Israel at 64

We have just celebrated Independence Day, just a week after commemorating Holocaust Day and immediately following Remembrance Day.

For various reasons, certain sections of the Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) community disregard the three commemorative occasions. Israel’s Arab minority evinces no special affinity to the day commemorating the destruction of European Jewry. Likewise our Arab communities either ignore Remembrance Day and Independence Day or acknowledge them in a subdued manner.

Every year our news media uncovers previously unknown stories related to Holocaust Day.

Umm al-Fahm, an Arab town in the north of Israel is probably the last place you would expect to find a Holocaust survivor. This year many Israeli news sources and even the Saudi based Al-Arabiya mentioned Leila Jabarin’s amazing story. For more than fifty years Leila hid her secret from her Muslim children and grandchildren. She never told them that she was a Jewish Holocaust survivor born in Auschwitz concentration camp.
Although her family knew she was a Jewish convert, none of them knew of her Holocaust connection.
This year, shortly before Holocaust Day Leila Jabarin, who was born Helen Brashatsky, finally sat down and told them that she too is a Holocaust survivor.

With the passage of time the number of survivors is diminishing.

Researchers in Israel and in other places have identified second generation and even third generation Holocaust syndromes. Of course they are far removed from the suffering of the people who managed to survive Hitler’s Final Solution. They are mainly behavioural traits.

On the other hand, the number of bereaved families of Israeli men and women killed in action and as the result of terrorist activities, is increasing.

This year too the dilemma of the sharp transition from the Remembrance Day to the celebrations of Independence Day is the subject of debate, an unresolved debate.

Another unresolved matter, the status of the territories is the topic of an ongoing debate. This week the crisis of the Ulpana neighbourhood at Beit El threatened the stability of our coalition government.
The Ulpana neighbourhood was founded during Netanyahu’s first term as prime minister. The neighbourhood includes 84 apartments in 14 buildings, and several caravans. In 2008 the Palestinian owners of the land on which five buildings were built petitioned the High Court of Justice, and last May the state declared that the buildings will be demolished within a year. Former Supreme Court President Dorit Beinish then announced that proceedings have been exhausted. The director of High Court petitions in the State Prosecutor's Office told the cabinet that the High Court will not accept requests for long-term delays. Another legal expert referring to the Ulpana eviction matter said, “There is no legal solution and there will be none.”
Colonel (res) Shaul Arieli is a hard man to fault. At the height of his military career he was the military commander of the Gaza Strip. Later he was the head of the peace administration in the Barak government, and some time later became one of the originators of the Geneva Peace Initiative. Earlier, he served for two years as Deputy Military Attaché to the Defence Minister. In 1995 -1997, he was head of the Interim Agreement Administration. Arieli is widely considered an expert on the demarcation of the future Israeli-Palestinian border and the route of the separation barrier. He has taken a leading role in efforts to renew Israeli-Palestinian negotiations and to ensure that Israeli policies vis-à-vis the Palestinians balance security and humanitarian considerations.

In an article entitled “Netanyahu, up to his neck in settlements” published in Yediot Ahronot this week Shaul Arieli took the prime minister to task.

“There is no government in Israel when it comes to the political future of the territories and the settlements built there. The Machpela house in Hebron, the Migron outpost, the Ulpana neighbourhood at Beit El and the dozens of other outposts and settlements all bear testimony to this fact.” Arieli is not one of the run-of the-mill government bashers. His qualifications entitle him to complain about the lack of planning regarding the territories, the preference for a “one day at a time” outlook. Furthermore, he doesn’t absolve previous governments from blame.” Netanyahu's government has joined a number of governments that preceded it, trying to hold both ends of the stick at the same time. On one hand they declare their readiness to separate from the Palestinians in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, on the other hand they strengthen the hold of the settlements in the territories.”

