Lunch at Jish

Our family trip on Saturday was planned to include a stop for lunch at Jish. Often referred to by its original Hebrew name Gush Halav, Jish at one time was known by a Greek rendition of the name - Giscala which happened to be the name of the restaurant where we had lunch. The town's 3,000 inhabitants are mostly Maronite Christians, the rest are Greek Orthodox, Catholic and Muslim. The town's last Jewish inhabitants left in the mid nineteenth century. The Ottoman Land Code and Registration Laws of 1858 and 1859 made life hard for farmers, both Arabs and Jews alike. Jews still farmed in a few villages in Galilee almost continuously for more than 1700 years.

While we waited for the food to be served I briefly recounted a few events from the past

Yohanan of Gush Halav, also known as John of Giscala: was the local commander here during the first Jewish-Roman War (66–73). He built a wall to defend the town from an impending Roman assault. When the town's defenders realised they were hopelessly outnumbered they retreated. Gush Halav surrendered but Johanan escaped and lived to fight another day during the siege of Jerusalem. He was captured, sent to Rome where according to one account he died in prison. His comrade in arms Josephus Flavius commander of the Jewish forces in Galilee was more fortunate. He surrendered to the Romans at Yodfat, wrote two monumental histories of the Jews and lived to a ripe old age.

The wall that Johanan built was never put to the test, however a modern day defence barrier, Israel's Security Fence is meeting up to expectations. Despite all the objections and protests the security fence/wall separating Israel from the West Bank, albeit incomplete is nevertheless very effective. Admittedly the fence's planners could have avoided a lot of controversy and caused less hardship in some places. Hopefully this will be rectified.

Along our border with Lebanon not far from Jish and demarcating the border between Israel and Gaza, fences help keep enemy land forces at bay but fail to prevent rocket attacks.

Developing a defence system capable of destroying rockets fired by Hamas and Hezbollah has to be cost-efficient and if possible transportable. Destroying a cheap homemade Qassam rocket used by Hamas or a mass produced Katyusha rocket favoured by Hezbollah with an expensive interceptor equipped with sophisticated homing technology, makes no sense.

By this time next year Israel will deploy its first counter-rocket “Iron Dome” battery. Initial elements of the Iron Dome developed by Rafael, an Israeli defence systems company, have already been delivered. Once supplementary components have been supplied, incorporated and tested the system’s first battery will become fully operational. Its core element termed the battle management and weapon control (BMC) is capable of detecting if a rocket or even an artillery shell presents a real threat. The Iron Dome’s radar detects a hostile rocket seconds after it is launched and calculates its predicted impact point. If it is expected to hit a populated area the BMC prepares an interception plan and launches an interceptor to engage the rocket at the optimal point of its trajectory.

Such a battery is capable of defending an area of 150 km² from attacks by rockets with ranges of up to 70 km, namely, an arsenal that ranges from the indigenously developed Qassam rocket to the Syrian B302 and Iranian Fadjr-5 deployed in Lebanon and Syria.

The first Iron Dome battery will be positioned outside Sderot in the western Negev and will protect the town from Qassam rockets fired from the Gaza Strip. If necessary the battery can be redeployed along the Lebanese border within 12 hours. The IDF assesses that up to 13 Iron Dome batteries will be required to give full protection against threats from Gaza and Lebanon.

So far the IDF has allocated $215 million for the development and procurement of the first four batteries.

Iron Dome has been criticized for its prohibitive cost. The estimated cost of the interceptor is $35,000–$50,000, whereas a crudely manufactured Qassam rocket costs a few hundred dollars. Rafael claims the cost estimates are exaggerated. The Iron Dome is a ‘discriminating’ system selecting only the real threats

Some critics have argued that Iron Dome is ineffective in countering the Qassam threat given the short-distance and flight time between close-to-the-border launch pads in Gaza and the targets in Sderot. Other anti-rocket systems are said to be more effective, namely the Nautilus laser defence system. From 1995 to 2005, the United States and Israel jointly developed Nautilus but scrapped the system after concluding it was not feasible. However, an American defence company - Northrop Grumman has proposed to develop a more advanced prototype of Nautilus called 'Skyguard'

Skyguard would use laser beams to intercept rockets, with the launching of each beam costing an estimated $1,000–$2,000. With an investment of $180 million, Northrop Grumman says it could deploy the system within 18 months. Israeli defence officials rejected the proposal, citing the extended timeline and additional costs. Officials also insist that with recent improvements to Iron Dome, the system is fully capable of intercepting Qassam rockets. Tests conducted recently have confirmed these new capabilities.

