Capturing the MidEast in short soundbites: poignant
reflections by people who understand the complexities of the Middle East. My philosophy is: "less is more."
You won't agree with everything that's here, but I'm confident you will find it interesting!
Excepting the titles, my own comments are minimal. Instead I rely on news sources to string together what I hope is an interesting, politically challenging, non-partisan, non-ideological narrative.
While the U.S. government has pressured Erdogan not to visit the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip, Erdogan announced in the White House Rose Garden that he would do so. An alleged U.S. ally says publicly in front of Obama while being hosted by him that he is going to defy the United States.
This is not some routine matter. With previous presidents, if an ally was going to do something like that he would say nothing at the time and then months later would subvert U.S. policy. Or better yet the foreign leader would not do so. To announce defiance in such a way is a serious sign of how little respect Middle East leaders have for Obama—and U.S. policy nowadays—and how little Obama will do about it.
Meanwhile, Obama has praised Erdogan unstintingly. Obama thinks Erdogan is the very model of a “moderate Islamist” and since Obama's strategy is to support such people in much of the Arab world, Erdogan has been his guide to the region, though this has meant supporting the radical Islamists of the Muslim Brotherhood.
What is especially ironic is that Obama believed that Erdogan's goals were essentially the same as those of the United States while Erdogan was in fact following a profoundly anti-American policy designed to bring hostile Islamist governments to power. Remember this is no longer the old Western-oriented Turkey of previous decades but a radical--if concealed--Islamist regime.
In a clear warning to Syria, a senior Israeli official told the New York Times: "Israel is determined to continue to prevent the transfer of advanced weapons to Hizbullah....If Syrian President Assad reacts by attacking Israel, or tries to strike Israel through his terrorist proxies, he will risk forfeiting his regime, for Israel will retaliate."
"Israel has so far refrained from intervening in Syria's civil war and will maintain this policy as long as Assad refrains from attacking Israel directly or indirectly....Israel will continue its policy of interdicting attempts to strengthen Hizbullah, but will not intercede in the Syrian civil war as long as Assad desists from direct or indirect attacks against Israel." (New York Times)
Iran has convinced Syrian President Bashar Assad to allow Hizbullah to open a front against Israel in the Golan Heights, Al-Hayat reported. (Ha'aretz) *
Report: Iranian Commander to Lead Fight Against Israel - Nimdor Sabal Officials in Baghdad said that Iran's supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, has given Maj.-Gen. Qasem Suleimani, commander of the Quds Force of the Revolutionary Guards, the responsibility of managing the struggle against Israel via Syrian territory, the Lebanese newspaper Almustaqbal reported. (Ynet News)
Iran's Plans to Take Over Syria- Shimon Shapira Gen. Suleimani has prepared an operational plan for the establishment of a 150,000-man force for Syria, the majority of whom will come from Iran, Iraq, and a smaller number from Hizbullah and the Gulf states. (ICA-Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs) *
The above video features a debate on the nature of Radical Islam.
Rabbi Mark Golub of Shalom TV [cable] leads this excellent debate between Daniel Pipes, PhD and Rabbi Eric Yoffie. Dr. Pipes is a MidEast Scholar; Rabbi Yoffie is the former head of Reform Judaism. While this one hour video is clearly not a "soundbite," I feel my readers would benefit from this fascinating exchange.
Despite Egyptian and Iranian condemnation, it is certain that the Syrian people were happy that Assad's warehouses and forces were shelled, regardless of Israel's reasoning. We were happy that Israel attacked Assad's forces and warehouses because the attack will speed up the collapse of the regime. It will also deprive the regime of weapons that would have been used to kill more Syrians. Two years' worth of massacres against tens of thousands of unarmed Syrians has revealed the biggest lie in this nation's history: the lie of resistance. (Al Arabiya)
The Israeli strikes on Syria have left Arab observers conflicted. While many have been hoping for a decisive military strike against President Assad, few expected or wished for it to come from Israel. One Damascus-based Twitter commentator wrote: Israel "is still my enemy....But when an enemy does a neat job, I admit it." (Times of Israel)
*
The Israeli attack enjoyed a relatively high degree of legitimacy, from Western recognition of the move as one of self-defense (President Obama) to the Sunni world's pleasure at the distress of the Syrian and Iranian regimes and Hizbullah. The satisfaction with the attack in the Gulf and Saudi Arabia was hard to hide. Maj.-Gen. (ret.) Amos Yadlin is director of INSS.
(Institute for National Security Studies-Tel Aviv University)
Israel has inserted itself forcefully into the Arab Spring's most intractable
conflict...
The bombings of targets near the Syrian capital — including two strikes in a
48-hour period beginning Friday — represent a risk-laden strategy based on the
calculation that retaliatory attacks against Israel by Syria or its allies are
unlikely.