He traces the present situation to its very source; “The Alignment governments headed by Levi Eshkol, Golda Meir and Yitzhak Rabin were the first to establish settlements, attempting to use them to fix Israel's borders. Even though these governments also bowed somewhat to the demands of settler leaders Hanan Porat and Moshe Levinger ‘to wrest the land from its [Palestinian] residents,’ as a rule they promised that the settlements would be built only around Jerusalem and the Jordan Valley, described as security regions according to a strategic plan drawn up by Yigal Alon.”

Little more than the museum at Kibbutz Ginosar named in memory of Alon remains to remind us of the man who could have lead the country. The Alon Plan has become a footnote in the tomes written about the “Conflict.”

Despite the original sin of settlement building in areas where the security consideration didn’t exist the three governments Arieli mentions had a programme. Today the scope of construction in isolated settlements is larger than in the blocs which the government plans to keep in a final-status agreement.

Arieli says, "Laundering (legitimising) the outposts and building neighbourhoods in East Jerusalem allow the foreign leaders and the Palestinians the right to doubt the honesty of the government's intentions. This is because of the well-known fact that fear of the social and economic price of evacuating so large a number of settlers is a central obstacle preventing Israel from deciding on a peace agreement.

The Alignment governments originated the use of the pretext of security to gain control of private Palestinian lands for the establishment of settlements. The 1979 High Court of Justice ruling on Elon Moreh led to a decrease in the use of that pretext.

However, despite U.S. presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama having explained the need for land swaps only because of ‘demographic changes’ caused by the settlements, Netanyahu still describes settlements as "security" needs. He also refuses to compensate the Palestinians for the prospective annexation of settlements with similar territory from Israel, and in this way has reneged on the basic principle of the negotiations - "the 1967 lines as the basis for a border and exchange of territories with a ratio of 1:1."

Veteran journalist Akiva Eldar wrote in Haaretz,

“The Ulpana neighbourhood was born and raised in sin. Ironically, it was established in 1999 during Ehud Barak's term in the Prime Minister's Office. Yes, the same Barak who is being denigrated by his fellow cabinet members for daring to uphold the High Court of Justice order to demolish the buildings in the neighbourhood. The first stop-work order there was issued on September 27, 1999, and through 2003 additional, "final" stop-work and demolition orders were issued for each of Ulpana's "normative" buildings. As usual in the land of the settlers, illegal construction continued for more than eight years under the noses of the authorities.”

Eldar continues with the description of the forged sale document claiming ownership of the land on which Ulpana is built. The land belongs to Palestinians in Dura al-Kara. Referring to the High Court ruling Eldar says,

“During the hearing on the petition, the state prosecutor said it was the Beit El Development Company that built and filled the homes with "renters." In other words, none of the residents of the five buildings to be torn down is the owner or even a protected tenant.

Going by accepted norms of the enlightened world, the Ulpana neighbourhood is not the only illegitimate child of Beit El. The entire community was founded on an unaccepted norm that goes by the name ‘temporary occupation orders.’ Over the years, the community spread north beyond the limits of those orders, onto the private lands of Dura al-Kara's residents. In a normative society, individuals and organisations that turn land theft and forgery into norms end up in jail. In Israel, their names are known to cabinet ministers and Knesset members who turn them into martyrs while the State Prosecutor's Office abandons cases against them. “

On Sunday it was reported that Attorney General Weinstein was exploring legal options in an effort to prevent the eviction of the Ulpana settlers. However, senior legal sources estimated that the State Prosecutor's Office will have a hard time finding a solution. The State has pledged to evict the neighbourhood in the past, on the basis that it is built on private (Palestinian) land.

In an interview with Haaretz President Shimon Peres said he was not seeking to extend his term in office. In the same interview the president focused more on negotiations with the Palestinians than the extended presidency prospect. “I've had no small number of conversations with Mahmoud Abbas. All of them were with the prime minister's knowledge. He knows all the details. Based on these conversations, I'm convinced we could have achieved peace with Abbas. He's a worthy partner and can deliver the goods." It will take more than Shimon Peres’ faith in Mahmoud Abbas to revive the moribund peace process.