The Iron Dome is the lower tier of a multi-layered defence system. The second tier coined “David’s Sling” is currently in the development stage and is planned to counter attacks by longer-range rockets such as the Iranian Zilzal and the Syrian M600 which can reach targets 250 km away. This second tier will also be able to counter cruise missiles and gliding bombs.

Defense Update an online defence magazine reported that, “The United States and Israel have initiated development of an upper-tier component to the Israeli Missile Defense architecture, commonly known as 'Arrow 3'. The development is based on an architecture definition study conducted in 2006-2007, determining the need for the upper-tier component to be integrated into Israel's Ballistic Missile Defence system. According to Arieh Herzog, Director of Israel's Missile Defence Programme, the main element of this upper tier will be an exo-atmospheric interceptor, to be jointly developed by Israel Aerospace Industries, (IAI) and Boeing.”

Lieutenant General Patrick J. O’Reilly, Director of the US Missile Defense Agency (MDA) described the upper tier component in glowing terms, "The design of Arrow 3 promises to be an extremely capable system, more advanced than what we have ever attempted in the U.S. with our programs" Gen. O'Reilly told the U.S. House of Representatives Armed Services sub-committee for strategic forces. "This has to do with the seekers that have greater flexibility and other aspects, such as propulsion systems - it will be an extremely capable system" he said.

It might appear strange that the US MDA which is involved to some extent in furthering the Arrow 3 development is also prepared for a cutback in its own missile defence systems.

Washington Post Staff Writer R. Jeffrey Smith reported on a US volte-face regarding long range missile interceptors,

“Last week, after a lengthy internal Pentagon review and against the backdrop of new limits on overall military spending, the generals again threw their weight behind a relative contraction of the effort to defend against long-range missile attacks. They cited needed budgetary savings and more immediate threats in demanding faster work to protect overseas forces and bases against shorter-range attack.

The latest shift shelved a plan to deploy in Europe an advanced radar and interceptors of long-range missiles by 2017. And it adds impetus to the Pentagon's request earlier this year for a cut of about 15 percent in overall missile defense spending, a scaling back of the deployment of long-range missile interceptors in Alaska and California, and the cancellation of three costly Reagan-era missile defense programs that officials say had threatened to balloon out of budgetary control.”

Admittedly our Iron Dome is intended to counter short-range rocket attacks, but it is also a comprehensive defence system which at a later stage will integrate the upper level tier to counter long range threats.

Viewing the US defence missile retrenchment it should be considered for what it is, a scaling-back, not a total dismantling of its missile defence system.

Furthermore the Iron Dome was developed to provide a counter to a very real threat. The Qassam and Katyusha rockets, Syrian rockets and missiles as well as the ever present menace of Iran’s developing nuclear capability are threats we can’t ignore.

This obsessive need to wall ourselves in, or wall our enemies out is not an exclusive Israeli paranoia. I doubt if we are paranoid, the threats we face are very real.

Over lunch recalling the hapless Johanan of Gush Halav and his wall I was thankful for our ingenious Iron Dome and all its tiers.

Gmar Hatima Tova

Beni 24^th of September, 2009

Goldstone's New Year Gift Package

This is the time of indecision! Faced with the task of sending greetings for the Jewish New Year I try to avoid the tired time-worn platitudes. I shy from the graphic designs portraying honey soaked apples, pomegranates and other traditional New Year symbols. I suppose I could have found an e-card for the purpose and dispatched it in an impersonal manner to all the relatives, friends and acquaintances in my NATO-sized distribution list. I don't know why I hesitate, we all want a good year and hope it will bring us peace, health happiness or at least contentment.

Before I close the list perhaps a little prosperity will soften life's rough edges, especially now.

