Mideast Peace Starts With Respect
Note to Obama: The Palestinians still haven’t recognized the Jewish state.


By RONALD S. LAUDER August 11, 2009 Op Ed, Wall Street Journal

More than one American president has tried to bring peace to the Middle East, and more than one has failed. So as the Obama administration outlines its own prospectus for a comprehensive settlement to Israel’s conflict with the Palestinians and the wider Arab world, it would do well to take note of some potential pitfalls.

Rule No. 1: Respect the sovereignty of democratic allies. When free people in a democracy express their preferences, the United States should respect their opinions. The current administration should not try to impose ideas on allies like Israel.

The administration would also do well to take heed of the Palestinian Authority’s continued refusal to recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people. This is not a trivial matter. A long-term settlement can only be forged on the basis of mutual recognition and respect. To deny the essence of the Zionist project—to rebuild the Jewish people’s ancient homeland—is to call into question the seriousness of one’s commitment to peace.

It is a sad statement of the Palestinians’ approach to peace-making that denial of the Jewish homeland is not simply contained in the openly anti-Semitic leadership of Hamas. It is a widespread belief across the spectrum of Palestinian opinion. This reality must be confronted.

Today’s leadership must never forget that the core historic reason for the conflict is the Arab world’s longstanding rejection of Israel’s existence. The two-state solution was accepted by Israel’s pre-state leadership led by David Ben-Gurion in 1947 when it agreed to the partition plan contained in United Nation’s General Assembly Resolution 181. The Arabs flatly rejected it. As Secretary of State Hillary Clinton knows all too well, President Bill Clinton’s peace plans in 2000 foundered due to Palestinian rejection of the Jewish state, even as Israel, once again, accepted their right to statehood.

More recent experience in Europe also offers lessons about the dangers of negotiating with terrorists. Over the past year, officials from Britain, France and the European Union all held talks with officials from the “political wing” of Hezbollah in a bid to get the terrorist group to moderate its behavior. Hezbollah is undoubtedly grateful for the legitimacy that these meetings have conferred, but it is not laying down its arms. Indeed, according to a recent report from the Times of London, the group has now stockpiled 40,000 rockets close to the Israeli border.

To be sure, we must have hope. Peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan are useful models. Nonetheless, the recent rebuffs by Jordan, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia of efforts by the Obama administration to promote a more conciliatory attitude to Israel offer a salient reminder that those who started this conflict may not yet be in a mood to end it, whatever their rhetoric to the contrary.

And then there are the settlements. Undoubtedly, this is a complex matter. Yet the administration must beware of overemphasizing it. Compromises between people of goodwill can be made on the settlements, as Israel has demonstrated in the recent past. But no compromise can be made on Israel’s right to exist inside secure borders unmolested by terrorist groups or threatened by belligerent states.

That’s why an unambiguous strategy explaining precisely how Hamas and Hezbollah can be disarmed and how Iran can be prevented from acquiring nuclear weapons is of central importance to any peace plan.

The administration must also be wary of letting Israel’s opponents use the settlement issue as a convenient excuse for failing to make moves of their own. The settlements matter, but they do not go to the core of this decades-old conflict.

Making peace in the Middle East is an unenviable task. It is also a noble calling. To be successful, it will require patience and fortitude. It will also require an ability to stand above the fray, to see the problems for what they are, and the courage to confront them at their source.

Mr. Lauder is president of the World Jewish Congress.

Rassmussen survey: 81% Say Palestinians Must Recognize Israel’s Right To Exist As Part of Any Peace Agreement

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Eighty-one percent (81%) of U.S. voters agree with Israeli President Benjamin Netanhyahu that Palestinian leaders must recognize Israel’s right to exist as part of a Middle Eastern peace agreement.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just seven percent (7%) disagree and say this should not be a requirement for a peace agreement. Twelve percent (12%) are not sure.

But only 27% believe it is even somewhat likely that Palestinian leaders will make such a concession. Only six percent (6%) say it is very likely.

AJC: Fatah Party Heightens Tensions, Deals Blow to Peace Prospects

NEW YORK, Aug. 9 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- AJC expressed deep dismay with the Fatah Party, headed by Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas, which is holding its first general assembly in 20 years.

"While much of the world, including Israel, favors a two-state solution, the biggest obstacle remains the Palestinians' own leadership," said AJC Executive Director David Harris. "Despite hopes for political reform of Fatah, and steps to renew peace negotiations with Israel, longstanding Palestinian obstinacy and rejectionism have been the prevailing messages emerging from Bethlehem."