In an op-ed article in the New York Times entitled “Peace Without Partners,”

Ami Ayalon, Orni Petruschka and Gilead Sher outlined an entirely different approach to peace and the territories. Two of the authors are well known to the peace camp. Ami Ayalon is a former commander of the Israeli Navy and head of the Israeli domestic security agency (GSS). Gilead Sher was a peace negotiator and chief of staff to the Israeli prime minister from 1999 to 2001. Orni Petruschka lacks the same qualifications. Nonetheless, he serves as co-chairman of Blue White Future movement together with Ayalon and Sher. He is described as a high-tech entrepreneur and a social investor and activist. They wrote, “For three years, attempts at negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian leadership have failed because of a lack of trust. It now seems highly unlikely that the two sides will return to negotiations — but that does not mean the status quo must be frozen in place.

Israel doesn’t need to wait for a final-status deal with the Palestinians. What it needs is a radically new unilateral approach: It should set the conditions for a territorial compromise based on the principle of two states for two peoples, which is essential for Israel’s future as both a Jewish and a democratic state.

Israel can and must take constructive steps to advance the reality of two states based on the 1967 borders, with land swaps — regardless of whether Palestinian leaders have agreed to accept it. Through a series of unilateral actions, gradual but tangible changes could begin to transform the situation on the ground.”

I doubt if the settlers will be rushing to join the new initiative.

In the meantime we are celebrating the sixty fourth year of our independence.

Chag Sameach

Beni 26^th of April, 2012.

Fire, fury and feathered friends

By all accounts the ritual of the "holy fire" is an unforgettable experience, even curious lookers-on and sceptics are enthused by the spectacle. The Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem is where the ritual of the "holy fire" takes place every year at Easter. The Greek Orthodox Patriarch enters the packed church at the head of a representative procession of clerics from six Christian denominations. Then he alone descends to the small chamber, considered by the Catholic and Eastern Churches as the site of Jesus' tomb. There he prays according to a time tested tradition and emerges later carrying a cluster of candles lit by "holy fire" said to be miraculously sent from heaven. The details of the flame's source are a closely guarded secret. Believers say the fire is the source of the Resurrection and also the fire of the Burning Bush of Mount Sinai.

An Associated Press reporter described the scene as he saw it on Saturday, "Flanking the chanting crowds were dozens of black-clad security police, khaki-uniformed riot-prevention forces and border security guards keeping order. Photographers teetered over the crowds trying to snap photos. Palestinian women ululated as the fire emerged. Young men banged on drums and a few heated pilgrims got into fistfights that were broken up by the Israeli security forces.

Amid them all were clerics in colorful robes designating their particular church, trying to get as close as possible to the ornate chamber in the cavernous Holy Sepulcher where many Christian traditions believe that Jesus was briefly entombed after he was crucified nearby. "

If you are unfamiliar with the ceremony you might wonder what Israeli security forces were doing in the church. Although this year the colourful ceremony was almost uneventful, in the past internecine scuffles, riots and on at least two occasions bloody clashes have marred the event. In 1834 the British parliamentarian Robert Curzon reported that more than four hundred worshippers died during the ceremony. Most of them were trampled to death in the overcrowded church, but some were killed when the governor Ibrahim Pasha of Egypt, a guest at the ceremony, was extricated by his guards. They were forced to cut an escape route through the panicking crowd.

The holy fire ritual has been practised for at least 1,200 years, and this year, as in the past, the risk of fire breaking out in the church packed with candle carrying worshippers was a real hazard. In particular the risk is high because the main entrance to the cavernous, spiral-shaped church is also the exit. Six Christian denominations zealously claim different sections of the church. So far the fear of jeopardizing their foothold in the Holy Sepulchre has prevented them from agreeing to build an emergency exit or a fire escape.

Another incident that started on Saturday and continued throughout Sunday had no claim to any kind of sanctity. A much publicised "fly-in" by Palestinian sympathisers from a number of places in Europe turned out to be much-ado- about nothing. The news media coined the projected mass descent on Ben Gurion air terminal the "flytilla", bringing to mind the Gaza blockade runners flotillas.