Despite everything I’ve said and all my efforts to produce something original I will, nevertheless still have to use a few clichés. So I hope the New Year will bring us peace knowing fully well I will be making the same wish next year. I hope regardless of the rigours of advancing old age we will enjoy good health and remain active. Of course we all want plenty of nachas/nachat, contentment, the kind of satisfaction derived from children, grandchildren and the wider family circle. I have probably overlooked something so I will cover it by a simple – etc.

Shana Tova

The nation at large dispenses New Year greetings in tangible festive packages.

From the highest echelons of government, to local authorities, businesses large and small and irregular groups like my kibbutz and the place where I work, Israelis receive either a packed assortment of wines, honey, olive oil and a calendar, or alternatively a cheque.

Richard Goldstone sent Israel his own New Year gift package, a damning 575 page report of the UN war crimes investigation into the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in Gaza, often referred to as "Operation Cast Lead" .The investigation led by former South African judge Richard Goldstone concluded that "Israel committed actions amounting to war crimes, possibly crimes against humanity," during the Dec. 27-Jan. 18 Operation Cast Lead against Palestinian rocket squads in the Gaza Strip.

The report "concludes there is also evidence that Palestinian armed groups committed war crimes, as well as possibly crimes against humanity, by firing rockets at cities in southern Israel,"

My instinctive gut-reaction is to shred the honourable judge's report in my office shredder. However considering Richard Goldstein's distinguished career, his daughter's insistence that he is a supporter of Israel, even a Zionist, the report and its recommendations deserve more than my angry impulsive response.

Sifting through dozens of articles on the Goldstone Report that have appeared recently in responsible newspapers, journals, blogs and web sites, I think a penetrating assessment posted in The Economist’s on line site this week is by far the best analysis I’ve read so far.

“From the very start,” claims the lead article entitled ‘Opportunity Missed’ “this report had to overcome the taint of prejudice. It was mandated by the UN Human Rights Council, an anti-Israeli outfit notorious for having congratulated Sri Lanka’s government on brutal conduct that led to appalling loss of life among Tamil civilians. Israel refused co-operation. But the mission was headed by a respected international jurist, Richard Goldstone. A Jew himself, Mr Goldstone insisted on scrutinising the conduct of Hamas as well as Israel. There was hope that he might wrestle the inquiry into balance.

Yet the report takes the very thing it is investigating as its central organising premise. Israeli policy in Gaza, it argues, was deliberately and systematically to inflict suffering on civilians, rather than Hamas fighters Israel’s assertions that, in the difficult circumstances of densely populated Gaza, it planned its military operations carefully and with constant legal advice are taken by the report as evidence not of a concern to uphold international law but of a culpable determination to flout it. Israel’s attempts to drop warning leaflets, direct civilians out of danger zones and call daily humanitarian pauses may well have been inadequate, but the report counts them for nought. As many as 1,400 people died in the fighting. It is a grisly thought, but if Israel really had wanted to make Palestinian civilians suffer, the toll could have been vastly higher.

Israel has argued that Hamas fighters endangered civilians by basing themselves around schools, mosques and hospitals. The mission had Hamas’s co-operation, but its fact-finders could detect little or no evidence for this—despite plenty of reports in the public domain to support it. The report does criticise Hamas for firing rockets indiscriminately into Israel and for using the conflict as cover to settle scores with its Palestinian rivals. But its seemingly wilful blindness to other evidence makes that look like a dash for political cover.”

“To some, Israel’s Gaza war will always be in principle unjust: a disproportionate response to Hamas’s rockets. Indeed, the suffering in Gaza, from war and the economic blockade, has been grievous. They may be tempted to applaud Mr Goldstone’s report for that reason alone. Yet if the mere fact of Israel’s attack were enough to condemn it then Mr Goldstone’s report was pointless all along. And there is a danger of double standards. American and European forces in Iraq, Afghanistan and Kosovo also caused thousands of civilian deaths, without attracting a Goldstone.”

