Jews, in spite of 3500 years of history, have no place and no sovereign claims in the middle east.

2009-05-17T12:39:00.000-07:00

A SMART GOVERNMENT
The new governments of Israel and the U.S and their ability to work with each other has been discussed and written about endlessly with very little analysis and a great deal of sloganeering. The question of whether or not the new Israeli government’s ability to work with the new American government is raised as though this is the sole purpose of the government of Israel.

I will focus here on the Israeli government, this is a government that is unique in many ways, let’s focus on the three main criticisms: First, it’s size, second, it is too “right” wing to work with the American government, Third, “the abandonment of the “two state solution”.

TOO BIG TO FUNCTION; First understanding that both the electoral system and government structure in Israel is very different from that of the United States. (a previous post describes that difference) is crucial. The current Prime Minister, Binyamin Natanyahu had to put together a government, not only of the winners as in the U.S., but to build a coalition of many parties even some small ones requiring great diplomatic and political skill to work smoothly. As I look at the list of cabinet ministers, it is excessive in size, but is also one of the smartest governments we have had in the last two decades. With names like Omer Moav, Moshe Yaalon, Yuval Steinitz, Yaakov Neeman, Avigdor Leiberman, Daniel Herschkovitz, Dan Meridor, among others, plus the appointment of Michael Oren as Ambassador to the U.S. and Natan Sharansky heading the Jewish Agency, this is as talented a government as can be put together. The size of the government is due to Israel’s peculiar election system that allows for a surfeit of political parties that dilute the pool of Knesset seats thus requiring too many parties being involved in the final make up of the government. The Prime Minister did a masterful job of pulling together a large but workable government while paying careful attention to the wishes of the voters.

TOO RIGHT WING TO WORK WITH THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION; The election results clearly showed an Israeli public wanting a government that takes a stronger stand on security issues. Campaign issues that were discussed the most during the recent election called for a stronger stance against Israel’s enemies, less apologizing for our existence and much less concern with pleasing the international community at Israel’s expense.
This all requires a right leaning government, remembering again that the political right and the political left in Israel are very different than they are in the United States. Even though the International media insists on characterizing it as extremely right wing, it is in fact moderate for those who understand the situation within the neighborhood in which Israel lives. The American political commentator, John McLaughlin predicted on his television show on May 8th that by next Easter, Tzipi Livni will be prime minister, this illustrates how lacking in understanding of the Israeli mental state he is. If he’s taking bets I would certainly want some of that action.