After the MV Mavi Marmara incident the Israeli government prevented further Gaza flotilla attempts by requesting ports in Greece and Cyprus to deny the flotilla vessels docking and refuelling facilities. Ahead of the scheduled "flytilla" a similar request was made to airlines flying passengers to Israel. They were provided with a list of the people the Israeli government had barred from entering the country. The list was compiled by the Israeli General Security Service (Shin-Bet) and the police intelligence division.

According to some reports, as many as 2,000 Palestinian sympathisers had planned to take part in the "Welcome to Palestine" rally. However the list sent to the airline companies contained only 730 names. Most of the companies complied with the request and cancelled tickets sold to people whose names appeared on the list. A phalanx of 450 uniformed and plain clothes security personnel provided a very inhospitable welcome for the 49 members of the "Welcome to Palestine" group who somehow managed to evade the security dragnet. Over a hundred news media reporters and photographers managed to get only a fleeting image of a few of the potential troublemakers.

I want to pause here to consider the identity of these unwanted tourists.

They have been variously described as anarchists, left-wing sympathisers with the Palestinian cause and "activists" (whatever that means.) I'm sure by now the GSS(General Security Service) knows how to label them. Most of the 49 strong horde were sent home on the first available flight. A few of the would-be-demonstrators who refused to accept the return flight option were arrested pending a court expulsion order.

Some observers have termed the air terminal operation an "overkill," exaggerated and even unnecessary.

Perhaps Christian Science Monitor correspondent Joshua Mitnick, reporting from Tel Aviv placed the air terminal non-event in the correct perspective.

"With turmoil in the region dominating the international agenda and diplomacy on Palestinian statehood mothballed, the vacuum in the Israeli-Palestinian struggle is being filled by the civil disobedience of a limited but creative band of local and foreign activists. After today's round, both sides claimed victory in what many observers said was mainly a public relations battle.

Palestinian organizers of the ‘Welcome to Palestine Campaign,’ argued that Israel’s refusal of the activists focused attention on claims of injustice in the West Bank and contradicted Israel’s boast of being the only democracy in the region. The Israeli government said it blocked activists bent on delegitimizing the Jewish state and sowing chaos, and mocked the activists for supposedly ignoring human rights violations in Syria."

A more critical view of the "keep them out" policy stated, “Israeli government spokespersons are using the ‘Welcome to Palestine’ operation in their campaign against the 'delegitimization of Israel.' It's a shame they don't understand that their refusal to allow the human rights activists into the West Bank illustrates more than anything the occupation's lack of legitimacy.”

Haaretz devoted an editorial to the "Welcome to Palestine” campaign.- "A country that respects human rights in the territories under its control, including the right to nonviolent protest against foreign occupation, must invite peace activists to visit anywhere and welcome them with flowers."

I hasten to add that the Haaretz editorial opinion in no way expresses anything close to the consensus in Israel.

Noam Sheizaf, an editor of +972, a dovish Israeli-Palestinian blog, said "Palestinians understand they will not see a sovereign state from the peace process, and they are trying to bring their issue back to the basic denial of human rights," ….. "If I were a newsroom editor I would focus on Syria and Afghanistan as well. But from a Palestinian perspective something is better than nothing."

I'm trying to visualise another scenario, the “welcome them with flowers” approach. Based on past experience and the demonstrations staged at some European airports after members of the "Welcome to Palestine” campaign had their flight tickets cancelled, I doubt if a bouquet welcome would have had much effect. I'm sure they would have exploited every opportunity to demonstrate at the Ben Gurion air terminal and on their way to Bethlehem.

Nevertheless, another group of "activists" did receive considerable local publicity.