When an Israeli soldier goes to war equipped with the best weapons, body armour, optic devices and communications systems that money can buy he adds the IDF code of ethics to his batle pack. He is acutely aware that he is being watched and scrutinised even more so in retrospect, after the din of battle has abated. A score or more NGOs are out there waiting for him to falter and miss his target. From Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, to the home-grown B’tselem and lesser known watchdogs. No military force in the world is as intensely under surveillance as the IDF.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who will guard the guardians?

Maybe “NGO Monitor “(Non-governmental Organisation Monitor) described as a non-governmental organisation based in Jerusalem whose stated objective is to stop other NGOs from promoting perceived "ideologically motivated anti-Israel agendas.

It claims it was founded "to promote accountability, and advance a vigorous discussion on the reports and activities of humanitarian NGOs in the framework of the Arab-Israeli conflict." The organisation was founded jointly by the Jerusalem Centre for Public Affairs, an organisation which has "developed and implemented an array of cutting-edge programmes to present Israel's case to the world", and the U.S.-based Wechsler Family Foundation.

NGO Monitor criticised Amnesty International for its disproportionate attitude to Israel. For example, by comparing Amnesty International's response to the twenty years of ethnic, religious and racial violence in Sudan to their treatment of Israel. NGO Monitor said that Amnesty International issued seven reports on Sudan, as opposed to 39 reports on Israel. Although failing to decry the slaughter of thousands of civilians by Sudanese government and allied troops, AI managed to criticise Israel’s ‘assassinations’ of active terrorist leaders.

In another analysis The Economist referring to the Goldstone Report states, “The incendiary premise of his report, to be delivered to the UN’s 47-country Human Rights Council in Geneva this month, is that Israel is guilty of one of the worst crimes: deliberately and systematically attacking civilians and making them suffer as a war aim. The Israelis knew they would get pasted, as the council is a serial Israel-bashing outfit that often lets more egregious human-rights abusers around the world off the hook. But the report was even more critical than they had feared.”

Israeli damage assessors differ over estimating the worst case scenario for the report’s outcome.

Military observer/analyst Ron Ben Yishai claims the report will constitute the basis for proposed anti-Israel resolutions to be submitted by the immense Arab-Muslim bloc in the United Nations – either in the UN General Assembly, where Third World countries enjoy an automatic majority, or in the Security Council. The General Assembly’s decisions are non-binding, but a Security Council resolution may mean big trouble for Israel: Ranging from acceptance of the recommendation to indict officials at the international war crimes tribunal in The Hague, to a demand to impose sanctions on Israel should it fail to lift the Gaza Strip siege.

On the media front the damage is grave, as the report provides an international seal of approval to the war crime claims. The attempt to balance it by mentioning the rocket fire at Israel and the abduction and treatment of Gilad Shalit is only for appearances’ sake. The criticism is worded in an incredibly moderate and cautious style. In fact it indirectly justifies Hamas’ attacks and hints that they came in response to the siege imposed even before Operation Cast Lead. While Israel is a sovereign democratic state, Hamas is just a military and political organisation, the report noted – that is, it should not be required to adhere to the Geneva Convention.

Amir Oren in Ha’aretz believes, “When the smoke of Goldstone's report clears, the IDF and the government can emerge from the bunker to find that little damage has been done. Israel's cooperation is needed in the diplomatic arena. After ‘Operation Defensive Shield’(2002), Israel succumbed to external pressure and agreed to establish a committee of inquiry headed by U.S. General William Nash on the massacre-that-never-was in Jenin. Only after Maj. Gen. Giora Eiland and UN envoy Terje Roed Larsen intervened was the committee called off.
Then, U.S. president George W. Bush preferred to push his diplomatic initiative to establish a Palestinian state. And that is what President Barack Obama will probably do: He will curb the propagandistic trend of slamming Israel for war crimes in order to extract tangible concessions from it as a peace partner.”

Well for the time being that’s enough of Richard Goldstone and his infamous report. We have guests for the New Year celebrations, notably our family including my daughter Daphna and her husband Mark from New Zealand who are visiting us now.

Have a good weekend and a very good New Year.

Beni 18^th of September, 2009.

Copper pots and sea yarns

Eilabun was our first stop on the Friday trip organised by Ein Harod as part of the 'Founders Day' celebrations.