Many of the Israelis I talked to at various campaign events in Israel wanted to vote for Avigdor Leiberman, but decided to vote for Likud instead because so many fears were raised from media coverage of Leiberman as an extremist, racist, hate-monger, none of which are accurate assessments. Current polls show a growing approval of Leiberman and Natanyahu, if the election were held today it appears that both Natanyahu and Leiberman would have many more votes, perhaps not needing as many small parties to form the government. Kadima has suffered the most. My prediction is that unless the current government does tremendous harm, Kadima will not be a factor in the next election. There appears to be some level of confidence that this government could actually last the 4 years and 9 months of its term. Given that this is the 32nd government in 61 years that would be a great accomplishment.
Although during the American campaign, generally Israelis polled felt Senator McCain would be more understanding and helpful of Israel’s security situation, President Obama is liked and concerns had as much to do with the last three administrations. Regarding the American administration, the most common comments I heard were the famous Menachem Begin quote to Ronald Reagan, when Reagan tried to hand down his decision on solving the Palestinian issue, “Israel is not a banana republic”, other similar expressions were, “we are not America’s 51st state” or “we are not an American colony”. These comments show the determination of Israelis to develop a non-apologetic, strong and prideful relationship with America. Israelis in general express a very high opinion of America (72% in a most recent poll although only 38% believed that President Obama has a positive attitude toward Israel) believing if they stand up for themselves America will not push policies, which could be suicidal for Israel. The same poll showed that 63% of Israelis felt Obama’s intent to reconciliate with the Muslim and Arab world to improve U.S. standing will come at Israel’s expense. A desperate desire for peace has been replaced after the disapproval of nearly every action of the Olmert government to an acceptance of Leiberman’s view “Let us have no illusion, what was has failed”. The biggest difference of opinion between Israel and the United States is also the biggest issue. The Israelis strongly hold that until the Iran situation is addressed nothing can be done on the Palestinian issue as Iran is using its surrogates, Hamas, Hizbullah and Syria to maintain and increase the level of violence against Israel. The Americans say that solving the Palestinian state issue is first in importance. This could be a tripping point in the relationship as the most clever of diplomats will not be able change Israel’s mind on this issue. Israel sees this as a survival issue and the major concern for every Israeli.
Whether or not the current government in Israel can work with the current American government will probably work out positively, I, at least, am optimistic. The new Israeli Ambassador has been an intelligent, reasonable, but strong voice for Israel in the past and understands that part of his job is educating the Obama administration. President Obama seems to be intelligent and a fast learner who doesn’t mind backing down and changing direction if necessary.
THE TWO STATE SOLUTION: The “two state solution” is still widely accepted by the general population (61%) but not at this time. The Palestinians are dysfunctional and not ready. Money alone won’t work. The two-state solution brings to mind the Einstein quote, “the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. There has been a general holding on to the same idea and the same negotiating strategies that haven’t worked for the past 16 years. The Palestinians are actually in worse shape since electing Hamas to their government while failing to make even the smallest compromise on their part towards Israel’s security. Every time Israel has given an inch it has been at the expense of their own security. Avigdor Lieberman has been castigated in the American press for saying “if you want peace prepare for war” this of course is not Mr. Lieberman’s idea, it was first voiced by Seneca and has been repeated consistently for centuries by leaders all over the world. The Jewish experience resonates with the truth of this idea.
The Israeli government sees that a two state solution may happen in time, there is little disagreement on that but it will not come until there is security for Israel, and an end to violence that could bring prosperity for the Palestinians. They must begin building something in the territories. Israel will help, according to government pronouncements, the Palestinians have to maintain law and order and educational reform that eliminates the teaching of hate and violence. These reforms must come from within and precede statehood.
The Natanyahu government is made up of some of the smartest and most experienced people in Israel and there isn’t much doubt that they will work things out with the Obama administration, unless the Obama government is intransigent in pursuit of an immediate (two years) Palestinian State. In general, Israelis remember that we did not have help and support from the U.S. government until after the Six Day War, if it is necessary they will do it again rather than give up its possibility of existence. While a helpful relationship is highly desirable, Israelis believe that the U.S. needs Israel as well as Israel needs the U.S. and they will work with us. The current Israeli government is not in a position to compromise much on security issues, regardless of what the Obama government wants. Security compromises will pull the government down very quickly. The understanding that the last two wars (with Hizbullah and Operation Cast Lead) were left unfinished has created a need to think of Israel’s best interests before the demands of the U.S. or the European Union. Olmert made the statement to the Israeli media after declaring the ceasefire in Gaza, that he called the ceasefire at that time to accommodate the Obama government, whether he was telling the truth or not, Israelis, in general and the army in particular were not pleased. (see the previous post, conversations with soldiers leaving Gaza after the ceasefire).The long and successful relationship between the U.S and Israel will continue as long as it is beneficial to both sides. The shared values and work in many fields, trade, military strategies and tools, health care research and development, technology research and development, agricultural technology and many other areas will keep the two countries working together

Mitchell meets Natanyahu and Lieberman

2009-04-16T15:35:00.000-07:00

Summarizing reports in Israeli newspapers, the initial meetings were cordial but cool. Prime Minister Natanyahu held firm on Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish State, with all that implies. Love or even friendship not necessary --Israel as a legitimate Jewish State is necessary. Both the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Lieberman accept the Road Map, meaning every clause in it's own order, including the Tenant clause and the Zinni clause. FM Lieberman reviewed the history of the peace process with Mr Mitchell from 1993 to today. George Mitchell was asked to bring back to President Obama the message that the traditional approach not only, has not worked but has created serious negative consequences for Israel. There have been no results or solutions that move anyone closer to peace from this process. (Who said doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is the definition of Insanity?)

Israel requires not only support for it's security concerns but also a committed affirmation to Israel as a Jewish State. The imposition of a peace deal by the International community will not be accepted. It appears that all this was accomplished with some degree of diplomacy, as all agreed to ongoing meetings and accepted the current meetings as "useful".