But even as some Israeli officials confirmed their military's involvement in
Sunday's pre-dawn assault on a reported weapons compound, they insisted their
goals in Syria are narrow, and portrayed the engagement as defensive and largely
unrelated to the two-year uprising against Syrian President Bashar Assad.
Rather than trying to weaken Assad or tilt the scales for either side,
Israelis say they have an eye on the prospective next war — against the Lebanese
militant group Hezbollah, which is backed by both Iran and Syria.
The aim of the airstrikes, Israeli officials say, is to prevent Syria's
advanced weaponry, much of it made in Iran, from being transferred to Lebanon
and Hezbollah.
"If we don't take action now, we will be on the receiving end of those
missiles," said a senior Israeli government official who spoke on the condition
of anonymity because Israel has not officially confirmed unleashing the attacks. [Jewish World Review]
A Message for Iran-Blake Hounshell Taking out Iran's fortified and far-flung nuclear facilities would be vastly more challenging than hitting a few warehouses in nearby Damascus.
But the intended lesson here for Tehran (and Washington) is clear: Israel will defend itself when threatened, and we mean what we say. (Foreign Policy) Israel Targeted Iranian Missiles -Anne Barnard, Michael R. Gordon & Jodi Rudoren
The airstrike that Israel carried out in Syria was directed at a shipment of advanced surface-to-surface missiles from Iran that Israel believed was intended for Hizbullah, American officials said.
Iran and Hizbullah have a powerful interest in expediting the delivery of advanced weapons to Hizbullah. The Iranian missiles were being stored in a warehouse at Damascus International Airport when they were struck, according to an American official. Israel has repeatedly cautioned that it will not allow Hizbullah to receive "game changing" weapons that could threaten the Israeli heartland. "The Israelis are saying, 'O.K., whichever way the civil war is going, we are going to keep our red lines, which are different from Obama's,'" said Ehud Yaari, a fellow of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
An American official said the targeted shipment consisted of Iranian-made Fateh-110s - a mobile, accurate, solid-fueled missile that has the range to strike Tel Aviv. Two prominent Israeli defense analysts said the shipment included Scud Ds with a range long enough to reach Eilat. An American official said the warehouse struck was believed to be under the control of Hizbullah and Iran's Quds Force.
President Obama said, "The Israelis, justifiably, have to guard against the transfer of advanced weaponry to terrorist organizations like Hizbullah." (New York Times)
Israeli Airstrikes Expose Flaws in Syrian Air Defenses, Embolden U.S. -Brian Bennett "The Russian-supplied air defense systems are not as good as said," Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) told NBC's "Meet the Press." Leahy said the Israel Defense Forces was using American-made F-16 jets to launch the missiles against Syrian targets. "Keep in mind the Israelis are using weapons supplied by us," Leahy said. "They have enormous prowess with those weapons." (Los Angeles Times)
The Syrian regime is like a dead body waiting to be buried - this is what the Israeli air strikes demonstrated. (Asharq Al-Awsat-UK)
Israel Enforcing Red Lines on Syria-Yaakov Lappin The two aerial strikes on Damascus reportedly carried out by the Israel Air Force are likely the result of intelligence indicating an imminent attempt to transfer strategic weapons from Syria to Hizbullah.
With Hizbullah deploying up to half of its fighting force to Syria to help Assad, it will be seeking reward for its actions. Hizbullah and its patron Iran may have asked Assad to make the advanced weapons available.
Israel is prepared to enforce its red lines on weapons proliferation with Hizbullah and take a calculated risk now, to avoid facing a significantly worse strategic situation later. (Jerusalem Post)
Message to Iran-Ron Ben-Yishai According to foreign sources, the Assad regime already succeeded to transfer a small number of Scud D missiles to Hizbullah in Lebanon two-and-a-half years ago. Israel was aware but refrained from acting due to Washington's objection. The Americans feared an Israeli attack would undermine stability in the Middle East, and the Israeli jets, which were already in the air, returned to base.
It is safe to assume that since then the Obama administration has changed its position on the issue.
Washington is making sure to leak to all American media outlets that Israel attacked and what the target was, after Assad's regime tried to "save face" and conceal the blow it had received. The Obama administration, in accordance with its new agreements with Israel, is trying to show Syria and its supporters - Iran, Russia and China - that the U.S. stands by Israel when it protects itself. (Ynet News)
*
U.S. officials said the U.S. and Israel have reached an understanding that they will assess the intentions of Iran's leaders after the June elections, and then, barring progress on the diplomatic track, shift to a detailed discussion of military options. (Wall Street Journal)
*
UPDATE:
Obama and Netanyahu's New Red Line on Iran-Ron Ben-Yishai According to various reports, the American president and Israeli prime minister agreed on a new plan to block Iran's nuclear program, which calls for narrowing the gap between the Israeli and American red lines. Obama promised Netanyahu that if diplomatic efforts fail and the economic sanctions do not dissuade Iran from building an atomic bomb, the U.S. would act militarily to thwart these efforts.