To point, Fatah adopted a measure demanding that Israel hand over all of Jerusalem before any peace talks can resume. This came after the unopposed Abbas was elected Fatah leader, assuring he will continue to serve as Palestinian Authority President.
"Two months ago, President Abbas firmly rejected Prime Minister Netanyahu's call in his Bar-Ilan University speech to resume direct Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations, and now Abbas ups the ante with preposterous demands on Jerusalem and other final status issues," said Harris.

"Why can't Palestinian leaders openly recognize the fact that four consecutive Israeli prime ministers have offered a two-state solution?" asked Harris. "Sixty-two years after the UN voted to establish a Jewish and an Arab state in mandatory Palestine, even so-called moderate Palestinian leaders are still saying 'no' to recognizing Israel's legitimacy."

The Fatah General Assembly is expected to continue through Tuesday. "Given the tone and substance so far, one can only wonder how much more damage to the peace process Fatah can deliver," said Harris. "The United States and the international community should recognize the regrettable fact that this Fatah leadership gathering is a slap in the face of those who seek peace and security for Israelis and Palestinians."

www.ajc.org SOURCE American Jewish Committee

Israel's Treatment.  Op Ed by James Eaves-Johnson

Published: August 5, 2009  Opinion Page, Ames Tribune

What kind of a state is Israel? Some Tribune letter writers argue that Israel should be judged based on how it treats Palestinian Arabs. Consider how Israel has treated them:

Israel ceded complete security control of Ramallah, Qalqilya, Bethlehem and Jericho to the Palestinian Authority.

Israel removed dozens of roadblocks, allowing for free travel between most Palestinian Arab population centers.

Israel has opened the border between the West Bank and Jordan to 24-hour passage of people and goods.

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has called on diaspora Jews to invest in the Palestinian Arab economy.

Israel announced plans to forcibly evacuate Jews from 23 outposts in the West Bank in a single day.

This and more has happened in just the last month as part of an accelerated plan to improve the lives of Palestinian Arabs and prepare for a stable and prosperous state. Israel has done this even as Palestinian Authority President Abbas refused to negotiate with Israel for peace.

In 2005, Israel forcibly removed 7,500 Jews from Gaza to make room for Palestinian Arabs. Even Kfar Darom, which was cleansed of Jews once before in 1948 by Egyptian forces, was not spared.

Some would prefer that Israel leave the West Bank in a similar fashion. The difference is that the Gaza withdrawal led to Hamas terrorism, war, and hardship for the people of Gaza.

Israel¹s care in withdrawing from the West Bank, while ensuring its security, is leading to unprecedented prosperity for Palestinian Arabs there.

James Eaves-Johnson

Coralville

The Radicalization of Fatah 

By Khaled Abu Toameh,    August 4, 2009 

Many in Washington and some European capitals are hoping that the Fatah faction,

which controls the Western-backed Palestinian Authority, is headed toward 

moderation and reforms as it holds its sixth general assembly in Bethlehem this week.

 

But on the eve of the conference, which is being held for the first time in two

decades, there are growing indications that Fatah is actually headed in the opposite

direction.

 

Perhaps one of the most disturbing signs of the growing radicalization of Fatah can

be seen in calls by top representatives for a "strategic alliance" with Iran's dictatorial

and fundamental regime.

 

In January 2006, Fatah lost the parliamentary election in the West Bank and Gaza

Strip to Hamas largely because of its leaders' involvement in financial and moral

corruption. Since then, not a single Fatah official has been held responsible for the

humiliating defeat. Nor has Fatah drawn the conclusions from its expulsion from the

Gaza Strip in the summer of 2007.

 

Hopes that the conference would pave the way for the emergence of a new and

younger leadership have faded as old guard officials of Fatah appear determined to

hold on to their positions regardless of the price.

 

Fatah is therefore unlikely to emerge stronger and younger from its sixth general

assembly. By adopting a hard-line approach toward the conflict and blocking reforms,

Fatah is sending a message both to the Palestinians and the world that it's still not

ready for any form of compromise or reforms. As such, Fatah remains part of the

problem, and not part of the solution. 

 

During the three-day conference, about 2,200 delegates would be required to vote for

new members of Fatah's two most important decision-making bodies: the Central

Committee [21 seats] and the Revolutionary Council [120 seats].

 

The Central Committee has long been dominated by old timers and former cronies of

Yasser Arafat who over the past four decades have stubbornly resisted attempts to

inject fresh blood into the committee.

 

The Revolutionary Council, on the other hand, consists of representatives of both the

old guard and the new guard. But this council has never been taken seriously and its

decisions are regarded by the Fatah leadership as nothing but mere recommendations.