President Obama's position is unclear, his Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is quoted in the Washington Post as saying that there will be a Palestinian state within four years no matter who the Prime Minister is. The comments from the administration regarding trading help with Iran for dismantling settlements (Bushahr for Yitzhar) hopefully is a rumour, if not it shows that the Obama administration does not understand the threat that Iran poses. If this is true, I feel confident it will be rejected out of hand. No one in the current Israeli government is suicidal.

It appears that both Israeli leaders were firm but polite and no feathers were rustled, however both the PM and FM were not cowed by the EU's threats against Israel if she doesn't accept their solution. I have repeated my comments on that issue below.

For the second time in the past month the EU has issued a warning/threat to Israel that the consequences will be grave if Israel vacates the "two state solution". Whether or not one supports that idea, the absolute arrogance of the EU to attempt to dictate to Israel what her foreign policy should be is outrageous. Did the Europeans not spend 1900 years (with a few peaceful breaks) participating in every form of persecution, degradation, torment and murder against us? Did these same people not confiscate our property while chasing us from country to country with the message "there is no room for you on this planet?" They dropped us into a black pit of hellish configuration and now protest any attempt to defend ourselves. Every European leader says we have the right to defend ourselves--until we do. We should all send a message of support to the new Israeli government letting them know we would like them to act in the best interest of the State of Israel, regardless of the opinions of the Europeans and/or Americans or anyone else who thinks they have the right to determine Israel's policies and thus her destiny. A note of encouragement canbe sent to email@natanyahu.org

After this visit from George Mitchell and the previous statements from both the PM and FM, I feel Israel is in good hands, we can only hope they stay firm. With the exception of the far left, there does not seem to be much disagreement in Israel. It is important to keep our elected representatives informed on the need for their support and appreciation for that support, when it is given. Act for America has just posted in detail, the number of Islamists close to the Obama administration. Congressman Brian Baird from Washington has announced his determination to limit Congress support for Israel. http://www.actforamerica.org/

Truth and Avigdor Leiberman

2009-04-16T10:35:00.000-07:00

March 20, 2009 During the last two weeks of the Israeli election, I followed Avigdor Leiberman as he was obviously as important as the “top three” candidates that the Israeli and world media had determined should be followed and reported on. After listening to Leiberman in several different venues, then asking him a question regarding his purported “racism”, I carefully read the platform of Yisrael Beitanu to find where he has expressed “hate” or “racism”. I want to issue the following challenge. Where, in Mr. Leiberman’s writings, speeches or party platform there is “hate mongering”, extremism or “racism” of which he has been accused.
First of all, the party platform in brief:
1. No negotiations with terrorists
2. Overthrow Hamas
3. Citizenship should be linked to loyalty to the state and its principles. (Remember there are two Arab parties which the Knesset voted to not allow to run in this election because their platforms call for the destruction of the state of Israel and replacement with a Palestinian state. The Supreme Court ruled they must be allowed to run) Americans elected to public office must take an oath of allegiance as well as new citizens. Nowhere does Leiberman call for only Arabs or any other singled out group.to be loyal to the state.
4. Legal residents who have served in the IDF or have done National Service will get preferential treatment when applying to Universities, receiving public service benefits and allocation of state owned land grants. (This applies to all sections of the population, not only Jews)The U.S. GI bill of rights comes to mind)
5. A coalition should be formed to change the system of elections to a more workable system, perhaps modeled after the American system.
6. A bill will be presented to allow civil union as well as religious marriage.
7. A special cabinet level position to encourage aliyah and integration of new immigrants from Europe and the U.S. due to the sharp rise in anti-semitism.
8. Remove the restrictions on the importation and sale of pork products.
9. Loosen Sabbath restrictions on commerce.
Some of these planks may be disagreeable, but which ones are right wing extremist and which are racist and in what way?

