יום שישי, 5 באוגוסט 2011

Elder of Ziyon Daily Digest

Elder of Ziyon Daily Digest

Nonsense in a book review in WaPo

Posted: 04 Aug 2011 08:49 PM PDT

Sari Nusseibeh reviews Jeremy Ben-Ami's book in the Washington Post. (Don't bother buying the book. You can read some excerpts at Israel Matzav, get the gist of the book and save yourself the money.)

I just wanted to point out a laughable part of the review - or it would be laughable if so many people didn't actually believe it:

Given the recent rapprochement between Fatah and Hamas, and the radical changes in the Arab world, there has never been a moment in the history of the conflict when the Arab side has been more ready for a settlement — and the Israelis less willing to agree to one.

Say what?

  • Fatah and Hamas didn't agree on anything. Hamas still controls Gaza completely. And if they did unify, that would make peace even less likely. Or does Nusseibeh really believe that Hamas has moderated in its daily demands for Israel to be destroyed? Perhaps he should read what Hamas was saying just last week.
  • How exactly are the changes in the Arab world helping peace? Perhaps in a decade or so, if democracy and freedom really takes hold, we can think about the Arab world accepting Israel. But in case Nusseibeh hasn't noticed, the demonstrators are even less willing to accept Israel than their old leaders.
  • A settlement involves compromise. The Arab world has not offered any concrete compromises to Israel, and neither has the PLO. If they are so "ready for a settlement" then why are they acting so intransigently?
  • Israel's position under Netanyahu is pretty much the same as it was under Olmert and under Barak. Netanyahu may be more adamant about some specifics but the outline has not changed much, and that outline has been continuously rejected out of hand by Palestinian Arab leaders.
That's a lot of nonsense packed into a single sentence. 

Syria killed 109 more people in Hama today. Syria says all is well.

Posted: 04 Aug 2011 02:31 PM PDT

From Now Lebanon:
CNN said on Thursday that Avaaz, a global activist group, said that at least 109 people died in and around the Syrian city of Hama today, adding that Avaaz cited a medical source.

"The brutality continues in Hama on the fourth day of Ramadan. Communication with the city and surrounding area is very difficult as the electricity supply has been cut off," Avaaz said.

"However, Avaaz has been in touch with a medical source who confirms that 109 people have been killed since the early hours of the morning. Avaaz has been told that more have been injured and bodies are lying in the streets as ambulances and private vehicles are unable to get through."

One resident who spoke to CNN by satellite phone said injured people have died in hospitals because there is no electricity in the facilities.

Residents reported a breakdown and cutoff in communications and electricity accompanying the siege, and said the military was bombing the city.

The resident said entrances of the city are blocked, with no one getting in or out, adding that snipers are deployed across the city.

"People who try to leave the city are being shot," he also said, adding that "he was told there was 'genocide' in one particular area of the city."
This is in addition to the 30 killed Wednesday.

But don't worry - Syria's "news" agency assures us that "Syrian Arab Army units are working to restore security, stability and normal life to Hama."

Syria hired PR firm to set up Vogue article on the Assads

Posted: 04 Aug 2011 01:10 PM PDT

Remember the absurd Vogue article in February that praised Bashir Assad's family and called Asma al-assad "A Rose in the Desert"?


Now we know a little more about how that article was placed.

From The Hill:
The Syrian government hired an international public-relations firm to help coordinate a Vogue magazine profile for Asma al-Assad, Syria's first lady.

Brown Lloyd James agreed to a $5,000-per-month contract with the presidency of the Syrian Arab Republic in November 2010 to help with the interview and photo shoot for a glowing profile of al-Assad by the high-profile fashion magazine.

The piece has been criticized heavily due to its publication in Vogue's March issue, which coincided with the Syrian government's crackdown on anti-regime protesters.
The firm "liaised between the Office of the First Lady and the Vogue editorial team on the scheduling of interviews and photo shoots," according to Department of Justice records. Brown Lloyd James also agreed to an extension of the contract for another $25,000, but its work for Syria has since ended, according to the firm.

"We look forward to an enduring and mutually beneficial relationship," the firm wrote in its contract with the Syrian government.