The outing was one of four separate activities planned for the day. We chose the 'whistle-stop' tour which included a visit to Yusef Abdullah's ornamental brass and copperware workshop and showroom at Eilabun. Most of the town's 5,000 inhabitants are Christian Arabs, the descendants of people who came here from a nearby village early in the 19th century. There is an air of prosperity about Eilabun, evident in the spacious dwellings, a small industrial zone, branches of well known chain-stores as well as a good measure of civic pride. However, the apparent prosperity is deceptive. The time-honoured sources of livelihood – agriculture and traditional trades like artisan Yusef Abdullah's workshop are of necessity supplemented by tourism. Some have turned to construction work while a fortunate few have acquired professions.

Eilabun is just a short distance from Ein Harod perched on a northern slope above the Beit Hanetufa Valley. An ancient spring found further down the incline below the town was once Eilabun's only water source.

Eilabun has an earlier history when it was known as Eilabu or Ein Lavon. Priestly families (Cohens) settled here after the destruction of the Second Temple.

These groups known as the priestly guards lived in anticipation of an early rebuilding of the Temple. They lived in a state of preparedness, ready to renew their sacred duties. Some people are still waiting for it to happen.

The descendents of the Temple priests, all the people called Cohen or variants of the name – Cowan, Kohn, Kahan, Kahana, Kagan, Katz and others have for all practical purposes lost their ritual jobs. Nevertheless, jobs or no jobs Jewish law places certain restrictions on male Cohens no matter how they are called. For example a Cohen cannot marry a divorcee or a proselyte. Since there is no civil marriage option in Israel "disobedient Cohens" and others who prefer a wedding ceremony without a rabbi travel to nearby Cyprus. The Cypriots are happy to oblige their neighbours. They offer special "nuptial deals", everything included travel packages. The flight, paperwork, ceremony and hotel accommodation (if required) are handled by enterprising people on the island. The sinning couple can get hitched and home the same day. Quick to take a page from their southern neighbours mixed Lebanese couples (e.g. Sunni Muslims and Maronite Christians) normally unable to marry in Lebanon now choose the Cyprus option.



The hoped for "gestures" from Arab states in return for a freeze on construction in West Bank settlements haven't materialised so far. Analysts say that fly-over rights for El Al planes would help the company cut costs on certain routes. However, opening Israeli trade legations in the Gulf States wouldn't necessarily improve trade with those countries. As it is, total annual sales of Israeli goods (usually with the labels removed) to Arab states excluding Jordan and Egypt, amount to more than $1 billion. Until recently Israel had a trade legation in Qatar, a fact we chalked up as a diplomatic achievement. Yet more than being an ego booster, the legation wasn't much of a sales promoter. It seems Qatari businessmen are prepared to buy Israeli goods clandestinely through a third party with labels removed but not directly with a blatant Israeli brand-name attached.

Our Syrian neighbours aren't exploring any form of trade options with Israel. Instead they are gunrunning for Hezbollah and trying to upgrade their air force with MiG 31E interceptor fighter planes The Russian daily Kommersant claims the sale has been approved but the delivery date is unknown, however the older MiG-29M fighters are being shipped to Syria.

The MiG-31E is faster and more manoeuvrable than the MiG-29 series fighters. It can fire simultaneously at several targets up to 180 kilometres away. According to one Israeli military analyst the advanced MiG in Syria's hands, would probably alter the balance of power in the region.

The first reports of the sale appeared in 2007 but were quickly dismissed by Moscow and its official state arms-trading monopoly Rosoboronexport, which issued a statement saying, "Russia has no plans to deliver fighter jets to Syria."

In May this year, outgoing head of the Pentagon's Defence Intelligence Agency Lt.-Gen. Michael D. Maples told the Senate Armed Services Committee that Damascus would be receiving the advanced MiG-31E fighter jets in the near future.

"With regard to its external defence, Syria's military remains in a defensive posture and inferior to Israel's forces, but it is upgrading its missile, rocket, antitank, aircraft and air defence inventories," Maples told the committee. "Recent Syrian contracts with Russia for future delivery include new MiG-31 and MiG-29M/M2 fighter aircraft."