My question to Mr Leiberman on the final borders was answered realistically and constructively. Borders are usually described as an issue in solving the disagreements between the parties in this part of the world. The idea of moving borders so most Arabs live together and will govern themselves autonomously and most heavily Jewish populated areas accrue to Israel, is the basic idea behind the borders set by the UN partition. This would insure that no one is moved out of their homes. Israel is not the U.S. and the Middle East is not the Americas. How people live here is different in that cultural, religious and ethnic differences cause people to prefer living together in their own communities, in order to maintain those differences. While Arabs can live freely in Israel, Jews cannot live in Arab territories—why is that?

In an interview with the Jerusalem Post, Leiberman stated he has two basic commitments, first the Security of Israel, second, prosperity for the Palestinians. He is a supporter of a two state solution and in fact believes this is the only way to solve the issue of security for Israel and prosperity for the Palestinians. Two states will only work under conditions that support Israel’s security needs.

American Jews may support the Zionist enterprise or not, but to attempt to pressure the government of a sovereign state to form a government, that is contrary to the wishes of the voters, in this case, by delegitimizing one of its leaders is not their province. To quote the embattled Dutch film maker Geert Wilders, “Thanks to Israeli parents who see their children go off to join the army and lie awake at night worrying, parents in Europe and America can sleep well and have pleasant dreams, unaware of the dangers looming.”

Demonizing those with whom we may disagree is not helpful, democratic or wise. While we can all read between the lines and determine that we know what another person thinks, but this is mind reading when there is no evidence to support it.

Jewish Morality in War

2009-04-16T08:35:00.000-07:00

Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Jewish Morality in War
January 20, 2009
The Jewish experience over it's 3500 years has been a matter of making choices between compliant submission, leading to victimization or standing up for ourselves and fighting back. The modern state of Israel has chosen the latter requiring an investigation of how to meet this challenge within a moral position. Israel is consistently called upon to determine how best to protect her sovereignty, making war a continuous necessity in meeting that existential requirement. The question is how does she protect herself without violating her moral parameters.Summarizing Rabbi Dr Donniel Hartman on this subject will hopefully open debate on a difficult issue. Starting with the decision to go to war, by definition a moral war is always defensive, never offensive. Defending life is a moral imperative. Once the decision to go to war is made, a clear purpose must be set and a plan for how the war will be fought. The issue that Israel faces is determining how to protect noncombatents while efficiently targeting combatants.. In traditional wars this has been less a problem than it is with the nonconventional warfare that Israel faces today.How to fight a moral war when differentiation between combatants and noncombatants is blurred? The defensive army, under Jewish guidelines must protect noncombatants but not if to do so means losing the war. When the war is defensive and therefore just , the defenders may not lose the war, thus assigning it's own noncombatants a horrific fate. If, as in the current situation,(Operation Cast Lead) the aggressors are mixing combatants with non-combatants, while taking what precautions are possible, the defending army is obligated to win it. Jewish law requires that we choose life, the question is how do you choose life for others, if you don't choose life for yourself. Since the tactics used by the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) puts the lives of IDF soldiers in greater danger than any other army would allow, for the sole purpose of protecting the lives of reputed noncombatants, are they doing the right thing? This decision would infer that the lives of the enemy noncombatant's life is more valuable than the soldier's life. Remember that a defensive war is a just war, therefore the ultimate obligation is to win. Living a moral life often requires tough decisions that are not always clearly defined. What are your thoughts?