The American leader also gave Netanyahu the "yellow light" for a unilateral operation against Iran. The light will turn green should the Israeli government conclude, after consulting with Washington, that it must bomb Iran in order to defend itself. Israel's promise to consult with the U.S. prior to a go-it-alone attack will secure Washington's diplomatic, military and logistical support - even if the White House believes the time has not yet come for military action in Iran.
During his meeting with Obama, Netanyahu clarified that Israel realizes the U.S. has superior capabilities which can delay or even destroy Iran's nuclear program - capabilities Israel does not have. Therefore, Israel prefers to wait for America to act on its own against Iran. Should Israel feel that it must act unilaterally, it wants to do so only after securing America's assistance. (Ynet News)
Fatah representatives praised as a hero Salam As'ad Zaghal, the Palestinian attacker who stabbed to death Evyatar Borowsky, a 31-year-old father of five, at a West Bank bus stop. Fatah posted pictures from the scene of the attack on its official Facebook page, accompanying each image with a caption boasting of the stabber's "success." Officials also expressed hope that he would be quickly released from prison. (Times of Israel) *
According to a Pew poll released May 9, Israelis, on balance, believe a way can be found for an independent Palestinian state to coexist peacefully with their country.
Palestinians, on the other hand, overwhelmingly do not think this is possible, and a plurality believes armed struggle rather than negotiations or nonviolent resistance is the best way to achieve statehood.
83% of Israelis view the U.S. favorably, while 79% of Palestinians view it unfavorably.
In the region, 86% or more in Lebanon, Jordan, the Palestinian territories, Egypt, Tunisia and Turkey have an unfavorable view of Israel.
Majorities in France, Germany and China also express negative opinions of the Jewish state.
The U.S. is the only country surveyed where a majority (57%) gives Israel a favorable rating.
The Pentagon has stepped up planning for potential military intervention in the Syrian civil war. A senior administration official said U.S. intervention is not likely to involve troops on the ground in Syria. Two other officials say the most likely options would be using cruise missiles to try to destroy chemical sites or the headquarters of Syrian military elements linked to them. U.S. Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey has told Congress the military could not secure the entire chemical stockpile because it does not know where it's all located. (CNN)
After the United States revealed last week that it now believes Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has used chemical weapons against rebel forces, the Israel Air Force reportedly struck a Syrian chemical weapons site near Damascus over the weekend.
The Free Syrian Army (FSA) rebel group posted a video of smoke rising from a chemical weapons site that it claims Israeli jets struck on Saturday, the Israeli newspaper Maariv reported. FSA said the jets flew over the palace of Assad before the strike, and that a Syrian air defense battery went on to fire at the jets. Neither Israeli nor Syrian officials have confirmed the reported strike. [The Algemeiner]
It was [Obama] who stated that Syrian use of chemical weapons constituted a red line
that warrant American action. It was he, and not the Israelis, who publicly
expressed the belief that Assad had to go. If, even after the White House
admitted proof existed of the use of deadly poisons like sarin, the United
States does nothing, it will effectively destroy his credibility.
Friends of Israel are watching to see what happens when a foreign leader
crosses what President Obama defined as a red line, as he did in Syria. If the
answer is nothing, they'll have a better grasp of what they can expect out of
the administration on Iran. But there should be no doubt about who set this red line about what is going
on in Damascus. It wasn't Israel, Netanyahu or the pro-Israel community in the
United States. The impetus to take a stand on Syria came from a president who was eager to
place himself on the side of Arab Spring protesters against authoritarian
regimes. No one was more vocal than Obama when it came to supporting the ouster
of dictators... [Jewish World Review]
*
[W]ho used the nerve gas? UN investigators are concluding thatthe rebels might have used it. I am no expert but I think it is possible that this is true on the following basis: The attack was on a very small scale in a non-critical area of fighting.
If the Syrian government was going to use chemical weapons it would be in a critical battle where victory was imperative and there were lots of enemy soldiers to kill and to terrify. This is what happened in the Iran-Iraq war.
Again, I want to stress that I am not claiming to know which side did it in a conflict where events are often mysterious and it is hard to be certain whether, for example, a claimed massacre did take place. There are no good guys, if we're speaking of the two sides in general.
Each day more and more reports come out about
the information US agencies had — for years — regarding the threat posed by the
Boston Marathon bombers.
But how could the FBI have possibly acted on
those threats? Obama has outlawed all discussion or study of jihad, Islamism,
radical Islam and the Koran by US federal government agencies. The only law
enforcement agency that monitors Islamic websites is the New York Police
Department.