The MiG fighter jet shipments to Syria are of less concern than the supply of Russian SAM 300 ant-aircraft missile systems to Iran.

Ten days ago President Shimon Peres made a surprise, unscheduled and slightly low-profile visit to Russia where he met Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. According to reports in the Israeli news media Peres asked Medvedev about an agreement signed between Russia and Iran on the sale of several S-300 anti-aircraft systems. Peres asked that the Russian government not carry out the deal, saying that it would violate the "delicate balance" of power in the entire region.
Medvedev promised Peres that Russia will review its decision to sell the anti-aircraft missiles to Iran.
Peres added that Israel has "clear proof that Russian weapons reach the hands of terrorist organisations, especially Hamas and Hezbollah, which receive them from Iran and Syria."

It’s possible to argue that Shimon Peres was paying a courtesy call to discuss reciprocal relations and a number of topics that concern the region.

However, another surprise unscheduled visit to Russia this week, this time by Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu was a real eyebrow raiser.

Netanyahu met his opposite number Russian Premier Vladimir Putin. At first the visit was denied, then confirmed and the Israeli official who issued the denial was reprimanded (the fate of all messengers). The mystery surrounding the visits has caused a lot of speculation, some of it related to

the disappearance of a Russian cargo ship in the English Channel.

The Observer believes the ship was carrying arms to Iran and was being tracked by the Mossad. The paper quotes sources in both Russia and Israel to support this opinion.

“The vessel flying a Maltese flag and bearing the name ‘Arctic Sea’, was according to its cargo manifest carrying a shipment of timber when it disappeared en route from Finland to Algeria on July 24. It was recovered off west Africa on August 17 when eight alleged hijackers were arrested. The Kremlin has consistently denied that the vessel was carrying a secret cargo. It claims the ship was hijacked by criminals who demanded a £1m ransom. “

The official version was challenged by sources in Tel Aviv and Moscow who claimed the ship had been loaded with S-300 missiles while undergoing repairs in the Russian port of Kaliningrad.

The Mossad, which closely monitors arms supplies to Iran, is said to have tipped off the Russian government that the shipment had been sold by former military officers linked to the underworld. “

BBC Online claims “Israel was linked to the interception of the missing cargo ship Arctic Sea last month, a senior figure close to Israeli intelligence. said Israel had told Moscow it knew the ship was secretly carrying a Russian air defence system for Iran.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has dismissed speculation that S-300 missiles were on board the ship.

Moscow announced that the Russian navy had captured the hijackers and rescued the crew.

Eight men were later charged with hijacking and piracy.

BBC Online said an Israeli source claims the piracy story was a cover and that Israel told Moscow it was giving it sufficient time to stop the shipment before making the matter public.

Admiral Tarmo Kouts the European Union's rapporteur on piracy told TIME Magazine that: Israel was likely behind the hijacking of the Russian-manned ship en route to Algeria.
"There is the idea that there were missiles aboard, and one can't explain this situation in any other way. As a sailor with years of experience, I can tell you that the official versions are not realistic."

According to TIME, Russia's official explanation for the incident is that the ship set sail from Finland bound for Algeria carrying a cargo of timber. Then a group of eight Russian and former Soviet hijackers boarded the ship on July 24.
This version of events is undermined by the fact that the ship issued no distress signal and President Shimon Peres visited Russia a day after the ship was rescued.
“Curioser and Curioser” cried Alice.

If you have had trouble following this convoluted series of events you are in good company. I too find it a little baffling. Let’s wait a year or two till somebody writes a book about the mystery of the Arctic Sea, a modern day Marie Celeste. Only this time the crew didn’t disappear. Maybe one of them will tell the story.



Next week we celebrate the Jewish new year. Shana Tova to everyone.



Beni 10th of September, 2009.