Columnist Amos Harel wrote in Haaretz."Just as the so-called "flytilla" of pro-Palestinian activists from abroad - which was so dramatically overstated here by Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch - was dying, as expected, with a whimper, the deputy commander of the IDF's Jordan Valley brigade saved the day for the pro-Palestinian activists. " Harel was referring to the clash between 200 cyclists and an IDF patrol commanded by Lt. Col. Shalom Eisner. There is every reason to believe that the cyclists were of the same political persuasion as the activists blocked at Ben Gurion air terminal. They weren't out for a Sunday jaunt, they were bent on disrupting traffic on the Jordan Valley highway. The confrontation which lasted about two hours wouldn't have warranted news media mention had it not been for the brutal striking of a Danish cyclist by Lt. Col. Shalom Eisner.

It appears to have been a case of "entrapment." Eisner struck the Dane with his M-16 rifle while one of the cyclists video filmed the whole despicable incident. Cognisant of the likelihood of a confrontation the IDF too takes the precaution of having its camera man accompany the intercepting force. Such was the case in the MV Mavi Marmara incident. Later the BBC used IDF footage in its documentary film refuting the Turkish version of that clash.

Well our schlemiel cameraman forgot to check his batteries before he joined the patrol and couldn’t photograph it. So it's our verbal version against the Sunday cyclists' neatly edited YouTube clip. Eisner claims he was provoked and attacked before he struck back.

Once the initial IDF investigation was completed Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz relieved Eisner of his post. Admittedly, the military police investigation has yet to be concluded, but Lt. Gen Gantz preferred an early response instead of waiting for the results of the MP probe which is not expected to contradict the initial findings. At the conclusion of the full investigation a recommendation will be made regarding further action to be taken.

I'm not familiar with the exact location where the incident occurred, however it seems that it would have been better handled if a specialised police unit had intercepted the cyclists. Perhaps not the YAMAM (an acronym for the Central Special Unit) a tough anti-terrorist border police unit better suited to deal with really violent encounters. It is equivalent to the US SWAT unit, the French GIGN and the German GSG-9. On the other hand the YASAM (Special Patrol Unit) is a police riot and disturbances dispersal unit trained and equipped to handle less violent confrontations. I don’t know why Eisner’s patrol was deployed instead of a YASAM unit.

Apparently the foreign news media took no special interest in Shalom Eisner and his short temper.

The low profile meeting between Palestinians and Israelis this week hardly raised a ripple of interest. It should have been a tête-à-tête between Prime Ministers Netanyahu and Fayad, but ended up as a postal delivery, merely a letter from Mahmoud Abbas to Bibi Netanyahu. Thomas L. Friedman and others have often urged Israel to make an extra effort concerning peace negotiations with the Palestinian Authority. True, it’s bound to annoy the West Bank settlers and their Knesset representatives. It would also entail a building freeze, but like the adage about bringing a horse to water, the Palestinians won't sign any accord that doesn't demand the repatriation of their refugees. The US and the EU understand that Israel will never agree to rehabilitate Palestinian refugees within its borders. Acquiescing on the refugees is tantamount to national suicide. The parameters of a bilateral agreement have been drawn up in previous negotiations. All that remains is to call their bluff on the refugee issue. Israel's international image has everything to gain if we take the initiative.

Initiative of another kind demonstrates cooperation is possible. At least 500 million birds of 200 different species fly across Israel each spring and autumn en route to and from Africa, Europe and Asia. And more than 70 native Israeli species, such as the hoopoe (its national bird since 2008), cuckoo, Egyptian vulture, short-toed eagle, hobby and lesser kestrel, often head to warmer Africa in winter.

Hordes of birdwatchers from across the globe flock to strategic locations along the migratory route twice every year to take in this extraordinary sight. All year long, naturalists work hard to preserve flyways, gather data on the visiting birds and teach adults and children how to make these feathered friends feel welcome

These initiatives have continued and expanded. Israel now has a national network of 10 bird-watching stations run in cooperation with the Israel Ornithology Centre. Ornithologist Yossi Leshem is working with Palestinian and Jordanian authorities to attract additional eco-tourists and birdwatchers to the Middle East. This kind of “fly-in” is definitely welcome.