The PR firm's work for Syria was successful, as Vogue published a profile of al-Assad under the title "Asma al-Assad: A Rose in the Desert," along with a full-page photo of the Syrian first lady.

Links to the profile of al-Assad on the Vogue website have since gone dead, sending readers to an error page. A spokeswoman for the magazine did not return messages from The Hill asking for comment on the profile.

Brown Lloyd James said in its statement that its work on behalf of Syria came at a time when the country's relationship with the United States was changing for the better.

"Our project in Syria, for example, hewed with U.S. efforts at rapprochement and normalization of relations, which were a major strategic priority to the U.S. at the time," the firm said. "During the time of our activity, the U.S. was engaged in a thaw in relations, highlighted by the appointment of a U.S. ambassador to the country. By complementing the efforts of traditional diplomacy, our approach seeks to establish a deeper reservoir of good will and a strengthening of international relationships. We aim to start dialogues and exchanges and develop constituencies for normalization in each country."
It's funny that "hasbara" is considered a dirty word by anti-Israel leftists but no one seems to have a problem with Bahrainis and Libyans and Syrians hiring PR firms to burnish their images.

(h/t Folderol)

Think the UN is obsessed with Palestine?

Posted: 04 Aug 2011 11:45 AM PDT

Online you can find the UN's document "Annotated preliminary list of items to be included in the provisional agenda of the sixty-sixth regular session of the General Assembly" which is due to convene in September.

The document is 215 pages long and covers pretty much everything that the UN is planning to discuss in the upcoming session.

Here is a chart showing how often various countries/entities are mentioned in this document:

It's a big world out there, and the UN is obsessed with a real tiny part of it.

The imaginary state (Foreign Policy)

Posted: 04 Aug 2011 10:35 AM PDT

A very good article in Foreign Policy that demolishes the idea of recognizing a Palestinian Arab state in the desired borders:

In a few weeks, an overwhelming majority in the United Nations General Assembly will likely vote for collective recognition of a Palestinian state. But which Palestinian state? Of the three Palestinian states the assembly could recognize, two are real and arguably could meet the requirements for statehood. But it is the third, purely imaginary one that the assembly will endorse, one that neither has a functioning government nor meets the requirements of international law.

According to the prevailing legal standard, the 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, a "state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states." Both the Hamas-controlled Palestinian entity in Gaza and the rival Fatah-governed Palestinian entity in the West Bank can be said to meet all four of these criteria of the law of statehood. The one on which the United Nations will vote does not.

In Gaza, Hamas controls a permanent population in a defined territory (i.e., Gaza within the armistice lines of 1949). Gaza has a functioning, if odious, government. And Hamas-controlled Gaza already conducts international relations with a large number of states. From a narrowly legal point of view, the Hamas Gaza entity could become a state, another miserable addition to a very imperfect world.

...The Fatah Palestinian entity in the West Bank also could meet the legal requirements for statehood, and it would have more international support. It has a functioning government in the Palestinian Authority (PA), a permanent population, and international relations with a very large number of states. It also controls a defined territory, which comprises what are called areas A and B as defined under the Oslo II agreement of September 1995, plus additional territory subsequently transferred by Israel in agreed further redeployments. (Area A is the zone of full civil and security control by the Palestinian Authority, and Area B is a zone of Palestinian civil control and joint Israeli-Palestinian security control.) The Fatah West Bank entity within these lines also could be recognized as a state under international law.

But Fatah, the PA, and the broader PLO do not seek statehood for this West Bank entity that arguably could meet the legal requirements. Their minimum demand is a state that includes Gaza along with the West Bank, the eastern part of Jerusalem, and all the other parts of mandatory Palestine that were under Jordanian and Egyptian control before 1967. Fatah, the PA, and the PLO are demanding title to lands and authority over populations they do not control, being as they are under the rule of Hamas and Israel.

Unlike the two Palestinian entities that already exist, either of which could be recognized as a Palestinian state because they seem to fulfill the legal requirements, the Palestinian entity that a General Assembly majority will recognize as a state this September does not actually exist on Earth. It is imaginary and aspirational, not real. And it does not meet the legal requirements.