Sunday, April 5, 2009
Chief of the General Staff Discusses Preserving Morality
IDF Spokesperson April 5th, 2009
In a Passover Letter to IDF Soldiers and Commanders,The Chief of the General Staff Discusses Preserving MoralityWhile Fighting a Terrorist Threat
In honor of the upcoming holiday of Passover, the IDF Chief of the General Staff, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, addressed the soldiers and commanders of the IDF in a letter released this evening. The Chief of the General Staff discussed the value of freedom that is celebrated during the holiday. Lt. Gen. Ashkenazi related this value to the challenges faced by the IDF as it is required to protect the people of Israel and their freedom while fighting a terrorist threat that relentlessly uses civilians as human shields.
In the letter, the Chief of the General Staff wrote:
"The ethos of the IDF is based on combining our strength with our righteousness; on the one hand, our need to hold a deterring sword against those who threaten to destroy us, and on the other hand, our continuous effort to reach peace. We fulfill this task with determination, while preserving out morality as Jews, as Israelis, and as followers of the 'Spirit of the IDF' [the IDF's ethical code].
"This ethos has been put to test in all of Israel's wars, as well as recently, during Operation Cast Lead. Following a long period of restraint, we emerged in a battle against Hamas and other terrorist elements, determined to protect our homes and people, and to remove the terror that threatened the residents of Israel's south. Our enemy used their people as human shields and as hostages, choosing to launch their deadly attacks from schools, hospitals, mosques, and houses, forcing upon us a battle zone where an uninvolved civilian population was largely present.
"We focused our fighting against these terrorists and their infrastructure, determined to mark the entire terrorist network and deliver it a severe blow, while doing our utmost to preserve the lives of our soldiers and avoid any harm to civilian populations unassociated with terrorism.
"This is the ideological and normative basis of our culture and identity. Thus, I was disturbed like many others by the so called 'testimonies' published by soldiers, describing unacceptable actions and intentional harm supposedly done to civilians. The testimonies were investigated and looked into thoroughly by the Investigating Military Police, and were found to be groundless and lacking any factual basis.
"If a shade of a doubt is to be uncovered that any deviations from the IDF's norms took place, they will be investigated and thoroughly dealt with. The IDF is determined to rigidly maintain its values and morality. This is where our strength lies. We will never embrace the ideologies of our enemies and will forever be loyal to the tradition and values of our people."

Israel's Election System

2009-04-16T08:18:00.000-07:00

Understanding Israel’s Election System
February 8, 2009
In the United States, we just finished a very long and somewhat angry election cycle and people have begun to put their differences aside and continue life normally. One of the great positives of democracies is their ability to change governments without violence and usually without bitterness. Yet different democratic countries have very different systems and all work fairly well. Israel on Tuesday, January 27th began its official election cycle. This date is two weeks from election day and the first day that paid television advertising is allowed. The system in Israel is different from ours and since so many people have asked me, over the past years, “how does the Israeli system work” this seemed an appropriate time to talk about it. Imagine two weeks of political ads, vs the nearly 2 years of campaigning we have just finished.
Israel’s Knesset(Parliament) is unicameral and holds elections every 4 years. Voters choose their political party and vote in internal party elections to choose who will lead the party and a list of candidates, to hold Knesset seats, below the party leader. Voters pick a political party and pay a tax to the party to support it. The party decides who will be on the list and in what order, this becomes important when the general election occurs. The first name on the list will be the Prime Minister if that party gets the most votes and the names below the party leader are ordered according to the party’s judgement as to their importance to the party. For instance, if a party gets enough votes to earn 30 seats, the first 30 names become members of Knesset.
The President of Israel, currently Shimon Peres, then asks the leader of the party, who seems most likely to be able to form a government, to do so within 45 days. This is usually the party receiving the most votes, but not necessarily. Forming a government requires negotiating with other parties to form a coalition. . The cabinet ministers are members of coalition parties as well as the majority party, which sometimes creates volatility in the government. Imagine if President Obama had to insert Republicans, Green Party representatives, Independents and so on into his cabinet. While in the American system the cabinet is the pick of the President and they all work together, that is not always possible if some of your most important cabinet members are from other parties. Currently Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni are from Kadima but the Minister of Defense is from Labor and different cabinet members could have competed for the Prime Minister’s job in the past election and plans to do so in future elections. In the current Knesset there are 12 different parties represented (27 parties competed in the last election) and in the current election 38 parties are vying for seats.
A party must have 2% of the total votes to earn a seat. For most of the political parties this very low threshold is too high due to the number of parties involved. In the current election,the parties that will make up the next government will most likely be, the current ruling party Kadima, Likud (the current front runner), Israel Our Home, Labor, and Shas (a Sephardic religious party). Around half of the voting Arab citizens vote for left wing Jewish lists instead of any of the 5-7 Arab parties that put up a list. Also many Arabs boycott elections, which makes it difficult for them to get many seats, totaling the Arab parties together they usually pass the threshold and hold between 3 and 7 seats.
Polls show the top issues for voters are, first security, second the economy, third education. Although the elections for Knesset are set every four years very few governments have lasted a full term. In the last 10 years, four governments have formed, with three falling before their term is finished, the one that lasted was Ariel Sharon’s government from 2002 to 2006. In the last 60 years there has been only one government that received enough mandates to form a government without coalescing with other parties and it lasted only one year.
This can be a confusing system, but generally the parties have very clear differences and Israelis tend to be very loyal to a particular party. Since Israel has been at war for 60 years, every voter has concerns about security, after that the parties represent different strengths. Although the Likud has always been strong on defense, the leader of Likud, Benjamin Natanyahu is considered strongest on the economy, concerns about social issues such as poverty and education are strengths of Labor, although the religious parties are also strong on those issues as well as on the issue of maintaining Israel as a Jewish state. Israel Our Home is strong with new immigrants Jewish identity and defense. Meandering through 38 political parties is not a likely activity for most voters who will lean toward parties they have voted for in the past.
Whichever party receives the most votes will lead the government but will, of necessity, have to form a coalition with several other parties. These coalitions can create broader consensus, but often create differences that make decision making difficult.
This is Israeli elections 101, if you would like to know more feel free to contact me tboussi@gmail.com