And its chief Ray Kelly has bravely maintained his policy
despite massive pressure from the media and the political class to end his
surveillance operations.
Everywhere else, from the Boston Police
Department to the FBI and CIA, US officials are barred from discussing the
threat posed by jihadists or even acknowledging they exist. People were
impressed that Obama referred to the terrorist attack in Boston as a terrorist
attack, because according to the administration-dictated federal lexicon, use of
the word terrorism is forbidden, particularly when the act in question was
perpetrated by Muslims. [Jewish World Review]
*
It is one thing for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev to be seen on security camera videos placing one of the bombs that killed three people at last week's Boston Marathon.
But now he's really crossed a line. Tsarnaev is telling investigators he and his brother were motivated by religion to plot their carnage, media reports citing anonymous federal sources say. Radical Islam. It's a label banned by the Obama administration. National Islamist groups say it doesn't belong in conversations about terrorism. Tsarnaev didn't get the memo. Recovering from multiple gunshot wounds, Dzhokhar told investigators from his hospital bed that he and his brother Tamerlan Tsarnaev were driven by religious fervor and took their instructions from al-Qaida's Inspire magazine, NBC News reports. The Tsarnaev case threatens the Islamist narrative that radical Islamic ideology in terror attacks should be ignored or minimized. [Jewish World Review]
[The Boston Marathon attack] will not bring American opinion together; if the "United We Stand" slogan lasted brief months after 9/11, consensus after Boston will be even more elusive. The violence will not lead to Israeli-like security measures in the United States. Nor will it lead to a greater preparedness to handle deadly sudden jihad syndrome violence. It will not end the dispute over the motives behind indiscriminate Muslim violence against non-Muslims. And it certainly will not help resolve current debates over immigration or guns.
What it will do is very important: it will prompt some Westerners to conclude that Islamism is a threat to their way of life. Indeed, every act of Muslim aggression against non-Muslims, be it violent or cultural, recruits more activists to the anti-jihad cause. Education by murder is the name I gave this process in 2002; we who live in democracies learn best about Islamism when blood flows in the streets. Muslims began with an enormous stock of good will because the Western DNA includes sympathy for foreigners, minorities, the poor, and people of color. Islamists then dissipate this good will by engaging in atrocities or displaying supremacist attitudes. High profile terrorism in the West - 9/11, Bali, Madrid, Beslan, London – moves opinion more than anything else. [The Washington Times]
*
The photo above depicts the bomber coolly passing behind the little boy he murdered at the Boston Marathon. The bag he left is visible, circled in red.
Two
kids paralyzed an American city with great ease just by being willing to
sacrifice their lives if necessary, which is after all the whole theory of the
suicide terrorism, we-believe-in-death-you-believe-in-life school of
thought.
Whether
or not they had some brief training in bomb making and didn’t just take the
Internet course isn’t that important. And remember that the Chechen nationalist
movements have no interest in attacking the United States. This was al-Qaida, as
we can see from the selection of You-Tube videos by one of the bombers.
When
I was watching the September 11 attacks on television, an announcer said, “From
now on, everything will be different.” And I said out loud to the television
set: “No, it won’t.”
For
many years before 2001 I carried with me a secret. When reporters would ask me,
“Why haven’t terrorists targeted the United States directly?” I didn’t
answer.
That’s
because the answer was: “Because they haven’t yet realized how easy it would be
to do that.”
I
didn’t want to be the one who tipped them off. Back then, in the 1980s and
1990s, the Islamist terrorists knew they didn’t know America very well. Also, I
suspect, they couldn’t believe how open the United States was, that there
weren’t policemen who would follow them around because they were Muslim and
Middle Eastern.
Here’s
the irony: Only when the terrorist leaders realized that Islamophobia
was not a big factor in the United States could they resolve to
attack the United States with a belief that they would succeed.
The Tsarnaev brothers pulled off their terrorist attack with great skill but made a fatal mistake in letting their faces and bodies be seen at a heavily photographed international sporting event. This meant that multiple images of them were available for a massive law enforcement squad to comb over and, after three days, identify them by name and appearance.
This rapid identification was not unprecedented – the London police had done likewise in the July 2005 suicide bombings but because none of the four perpetrators survived that attack, that was more a theoretical achievement than a practical one. To the best of my knowledge, the Tsarnaevs were the first terrorists to be tracked down via still and video pictures.
Obviously, they should have put on Islamic full body covers that show only the eyes (niqabs) or nothing at all (burqas). These garments have multiple and unique virtues, totally hiding the wearers identity; being legitimate attire in any weather and in any place; permitting the discreet transport of weapons; giving off the helpfully false impression of being worn by women, which both reduces suspicion and misleads witnesses; usefully creating a social barrier; maximizing personal prerogatives; and being ideologically appropriate, sending an unmistakable Islamist signal.