...So there you have it. The General Assembly will make a remarkable decision about all this in the next few weeks. Instead of recognizing either of the two state-like entities that already exist, each having many of the attributes of statehood required by international law, the General Assembly will create an imaginary state that has two incompatible presidents, two rival prime ministers, a constitution whose most central provisions are violated by both sides, no functioning legislature, no ability to hold elections, a population mostly not under its control, borders that would annex territory under the control of other powers, and no clear path to resolve any of these conflicts. It is a resolution that plants the seeds for civil and international wars, not one that advances peace.
Read the whole thing; it does a great job documenting how dysfunctional the proposed state government would be. And this is without even going into the financial issues.

(h/t Folderol)

Administrivia: Advertorials

Posted: 04 Aug 2011 09:30 AM PDT

Advertorials are advertisements that look like normal editorial content. Newspapers and TV stations have been running advertorials for many years, and it is an accepted part of the media as long as it is made clear that the content is in fact an advertisement.

I'm going to test out advertorials at EoZ.

I do not want to just publish press releases. That would not be fair to my readers. So here are the rules for EoZ advertorials:

  • I must approve of the item being advertised. If I don't believe in the product or service, I won't pretend I do.
  • The product or service must be relevant to EoZ readers.
  • I write the article, in my style, as honestly as I can. 
  • Obviously it will not be critical towards the item being advertised, but I will not write anything I do not believe. I will treat it as a blog post; use my own angle on the product or service, and do my own research if needed. 
  • The article will be approved by the advertiser. 
  • The article will be clearly labeled in the title and within the post as being an advertisement.
I think that this is fair; it allows me to make a little money but it should not detract from the blog experience. If you don't want to read an ad, you can skip it, but if you do read it the post will hopefully be as educational and entertaining as any other blog post. 


The first one will probably be posted in the next couple of days.

If  you have a relevant product or service you would like to have me write about, just contact me.

UNIFIL confirms that IDF did not cross Lebanese border

Posted: 04 Aug 2011 08:25 AM PDT

The Daily Star (Lebanon) buries the lede:
U.N. Special Coordinator for Lebanon Michael Williams warned Tuesday that a war could erupt between Lebanon and Israel as a result of this week's minor exchange of gunfire on the tense border.

In the meantime, Prime Minister Najib Mikati said Lebanon was determined to defend its rights and protect its sovereignty by all legitimate means against Israeli threats.

In response to the Wazzani incident, Foreign Minister Adnan Mansour said: "Lebanon will file a complaint against Israel through its mission at the United Nations tomorrow for its violation of [U.N.] Resolution 1701 and the infiltration of its soldiers into Lebanese territory in the Wazzani area yesterday."
Twelve paragraphs later:
Meanwhile, a UNIFIL official denied reports that Israeli forces violated Lebanese sovereignty near the Lebanese border village of Mais al-Jabal Tuesday.

"Israeli troops were carrying out routine maintenance work on the Israeli technical fence near the village of Mais al Jabal. There was no violation of the Blue Line. A UNIFIL patrol was sent to the area. The situation is quiet," UNIFIL spokesperson Neeraj Singh told The Daily Star.
Of course, this information is still not available on the UNIFIL website.

Al-Qaeda group claims responsibility for two rockets

Posted: 04 Aug 2011 07:30 AM PDT

From YNet:
Two Grad rockets were fired from Gaza late Wednesday evening after a period of relative calm in the south.

The first rocket exploded at around 10:30 pm in an open area between Sderot and Kiryat Gat, near a town in the Lakhish Region. The second exploded some two hours later at the entrance to the southern city of Ashkelon. No injuries or damage were reported in either case.
Palestine Press Agency says that the Abdullah Azzam Brigades took responsibility for these attacks.

The same group took responsibility for a Grad attack in April. They are affiliated with Al Qaeda.

It is pretty much impossible to smuggle Grad rockets into Gaza without Hamas' knowledge and permission, so the "good cop, bad cop" routine that Hamas has been playing with the Islamist groups is mostly theatre. No doubt they have their differences but Hamas is well aware of their possession of, and use of, Grad rockets.

Israel releasing 200 security prisoners today

Posted: 04 Aug 2011 06:35 AM PDT

From JPost:

Israel on Thursday released some 200 security prisoners due to overcrowding in prisons, Israel Radio reported.