Soldiers Return from Gaza

2009-04-16T08:12:00.000-07:00

SOLDIERS RETURNING FROM GAZA
January 13, 2009
After talking to five soldiers returning to Israel from action in Gaza, I convey in this piece their answers as though the five soldiers were one. This seems justified, as there was almost no difference in their replies. Three of the five were reservists married and with children, and two of those reservists were religious. The interviews were mostly in Hebrew, so exact quotes are difficult.
At their request, the soldiers were not photographed. Note: On January 27, 2009 The Israel Defense Forces announced that no soldiers, commanders, or officers who participated in Operation Cast Lead, may be photographed without their faces being blurred due to European anti-Israel groups threatening to bring war crimes charges against Israeli members of the Israel Defense Forces. A bill was passed in the Knesset (the Israel Parliament) to provide any Israeli charged in a foreign country with complete protection against such lawsuits should they take place. England is of particular concern as their laws make it particularly easy for any individual to bring about such lawsuits.

How did you feel going into Gaza?
When we knew we were going in, it was initially difficult. Knowing we must do this helped. But what put us most at ease were the army Rabbis who came and talked to us—they really made you feel “the hand of G-d,” and that feeling put us very much into ruach krav (spirit of battle).
Did the soldiers with you share this feeling?
Nearly everyone felt that the Rabbis made this easier. It is said 'there are no atheists in a foxhole,' and I can tell you that is the truth. Guys who never prayed before learn to pray on the battlefield. I saw it in Lebanon in 2006 and I saw it here. Nobody enjoys fighting; we all miss our families. Ronnie here has a 2 week old baby - he should be home with his family. There is for all of us a sense of safety in Israel. I know that sounds strange, but when you step over the border into Gaza, the feeling is immediately different, even though Gaza was quiet until we reached the more inhabited areas.

How supportive are your families?
One Hundred percent. When you write to tell others about this conversation, make them understand no one of us wants to fight; but it is the only way for us to live. As much as we do not want to fight, there is a sense of relief that we are finally doing something. If we had done this two years ago, it would have been much easier. (Note: none of the soldiers lives in Sderot; two live in Ashkelon, Portland's sister city in Israel. Sderot and Ashkelon are cities in Southern Israel nearest to Gaza and under attack since Gaza was ceded to the Palestinian Authority).

How do you feel now after the ceasefire?
We aren’t supposed to talk to the media and I understand keeping the media out; but I will answer this if you do not use my real name. I am loyal to the army, my country and the job I have to do for it, and more than willing to do it. I just don’t understand the ceasefire now. No one wants it now. We want the politicians to let us finish the job. We don’t want to stop now and in a year from now have to do it all over again.