The niqab exposes the eyes, which is a drawback that sunglasses can compensate for; and it has the great virtue of allowing the terrorist to see around him better than the burqa.
One must expect future non-suicide bombers to turn to niqabs or burqas. (As many terrorists and criminals repeatedly have done so: see my 16,000-word blog on this topic.)
But why wait for them to engage in more murders? Why close the barn door only after the horse has run away? Far smarter would be to ban the niqab and burqa in public places now, before tragedy occurs. [National Review Online]
*
Pounding Square Pegs into Round Roles- Norvell B. DeAtkine
The demonstrated ineffectiveness of Arab armies in conventional warfare does not apply to the parameters of unconventional warfare, where insurgents displayed initiative and imagination. A number of factors account for this difference.
The guerilla usually had leadership sharpened by battle as well as experience and exuded the confidence that motivated others to follow him - as opposed to a conventional unit commander most likely picked by the regime for political reasons. Moreover, the guerilla was apt to be with those of his own ethnic group, clan, or tribe. The unconventional soldier is fighting within his element with people he trusts. (GLORIA Center-IDC Herzliya)
*
Dr. Alasdair Conn [pictured in rear], chief of emergency services at Massachusetts General Hospital where many of the wounded from Monday's bombing attack were treated, credited Israel with training the hospital's first-response team and readying it to deal with mass-casualty incidents.
Two years ago, the Israelis "helped us set up our disaster team so that we could respond in this kind of manner." (Times of Israel) *
The surviving suspect in the terror attack at the Boston Marathon, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, and 24 of those injured - 16 in serious condition, are being treated by an Israeli.
Prof. Kevin (Ilan) Tabb, 49, is the director of Boston's Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, a teaching hospital of Harvard Medical School. "Unfortunately, I have had a lot of experience with these types of injuries after years of treating people injured in terror attacks in Israel," said Tabb, a member of the board of Hadassah Ein Kerem hospital in Jerusalem, where he studied medicine and completed his residency. (Ynet News) *
The explosives used in the deadly Boston Marathon bombing were contained in 6-liter pressure cookers and hidden in black duffel bags on the ground, a person briefed on the investigation told The Associated Press.
One of the explosives contained shards of metal and ball bearings, and another contained nails, the person said.
These types of pressure cooker explosives have been used in Afghanistan, India, Nepal and Pakistan, according to a July 2010 joint FBI and Homeland Security intelligence report. One of the three devices used in the May 2010 Times Square attempted bombing was a pressure cooker, the intelligence report said.
"Placed carefully, such devices provide little or no indication of an impending attack," the report said.
The Pakistani Taliban, which claimed responsibility for the 2010 attempt in Times Square, has denied any role in the Boston Marathon attack.
Investigators have a suspect — a Saudi Arabian national — in the horrific Boston Marathon bombings. Law enforcement sources said the 20-year-old suspect was under guard at an undisclosed Boston hospital.
Fox News reported that the suspect suffered severe burns. It was not immediately clear why the man was hospitalized and whether he was injured in the attack or in his apprehension. The man was caught less than two hours after the 2:50 p.m. bombing on the finish line of the race, in the heart of Boston.
In addition, Boston police have surveillance video of someone bringing multiple backpacks to blast site, according to CBS News.
A law enforcement source confirmed to The Post that 12 people were killed and nearly 50 were injured in today's blast. [New York Post]
*
A U.S. law enforcement official and the uncle of the suspects in the Boston
Marathon bombings are confirming that the name of the second suspect is Tamerlan
Tsarnaev, the older brother of Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, 19.
Tamerlan Tsarnaev was killed in a gun battle with police in Massachusetts
overnight.
The uncle, Ruslan Tsarni of Montgomery Village, Md., told The Associated
Press that the men lived together near Boston and have been in the United States
for about a decade. They traveled here together from the Russian region near
Chechnya.
The two suspects in the Boston Marathon bombing are believed to have killed
an MIT police officer, injured a transit officer in a firefight and threw
explosive devices at police during their getaway attempt in a long night of
violence that left the older brother dead and the younger one still at large, authorities said.
In May of 2011, Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, then a senior at a prestigious high
school, was awarded a $2,500 scholarship from the city of Cambridge, Mass., to
pursue higher education. Now, Tsarnaev is on the run, described as "armed and
dangerous" and suspected of the Boston Marathon bombing.
Two brothers, one now dead, one alive and at large. After hours of only
grainy images of two men in baseball caps to go on, a portrait gradually started
emerging Friday of the men suspected in the attack.
They came from the Russian region near Chechnya, which has been plagued by an
Islamic insurgency stemming from separatist wars.