Among those freed was Hassan Yusuf, a senior member of Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Yusuf, who had served six years in prison for his activities as part of the terrorist organization, was scheduled to be released in a month and-a-half.
The overcrowding reason seems unlikely. After all, the number of security prisoners today is roughly half what it was in 2007. Ha'aretz says it was a gesture for Ramadan (and gives more background behind Hassan Yusuf.)

It does look like most of the released prisoners did serve all of, or close to, their full terms, so this does not seem to be related to any Shalit negotiations, unfortunately.

Assuming that Israel released prisoners in May, June and July at the rates they did earlier this year, this means that there are now less than 5000 security prisoners in Israeli prisons.

The politics of honor/shame: PalArabs unlikely to drop UN bid

Posted: 04 Aug 2011 05:38 AM PDT

From AFP:
THE PALESTINIANS are unlikely to agree to drop their UN membership bid in exchange for new peace talks based on the pre-1967 lines, Palestinian officials and analysts say.

On Tuesday, an Israeli official confirmed that Israel has been working with Washington to hammer out a framework for new peace talks that both countries hope could convince the Palestinians to drop their bid for United Nations membership.

But Palestinian officials and analysts said the Palestinian leadership had already invested heavily in the bid, and would face public disgrace if it agreed to drop the much-touted plan. They described the new framework for talks as little more than a public relations exercise for Israel, allowing it to show willingness to resume talks while attempting to torpedo the UN membership campaign.
This is only a minor example, but the shame culture dynamic among Arabs gives them an advantage in any negotiations with a "guilt culture" adversary.

They can always fall back on the importance of honor and fears of disgrace to avoid doing things that are necessary.

In this case, as is often the case, the threat is exaggerated. Yes, Abbas would lose face if he backs down, but it would not be fatal to his hold on power.

What people are not discussing is the downside of going through with the UN stunt. Already, the PLO is planning mass demonstrations on the eve of the vote (under the guise of being "popular demonstrations," of course:)
Palestinian officials said Monday they plan to begin mass marches against Israel's occupation of the West Bank on Sept. 20, the eve of a largely symbolic U.N. vote expected to recognize their independence.

Palestinian official Yasser Abed Rabbo said leaders hope to attract millions, and the protest will be the first of a prolonged effort. He said the campaign would be called "Palestine 194," since the Palestinians hope to become the 194th member of the United Nations.

"The appeal to the U.N. is a battle for all Palestinians, and in order to succeed, it needs millions to pour into streets," he said.
It seems likely that these PLO-organized demonstrations will become PLO-organized "resistance" in short order. And while the PA is not likely to start an armed third intifada, it will have little incentive to stop Hamas and other terror groups in the territories from rebuilding their terror infrastructure and attempting to escalate attacks against Israelis. And even the PA considers rock throwing and Molotov cocktails to be "non-violent resistance."

This UN stunt, in other words, will cost many lives. Most of them will be Arab.

The stunt will also set back the chances for real peace by another decade. The relative security and prosperity that Arabs enjoy in their autonomous areas will disappear. It may be as disastrous for Palestinian Arabs as the second intifada was.

Yet no one is talking about the downside - and one reason is because no one wants to offend  the "honor" of Abbas.

(h/t Mike T)

The cluelessness of Nick Kristof

Posted: 04 Aug 2011 03:19 AM PDT

From Nicholas Kristof in the New York Times:

Next month, Palestinians are expected to seek statehood at the United Nations. It's a stunt that won't accomplish much for anybody, but it's more constructive than throwing rocks at Israeli cars — or, on the Israeli side, better than expanding illegal settlements.

Yet the American House of Representatives voted 407 to 6 to call on the Obama administration to use its diplomatic capital to try to block the initiative, while also threatening to cut the Palestinians' funding if they proceeded to seek statehood.

Similarly, when Israel stormed into Gaza in 2008 to halt rocket attacks, more than 1,300 Gazans were killed, along with 13 Israelis, according to B'Tselem, a respected Israeli human rights group. As Gazan blood flowed, the House, by a vote of 390 to 5, hailed the invasion as "Israel's right to defend itself."

Such Congressional tomfoolery bewilders our friends and fritters away our international capital. It also encourages the intransigence of the Israeli government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and reduces the chance of a peace settlement.