What will it take to finish the job? We don’t know exactly; but a serious push is necessary. As long as Hamas is in control it won’t end. We killed 900 terrorists out of at least 20,000: this is nothing to them. They have to know it is not worthwhile to “mess” with us.
We don’t want to be here and the Arabs in Gaza don’t want tanks and shells raining down on them. It shouldn’t be us [trying to control Hamas]. It is an Arab problem and they should solve it themselves.
Why do you think the media was kept out? I heard a reporter on Fox News channel say that it was because the Israeli government didn’t want the Israeli side of the story told.
(Laughter from all the soldiers standing there.) Of course we want our story told, but we learned from Lebanon [2006]: The press was everywhere - they were constantly getting in the way and we had to be always aware of them theyto be sure they didn’t get killed. Sometimes we couldn’t take an action we wanted to for fear of hurting them. They think war is a card game (no offense to you), but it is life and death. We can’t be out there thinking, “How will the media see this?”. Gaza is one of the most crowded places on earth. Yet we have to avoid hitting civilians and the reporters, who seem to feel they should be able do anything and be anywhere they want to be. In Lebanon, I saw a soldier in another unit who couldn’t take a shot at the guy pointing a gun at him, because a reporter was in the way. Restricting the press was one of the things that made this action much easier.
What other things made Gaza easier than Lebanon?
I don’t know if “easier” is the right word, but certainly we could be more focused on our job with the distraction created by reporters eliminated. Other things that made Gaza easier than Lebanon were:
we were well prepared and had a definite plan
our officers were in the field beside us, which is what the IDF is about
In Lebanon we fell in love with technology and thought we could do too many things from a distance.

Do you think that Gabi Ashkenazi (Chief of General Staff) is the reason?
Well, [Lieutenant General Askenazi is] probably a good part of the reason; but we all learned a lot from Lebanon. Another thing about reporters: in Lebanon, some reporters were giving away ground information, site information . . . not necessarily intentionally, but they did and it cost us lives. Security was very tight this time around; we were not even allowed to keep our cell phones with us.
Every soldier I have talked to has used the word “scared” usually more then once, what were the most frightening things for you?
First every house or building is wired. They wire their own houses, the schools that their own children attend, hospitals . . . the mindset [of putting your own people at risk] is so alien to us that we have to keep reminding ourselves of the danger in every step we take. They would rather have a family of eight blown up in their own house than eight different Arabs blown up in different places; and if it is a school full of kids that is blown up, all the better, as they understand that the publicity is good for them. They think that if they kill Israelis that’s good and if a lot of Arabs die that is even better, as it is blamed on the Israelis and that is the publicity they want. Dead women and children are the publicity they look for..
The second most frightening thing -or maybe even the first- is the tunnels. Gaza is a mass of tunnels everywhere. Some of these tunnels are big enough to walk in standing up, and with electricity and other necessities. They use them for everything; not just to smuggle other terrorists, money, weapons and whatever else they want. The tunnels run from house to house as well. The top leaders are in comfortable tunnels under the hospital: they know we won’t bomb the hospital so they [ the leaders] are safe. Another use of tunnels is for a major goal Hamas has: Kidnapping Israeli soldiers, THAT is very scary. If you are walking anywhere near any kind of brush or debris, a hand might reach out and grab a leg and try to drag you into the bush or a camouflaged tunnel. We sleep on the floor of vacant houses which we have searched. While we sleep, a floor tile will move and a hand reach out to grab an arm, a leg, or whatever, and drag you under the house into a tunnel. Thank G-d they did not succeed- only because we learned from past incidents.
Getting into the heads [of our enemy] is hard and frightening. They don’t mind how many of them die, while for us one soldier is too many. Every life is precious, even theirs—what can anyone do?

What do you feel has been accomplished?
We will have failed if we leave without Gilad Shalit: no way we can do that! We don’t want to go home until we are finished. This ceasefire was political, not practical. My hope is when Hamas' leaders stick their heads out of the tunnels they are hiding in, they will be so shocked by the devastation they see they will not want to attack Israel again. Everywhere in Gaza we left destroyed grey concrete buildings surrounded by rubble covered with a grey-black smoke.

What do you think the people of Gaza feel now that there is quiet?
'Quiet' is the right word because it is not over –the people really do hate us. They don’t know anything good about us; only that they are suffering. Some of them know Hamas is the problem; but most don’t think that way. I would say ninety-nine percent say they hate us. Hamas will get billions from the international community, and they will use most of it to re-arm themselves and to continue to educate their children [with anti-Israeli propaganda]: not to make a life for themselves, but to hate us. Their cynical use of their children is the long-range problem.