Not at any price

Back to school, usually on the 1st of September in northern hemisphere countries, is an occasion Israeli political figures rarely miss. It's an image improving photo-opportunity and often a convenient time-slot to make a statement.
So when Minister of Defence Ehud Barak visited a high school somewhere in the western Negev on Tuesday he used the occasion to send a message.
After the traditional well wishing the minister called on the students to ask questions. In an oblique reference to Gilad Shalit a senior student asked
“Can the state guarantee my safety when I enlist, if I fall into enemy hands?”
Barak's answer was blunt and to the point. “The state can't even guarantee you will stay alive." He said facing the student but directing his remarks to attentive ears in Gaza. "The state of Israel is willing to do anything to free kidnapped soldiers – but not at any price."
Later the same day a Hamas spokesman made an oblique reference to Barak's reply indicating that the message had been received.
T,V. Channel 10 reporter Raviv Drucker griped about Israel's “emotional obsession” with Shalit. “There is no nice way to say it: we've gone ‘overboard’ about Gilad Shalit,” Drucker continued, ” The whole country is caught up in an emotional obsession. Our national agenda is a brief one line slogan – release Gilad, and to hell with the price,”
Expressing sympathy with the Shalit family Drucker concluded, “It's true that if I were Gilad's father, I'd do everything to set him free, but that's exactly the difference between the interests of a single family and the interests of a state.”
Quoted "off the record" Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak once complained about all the fuss being made "for the sake of one soldier." Nevertheless, Mubarak, not entirely for altruistic reasons, has repeatedly tried to broker a prisoner exchange with Hamas aimed at bringing about Shalit's release.
Ehud Barak's blunt retort and Drucker's brash remarks stand out in sharp contrast to the Shalit family's quiet subdued manner, their almost apologetic appeal for help. Noam and Aviva Shalit have stoically accepted many rebuffs and faced repeated disappointments. They are truly the "salt of the earth."
They are not alone in their struggle. A formidable army of volunteers is waging a war against apathy and the "not at any price" attitude.
The problem is the price is never right and at times the negotiations for a prisoner exchange are more like horse-trading than an equitable deal.
Israel has never shirked its responsibility to do everything possible to bring about Gilad Shalit's release; however as was the case in previous prisoner exchanges the other side demands more than we are prepared to pay.
Israel has always tried to exclude prisoners with "blood on their hands" from the exchange list although it knows that in the end it will be forced to release unrepentant murderers together with lesser villains.
The political price also affects the negotiations. Prime Minister Netanyahu is ever cognisant of the more intransigent views of his coalition partners and even members of his own Likud party.
At the end of July an old-new negotiator was enlisted to help facilitate a prisoner exchange with Hamas.




According to Der Spiegel the involvement of a German mediator in the negotiations for the release of Gilad Shalit came at the request of the Israeli government. Germany’s foreign intelligence service, Bundesnachrichtendienst (Federal Intelligence Service, BND) was the obvious choice for the job.
The German government confirmed that intelligence chief Ernst Uhrlau is mediating the release of the kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.
The Der Spiegel article mentioned an added aspect of the negotiations, “As is always the case in the Middle East, the outcome is of far greater significance than the fate of one soldier -- it has to do with the future of the region. An agreement with Hamas would clearly improve the prospects for a reactivation of a peace process that has come to a standstill.”
The German government too stands to gain something, “The new mandate provides an opportunity to build its political influence in the region and to make it indispensable as a political negotiating partner." Says Der Spiegel.
Although the Egyptians hadn’t made much progress they weren’t overly enthusiastic about letting the BND replace them. Officially, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak is still in charge, with the Egyptian secret service negotiating parallel to the BND.
There is an equation of opposing forces on both sides. On one side the Israeli government has to deal with its hardliners who call for an uncompromising negotiating posture while trying to appease the "Free Gilad" support groups.
On the other side, across the divide in Gaza, Hamas has to contend with its own hardliners, mainly the Damascus exiles while trying to appease the prisoners' families who want to see their sons released from Israeli jails.
Hamas stands to gain politically if the negotiations come to a successful conclusion.
If Hamas stands to gain prestige from a successful prisoner exchange with Israel, namely one Gilad Shalit for hundreds of Palestinian terrorists, it also stands to loose a lot.
The Hamas leadership in Gaza and the branch of exiles in Damascus certainly remember the golden era of Hezbollah in Lebanon.
While Nasrallah held the bodies of Israeli soldiers he enjoyed a lot of ‘prime-time’ exposure. Since the last exchange of bodies and one live Lebanese terrorist, Hezbollah has lost a lot of lustre. Its hoped for political gains didn’t materialise and its military wing is mainly hedged in beyond the Litani river.
Nasrallah is no longer a household word, just a fading turbaned image on a poster peeling off a wall. Admittedly he has replenished his arsenal of rockets and missiles and remains a force to be reckoned with, however after the Second Lebanon War and more so the ‘Cast Lead Operation’ in Gaza he fears an Israeli mad-dog response to any Hezbollah provocation.
Hamas sees this mirror image and wonders whether it would be wiser to hang on to Gilad Shalit. On the other hand with Gaza under siege and the pressure mounting the time has come to end the matter.
Der Spiegel concludes, "Thus, the opportunities for a breakthrough right now aren't bad."
I too have a gut-feeling that maybe this time something will happen.