Kristof apparently believes that an explicit abrogation of the Oslo Accords is praiseworthy.

He also apparently believes that Netanyahu was Prime Minister during the Gaza war.

He also believes that it has been Israeli intransigence, not the Palestinian Arab adding preconditions to negotiations in 2008, that has been the obstacle to moving forward towards an agreement.

And he believes, like many, that Israel has been "expanding" settlements - one of the biggest lies out there. Israel has not been building Jewish communities on land outside existing boundaries for many years, and the lie that Jewish communities are today continuously encroaching upon and taking over Arab-owned land is one of the more brilliant propaganda victories of the anti-Israel side.

(A good argument could be made that Israel should indeed do that - because that would lend some urgency to the PLO to restart negotiations. As it is, adding more apartments to existing communities does not affect Palestinian Arabs in the slightest way - except for providing many of them with construction jobs. )

In other words, Kristof has swallowed the Palestinian Arab lies completely and without the slightest bit of even-handed skepticism that one would hope a journalist would exhibit.
In the last few years, a former government official named Jeremy Ben-Ami has been trying to change the political dynamic in Washington with a new organization — J Street — that presses Congress and the White House to show more balance. Ben-Ami has just published a book, "A New Voice for Israel," that is a clarion call for American reasonableness in the Middle East.

"If things don't change pretty soon, chances are that the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will slip through our fingers," Ben-Ami writes. "As that happens, the dream of the Jewish people to be a free people in their own land also slowly disappears."
Only the Israeli side has made real concessions since Oslo. J-Street, and Kristof, are adamantly against pressuring the Palestinian Arab side to meet Israel halfway. And yet they claim, incongruously, that it is only Israel that needs to be pressured to give up even more!

American Jews have long trended liberal, and President Obama won 78 percent of the Jewish vote in 2008. Yet major Jewish organizations, like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or Aipac, embrace hawkish positions.
Since when is supporting a Palestinian Arab state "hawkish"? AIPAC's - and Netanyahu's - plans for a Palestinian Arab state effectively addresses all of Ben-Ami's stated fears. The problem isn't that Israel and AIPAC don't accept a two-state solution - it is that Abbas and the PLO don't accept the idea of compromising for peace. And Kristof gives them a free pass on their intransigence while calling Netanyahu a "hawk."

Kristof also shows his intellectual dishonesty on other ways:

There's also some evidence that young American Jews are growing disenchanted as Israeli society turns rightward.
And the "evidence" he links to is the famous Peter Beinart article making that claim, with little proof - and there is plenty of evidence to the contrary.

And look how Kristof characterizes "Jewish Voice for Peace":
[JVP] supports divestment campaigns against companies profiting from the occupation of Palestinian territories.
JVP also supports the "right of return" which is a code-word for destroying Israel. Why doesn't Kristof mention that? Why does he make it sound like it is merely an organization that is against "occupation"? Is he ignorant - or is he trying to hide the facts?


Kristof also throws in this nugget:
(Whenever I write about Israel, I get accused of double standards because I don't spill as much ink denouncing worse abuses by, say, Syria. I plead guilty. I demand more of Israel partly because my tax dollars supply arms and aid to Israel. I hold democratic allies like Israel to a higher standard — just as I do the U.S.)
The US also gives Kristof's tax dollars to the Palestinian Authority, where it is being used to pay salaries to terrorists and to the families of suicide bombers, where more than half of its budget goes to indirectly prop up Hamas' hold on Gaza. US aid is a much higher proportion of the PA budget than of Israel's. Kirstof's tax dollars helped pay for the second Intifada.

The principled Kristof, if he is to be consistent, should be demanding that US aid to the PA be conditional upon their continuing with existing agreements and not doing things that abrogate those agreements.

Which is exactly what Congress is doing - and what Kristof is calling "tomfoolery!"

Consistency is not what Kristof wants, though. He wants Israel to be pressured to do things that will inevitably bring more conflict to the region, not less, because he is so convinced that he knows better than most Israelis what is good for them.
פורסם על ידי zoom ב- 0:09

אין תגובות:

הוסף רשומת תגובה

הירשם ל- תגובות לפרסום (Atom)