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's page on the Russian social networking site Vkontakte says
he attended Cambridge Rindge and Latin School, graduating in 2011, the year he
won the scholarship, which was celebrated with a reception at City Hall,
according to a news release issued at the time.
Before moving to the United States, he attended School No. 1 in Makhachkala,
the capital of Dagestan, a predominantly Muslim republic in Russia's North
Caucasus that has become an epicenter of the Islamic insurgency that spilled
over from Chechnya. On the site, he describes himself as speaking Chechen as
well as English and Russian. His world view is described as
"Islam"... [Associated Press]
*
Conflict Is Not Primarily over Territory- Barak Ravid A senior Israeli official involved in the talks held in Jerusalem with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said that Israel opposes Kerry's proposal to resume negotiations with the PA on the basis of discussing border and security issues alone. The official said that Kerry "thinks that the conflict is primarily over territory...and that is wrong." "Israel opposes placing the issues of borders and security at the preliminary stage of negotiations, and we said this to Kerry. On this issue, there is full consent among all the ministers dealing with the Palestinian subject, including Tzipi Livni."
Israel demands that if negotiations are to be resumed, they will need to address, in parallel, all core issues of the final settlement - including recognition of Israel as a Jewish state and a solution to the refugee problem. "If the discussion commences with talks about borders and security, Israel will only give, and will get almost nothing in return," the official said. "When we get to the issues where the Palestinians will need to give something up - like the right of return - we won't have any bargaining chips left."
In addition, Israel also opposes making significant gestures toward the Palestinians before the resumption of negotiations. Off the table are any moves such as releasing prisoners, transferring weapons to the PA's security services, and the promotion of economic projects that would require the transfer of land to Palestinian control. "There is no problem with setting up sewage treatment plants, schools or roads in Area C. But if we're talking about transferring land through economic projects, then we're not ready to do so. If negotiations are renewed, we will be willing to perform many gestures and steps, but they will take place as part of a process that is already underway." (Ha'aretz)*
Fatah leaders are yearning for the days of Yasser Arafat, when they were able to steal international aid earmarked for helping Palestinians.
The Palestinians' problem with [Salam] Fayyad [pictured] is that he did not sit even one day in an Israeli prison. For them, graduating from an Israeli prison is even more important that going to any university.
PA President Mahmoud Abbas and Fatah leaders see U.S.-educated Salam Fayyad, who was appointed PA prime minister in 2007 at the request of the U.S. and EU countries, as a threat to their control over the Palestinian Authority and its finances.
Some Fatah leaders, such as Tawfik Tirawi and Najat Abu Baker, are even convinced that Fayyad is plotting, together with the U.S. and other Western countries, to replace Abbas. Were it not for U.S. and EU intervention, Abbas and Fatah would have removed Fayyad from his job several years ago.
Each time Abbas considered sacking Fayyad, U.S. and EU government officials stepped in to warn that such a move would seriously affect foreign aid to the Palestinian Authority.
Yet these efforts have been counterproductive and have further discredited Fayyad in the eyes of many Palestinians. Fayyad's enemies have cited these efforts as "proof" that he is a "foreign agent."
Fatah's main problem with Fayyad is that he has almost exclusive control over the PA budget. Fatah does not like the idea that its leaders can no longer steal international aid because of Fayyad's presence.
Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad has resigned once again. What's news, however, is that PA "President" Mahmoud Abbas has accepted it.
While it's hard to believe that Fayyad will finally be ousted--the Western donors want him in power--the continuing frustrations of the only honest and relatively moderate Palestinian officialshows that the PA has made no progress toward moderation, state-building, or real economic success.
This is despite what might be the highest per capita foreign aid in world history. It also sheds new light on what often seems to be the the world's best-kept secret: The Palestinian leadership doesn't want a peaceful solution with Israel. [The Rubin Report] *
Fayyad's Resignation: The Beginning of the End of the PA?- Barak Ravid The resignation of PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad on Saturday will affect Israel and the Obama administration's efforts to renew the peace process, as well as EU policy towards the Palestinians. Fayyad, a former IMF economist educated in the U.S., was a symbol of good governance and the war on corruption. But PA President Mahmoud Abbas and the Fatah party's old guard saw Fayyad as a political rival who needed to be eliminated.
Fayyad's resignation will place a question mark on the prospect of continued international aid to the PA without Fayyad guarding the public coffers. (Ha'aretz)
Resignation: Bad News- Jonathan S. Tobin The resignation of PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad lays bare the collapse of the hope that Palestinian nationalism would be refocused on development and coexistence rather than violence. It dooms the Palestinians to a choice between the incompetent cadres of Fatah or the bloody Islamist tyranny of Hamas.
Without Fayyad (or someone like him), there is no pretense of a state living in peace with Israel, rather than a kleptocracy run by terrorists. It is also a guarantee that the terms of any peace deal signed with the Palestinians will not be observed.