The Daily Star Lebanon picked up on the Israeli- Egyptian cooperation, often alluded to but rarely admitted. The paper mentioned the speculation regarding the Israeli submarine cruise through the Suez Canal a few weeks ago. It quoted Emad Gad, an expert on Israeli policy with the Cairo-based Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, who advised not to read too much into the submarine incident. “There may be some Egyptian cooperation with Israel, but it hasn’t reached the level of joint planning.” Gad believes Egypt’s permitting the submarine to use the canal “was more for the Americans than for the Israelis.”
The Daily Star continued, "The two countries still have just as many points of conflict as they do areas of common interest. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains a sore spot between the two, with each government seemingly pulling in opposite directions. Egypt has worked (unsuccessfully) for years to produce a reconciliation and unity government between Hamas and Fatah – something that Israel staunchly opposes.
Earlier this month, Hosni Mubarak lobbied US President Barack Obama to push Israel for an immediate jump to final-status negotiations with the Palestinians. That would essentially be a direct repudiation of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s plan to delay final-status talks for years while building up the economy and infrastructure of the occupied West Bank."
It could be argued that Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad' unilateral facts on the ground plan, the building of infrastructure and institutions for an independent Palestinian state is in line with Netanyahu's master plan, but on closer inspection it isn't at all.
Defense-Update is an online magazine dispensing news and views relating to military hardware. I was surprised this week to discover that this strictly killing machines review carried a politically motivated article entitled "A Roadmap to Total Confusion." After summarily dismissing the Fayyad Plan as unmitigated
nonsense, not a plan but a "wish list" the authorless article proceeds to outline its own wish list:
"Having missed all past chances for a self-ruled state, by short-sighted leaderships, since the termination of the British Mandate in 1948, their only hope for a viable solution would be the so-called "Jordan option".
Jordan is also alarmed by rumours regarding a US-backed scheme to turn Jordan into a homeland for Palestinians. King Abdullah is planning a series of ad-hoc steps to foil any attempt to resettle Palestinian refugees in the kingdom.
So far reports indicate that at least 40,000 Palestinians are believed to have already lost their status as Jordanian citizens in recent months. Fearing a plot by Palestinian officers serving in his armed forces, the king has ordered a massive purge of the Jordanian military, forcing hundreds of officers into early retirement. Although the official pretext seemed organisational, none of the officers dismissed from active duty bear Bedouin tribal names. The Bedouins are generally considered loyal to the Hashemite royal house.
Political analysts in Amman said the monarch was ‘extremely nervous’ because of the growing rumours. They said the king and others members of the royal family were convinced that the new government in Israel was quietly pushing for the idea of transforming Jordan into a homeland for the Palestinians."
The large scale purge in the Jordanian army was mentioned in other sources, The rumour of a US-backed scheme sounds like more wishful thinking. After all the U.S. has a vested interest in maintaining the status quo in Jordan. However, the “Jordanian Option” is a popular concept in conservative circles in Israel, which is revived from time to time in different mutations. King Abdullah is cautious, mindful of the fate of his great–grandfather the first King Abdullah who was felled by an assassin’s bullet.
Despite his British upbringing and refinement he remains a Hashemite and knows to respect and especially to suspect.

Have a good weekend.

Beni 3rd of September, 2009.