 

Days before the conference was opened in Bethlehem, Fatah members were surprised

to discover that Mahmoud Abbas and his old guard colleagues had selected more

than half of the delegates who were invited to the meeting.

 

In protest, young guard representatives decided to drop their candidacy for the

prestigious Central Committee after realizing that their chances of beating the old

guard members were slim, if not impossible. This means that the committee will

continue to be controlled by former Arafat cronies, some of whom are even publicly

opposed to the Oslo Accords with Israel.

 

To further strengthen the old guard camp, Abbas sought and received permission

from Israel to allow Mohammed Ghnaim, a hard-line Fatah leader, to move from

Tunisia to the West Bank. Ghnaim is one of a handful of senior Fatah leaders who

remain strongly opposed to the Oslo Accords, insisting that the "armed struggle"

against Israel is the only way to "liberate Palestine."

 

Ghnaim is now being touted as Abbas's successor as head of Fatah and the

Palestinian Authority as to ensure the continuity of the old guard hegemony over the

affairs of the Palestinians in the West Bank.

 

Many Fatah operatives, including some of Abbas's closest allies in Ramallah, have

made it known that they would oppose any move to abandon the "armed struggle"

option during the Bethlehem assembly.

 

Their statements came in response to reports according to which the Fatah

conference is set to endorse a more moderate and pragmatic approach toward the

conflict with Israel.

 

Moreover, a majority of Fatah members appear to be vehemently opposed to the idea

of recognizing Israel as a Jewish state. A draft plan of Fatah's political platform that

was leaked to some Arab media outlets last week clearly states that Fatah will remain

strongly opposed to Israel's demand that the Palestinians recognize the state as a

homeland for the Jewish people.

 

In other signs of continued intransigence, the political platform opposes any

concessions regarding the "right of return" of Palestinians to their original homes

inside Israel. 

UJC Mourns Victims of TA Shooting

August 4, 2009

UJC/The Jewish Federations of North America mourns the fatal shooting of two young Israelis at a gay youth center in Tel Aviv this past weekend.



Those killed were Liz Trubeshi, 16, of Holon and Nir Katz, 26, of Givatayim. Fifteen others were injured.



According to news reports, a masked attacker walked into a community center for gay and lesbian youth on Nachmani Street around 11 p.m. Saturday, firing an automatic rifle indiscriminately. No one has been arrested and police are considering that the attack was either a hate crime or motivated by a personal dispute.


"We are appalled and saddened by the murders at the Tel Aviv Gay and Lesbian Association," said UJC President and CEO Howard Rieger. "Our hearts go out to the families and friends of the victims and we hope the attacker will be swiftly brought to justice."



Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has also condemned the attack as a violation of Israel's democratic values, and called for greater tolerance. Memorial ceremonies have been held in Jerusalem, Tel Aviv and Washington, DC.



May the families of the victims be comforted among the mourners of Zion and Jerusalem and may the names of the victims be forever as a blessing.
       



To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
leave-3660282-5847217U@lyris.ujcfedweb.org <mailto:leave-3660282-5847217U@lyris.ujcfedweb.org>

Israel report on Gaza War rejects charges one by one

Ynetnews: Israel published an official 160-page report on Operation Cast Lead, the military offensive launched in the Gaza Strip in January.

Jerusalem Post: Defending Israeli actions, the government report said it was not meant to be an "assertion of infallibility," but rejected the charges one by one, attributing excessive damage and casualties to understandable wartime mistakes.

The report said Israel is investigating about 100 complaints and has opened 13 criminal inquiries. A military statement Thursday said criminal cases under investigation now number 15.

Ynetnews: Thursday's report holds Hamas responsible for the need for military operation, citing that the incessant rocket fire on Israel's south made a military strike inevitable, and that Israel did not violate international law.

In the report, Israel admits that despite taking precautionary measures, many Palestinian civilians were wounded and killed during the operation and severe property damages was inflicted.

Nevertheless, the reports states that civilian casualties and property damage do not, by themselves, constitute a violation of international law.

Hamas rocket fire was aimed at civilian population rendering it a clear violation of international law, while Israel's strikes were aimed at Hamas military targets and therefore did not breach it, said the report.

The report, dubbed "Israel's statement of defense," said that "Israel had both a right and an obligation to take military action against Hamas in Gaza to stop Hamas’
almost incessant rocket and mortar attacks upon thousands of Israeli civilians and its other acts of terrorism.

"Israel was bombarded by some 12,000 rockets and mortar shells between 2000 and 2008, including nearly 3,000 rockets and mortar shells in 2008 alone… These deliberate attacks caused deaths, injuries, and extensive property damage; forced businesses to close; and terrorized tens of thousands of residents into abandoning their homes."