Fayyad's tragedy was not just that both Fatah and Hamas wanted to be rid of him, but that he had virtually no support among ordinary Palestinians. (New York Post)
Fayyad's Departure- Hugh Naylor The resignation of Salam Fayyad may signal a resurgence of old-style politics in the West Bank, with a focus on backroom deal-making and patronage. Appointed by President Abbas to the premiership in 2007, Fayyad streamlined the PA's bloated budget while reining in corruption and dismantling the militant groups that had roamed the West Bank. The result was more stability and glimmers of economic prosperity. (The National-UAE) *
The Fayad Resignation: Scapegoating a State-Builder- David Makovsky The departure of PA Prime Minister Salam Fayad could be a blow to the Palestinians, particularly in terms of how much international aid they receive. Fayad became the PA's finance minister in 2002 upon demand by donor countries who were concerned that their contributions were being diverted for corruption. Before he took office, PA security personnel were paid via paper bags full of cash. Fayad insisted that every PA employee have a bank account and be paid on time. After Hamas took over Gaza in 2007, Fayad became prime minister and security cooperation with Israel became the norm.
His tenure has been defined by institution-building, in which the PA built schools, health clinics, hospitals, paved roads and installed water pipes. In particular, Fayad's embrace of economic transparency - which included U.S.-led audits - was instrumental in attracting increased international aid.
Fayad repeatedly warned that Abbas' statehood bids at the UN would spur Washington to cut off aid, and Israel to halt the transfer of Palestinian tax revenues. Nevertheless, he was blamed for the economic downturn that resulted. The writer is director of The Washington Institute's Project on the Middle East Peace Process. (Washington Institute for Near East Policy) *
A New Challenge for Palestinians- Aaron David Miller The resignation of Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad has the potential to inject clarity and honesty into the discussion. Hamas said that Fayyad was a major obstacle to the formation of a unity government in the territories. Fayyad's departure will help reveal that Palestinian unity is an illusion, that what divides the Palestinians are fundamental differences over what Palestine is and even where it should be.
Fayyad's resignation highlights the leadership crisis in the Palestinian national movement. If PA President Mahmoud Abbas were to leave the scene, Fatah itself might split.
There is no obvious, nationally recognized figure who could hold the Palestinian Authority together. The name usually mentioned as a possibility, Fatah leader Marwan Barghouti, is currently serving several life sentences in an Israeli prison. The writer is a distinguished scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. (Los Angeles Times)
*
Fayyad was nothing more than a Western delusion, like Arab peace with Israel.
Fayyad didn't have a chance of leading the Palestinians because he never
personally killed a Jew. And the Palestinians only accept murderers as their
leaders. But the fact that he never killed a Jew personally didn't render Fayyad
a partner for Israel.
Fayyad dutifully used donor funds to pay the salaries of terrorists in Judea,
Samaria and Gaza every month. He led the Palestinian branch of the boycott, divestment and sanctions war
against Israel. He made working for Israelis and buying Israeli goods criminal
offenses. Fayyad personally led raids into private homes to inspect people's
refrigerators to see if they had Israeli cottage cheese on their shelves. He
organized and attended bonfires where they burned Israeli goods.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but this is not the sort of behavior you
would expect a peace partner to engage in. [Jewish World Review]
*
After Obama snubbed the PA on his recent trip [twice], Palestinians kick sand in Obama's face
Efforts to Revive Peace Process Run Adrift-Robert Tait Palestinian sources said U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry during his current visit to Israel and the West Bank suggested reviving the Arab Peace Initiative - first proposed by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia in 2002 - as a basis for re-starting talks between Israel and the Palestinians, which have been stalled for the past three years. Kerry was said to have proposed wording that would soften the initiative's demand for Israel to withdraw to pre-1967 borders, saying they could be modified by mutual agreement, while inserting stronger security guarantees for Israel.
"Kerry asked us to change a few words in the Arab Peace Initiative but we refused," said Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator.
The plan, which calls for Israel's complete withdrawal from the West Bank and east Jerusalem, has been accepted by the Arab League but rejected by Israeli leaders on the grounds that it would leave the county with indefensible borders. (Telegraph-UK) *
The latest round of negotiations on Iran's nuclear program was, by all accounts, a disappointment. Tehran's negotiators did not spell out a full response to a proposal by the U.S. and five partners for limiting its enrichment of uranium, and what they did say revealed a wide gulf between the two sides.
The international coalition is offering Iran a partial lifting of sanctions in exchange for a freeze on the production of medium-enriched uranium, while Iran wants a complete lifting of sanctions in exchange for token steps that would leave its nuclear work unfettered. The Obama administration and its allies rightly refused Iranian requests to schedule further meetings.
Proponents of diplomacy over war with Iran can thank Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The Israeli leader's explicit setting of a "red line" for the Iranian nuclear program in a speech to the UN General Assembly in September appears to have accomplished what neither negotiations nor sanctions have yielded: concrete Iranian action to limit its enrichment.
A host of commentators scoffed at what they called Mr. Netanyahu's "cartoonish" picture of a bomb and the line he drew across it [pictured above]. The prime minister said Iran could not be allowed to accumulate enough 20% enriched uranium to produce a bomb with further processing, adding that at the rate its centrifuges were spinning, Tehran would cross that line by the middle of 2013.
But then the regime began diverting some of its stockpile to the manufacture of fuel plates for a research reactor. According to the most recent report of international inspectors, in February, Iran had converted 40% of its 20% uranium for this purpose. As a result, Iran has remained distinctly below the Israeli red line.
The lesson here is that clear red lines can help create the time and space for diplomacy that President Obama seeks.
(Washington Post)
Iran Beyond Oil?-Patrick Clawson Iran is in the midst of a non-oil export boom. While still important, oil is becoming a smaller part of Iran's trade. The country's largest trading partners are Iraq, China, the UAE, Afghanistan, India, and Turkey. In short, even with reduced oil income due to sanctions, Iran's government finances are doing as well as (or better) than those of the U.S. and most other industrial countries.
Iran is therefore unlikely to be crippled by any sanctions the West could impose. Thus, it would be imprudent to rest one's hopes for resolution of the nuclear impasse on such a possibility.
(Washington Institute for Near East Policy)
*
The latest round of negotiations with Iran has ended in failure, with the two sides as far apart as ever.
Time is running out for the international community. Iran has built up its nuclear infrastructure and will continue to do so until a decision to move to nuclear weapons is unstoppable. Time works in Iran's favor as long as it can string the international community along, and ward off military action by convincing it that cooperation is just around the corner.
If Obama is truly committed to stopping Iran, the lack of any reasonable prospect for a negotiated settlement after ten years of efforts should make it clear that the U.S. has no choice, and it's time for more forceful options.
A limited, surgical strike to Iran's nuclear facilities would send a serious message, perhaps one that would bring them to the table looking for a deal. Military action is far from the preferred option, but it is beginning to look like the one that has a realistic prospect of compelling Iran to seriously consider changing course.
The writer is a senior research associate at the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University.
Islamist terrorists and fanatics are methodically exterminating the 2,000-year-old Christian civilization of the Middle East through oppression, threats, appropriations and deadly violence. Christianity's greatest thinkers, greatest monuments and greatest triumphs for its first 1,000 years rose in the Middle East. But today, the end is in sight.
In Iraq, the country's Christian population, estimated at up to 2 million a decade ago, has fallen by half - perhaps by three-quarters. Over 2 million Christians in Syria dread Islamist terror and religious cleansing. Two-thirds of the West Bank's and more of Gaza's Christians have been driven out. They're now a small minority even in Bethlehem. Christians in Iran? Gone. Turkey? Almost gone. Saudi Arabia? Once-thriving Christian and Jewish populations were finished off centuries ago.
Egypt has the region's largest remaining Christian population, at least 10 million Copts. With rare exceptions, they've long been confined to squalid quarters and treated as third-class citizens. Now the Salafist fanatics have been unleashed. (New York Post)
*
Torches flickered outside the church. Little girls wore their sparkly Easter best. Children bearing lanterns filed out through the heavy gilt doors, as worshipers carried an icon of Jesus and a cross covered with carnations.
But the Good Friday procession at St. Kyrillos Church here in Syria’s capital did not follow the route it had taken for generations. No drums or trumpets announced its presence. The marchers made a tight circle inside the iron-gated courtyard, then headed back into the church...
Easter weekend is usually the year’s most festive for Syria’s Christians, but this year, it is infused with grave uncertainty. Christians here say they primarily fear the general chaos enveloping the country as the war enters its third year. But like members of Syria’s other religious minorities, many Christians also fear what they see as the rise of extremists among the mainly Sunni Muslim rebels fighting the government of President Bashar al-Assad.
Ezzat Kromer, a Christian gynecologist in Matai, Egypt, was kidnapped by masked gunmen and held for ransom. His case was part of a dramatic rise of kidnappings targeting Christians, including children, in Egypt's southern province of Minya, home to the country's largest concentration of Christians.
Kromer, a father of three, was snatched on Jan. 29 as he drove home. By the next day, his family paid nearly $40,000 to a middleman and he was released. Church leaders and rights activists blame the atmosphere created by the rising power of hard-line Islamists.
Over the past two years, there have been more than 150 reported kidnappings in the province - all of them targeting Christians, with 37 in the last several months, according to a top official at the Interior Ministry. (AP) *