.

Have a good weekend

Beni 19^th of April 2012.

A lost cause

For some people Passover/Pesach week is a gastronomic ordeal. In Israel, unless you are an unabashed sinner and have stocked up on leavened food products to tide you over till the bakers knead again, you will have to grin and bear it. However, the enforcement of the Matzot Law 2008 is very lax and if you are prepared to go the extra mile, you might find a minimart that sells “Chametz.” In our neck of the woods that extra mile stretches to Nazareth, a short drive from Ein Harod. Ironically supermarkets in Nazareth stock matzot all the year round. It appears the Arabs have acquired a taste for the “bread of our affliction.”

One of the affliction events in the Israeli Arab’s calendar is “Land Day,” an annual event that commemorates the violent clashes between the Israeli security forces (the army and the police) and Arab protestors at the time of first Land Day in 1976.

Despite rousing promos and advance preparations this year’s event was poorly attended. On Land Day which fell on the 30^th of March, our borders were quiet. In fact the total attendance at protest rallies and marches held in Israel and the Arab states was far less than the number of participants in the Tel Aviv marathon held the same day. The organisers reported that 25,000 runners started the race and 100,000 supporters lined the marathon route.

The lack of response to the Land Day events can be attributed to a number of causes. The Tel Aviv marathon certainly wasn’t one of them.

For decades the Palestinian cause enjoyed broad-based support throughout the Middle East. Since the advent of the “Arab Spring,” the Palestinian Cause has largely been ignored. Unfinished business at home, namely, the ongoing political struggle throughout the Levant, has taken precedence over everything else.

For many years the Palestinian Cause was staunchly supported by the left flank of the Israeli political spectrum. For decades justice for the Palestinians was a defining issue succinctly worded in party manifestos. Now it is passé, omitted, largely forgotten. There were too many “initiatives” that fizzled out to maintain the support and interest of Israeli peaceniks. Arafat’s reluctance to really move forward at Camp David may not have been the “last straw,” but it was one of many last straws. There were too many shuttles between Jerusalem and Ramallah and too many agreements that were “almost signed.” Middle East affairs analyst Guy Bechor wrote the bottom line in an article he wrote for Yediot Ahronot this week. “When the Left discovered that the Palestinians have no interest in peace or negotiations, it replaced the Palestinian agenda with a new one, premised on social issues like cottage cheese and the tent protest.”

In his New York Times column Thomas L. Friedman gave the Palestinians some practical advice. The piece entitled “A Middle East Twofer” (I believe that’s an Americanism meaning two for the price of one) takes up the call made by Palestinian leader Marwan Barghouti currently serving five life sentences. Friedman wrote, “His call for nonviolent resistance is noteworthy and the latest in a series of appeals to and by Palestinians — coming from all over — to summon their own “Arab Awakening,” but do it nonviolently, with civil disobedience or boycotts of Israel, Israeli settlements or Israeli products.

I can certainly see the efficacy of nonviolent resistance by Palestinians to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank — on one condition: They accompany any boycotts, sit-ins or hunger strikes with a detailed map of the final two-state settlement they are seeking. Just calling for “an end to occupation” won’t cut it.

Palestinians need to accompany every boycott, hunger strike or rock they throw at Israel with a map delineating how, for peace, they would accept getting back 95 percent of the West Bank and all Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem and would swap the other 5 percent for land inside pre-1967 Israel. Such an arrangement would allow some 75 percent of the Jewish settlers to remain in the West Bank, while still giving Palestinians 100 percent of the land back. “

A number of political observers claim that Prime Minister Netanyahu’s coalition government can’t, or doesn’t want to negotiate with the Palestinians. Furthermore, they say, “What incentive is there to make territorial concessions when they will only undermine Israel’s security.” Friedman believes he has the formula for an agreement. “The Iron Law of the peace process is that whoever makes the Israeli silent majority feel morally insecure about occupation but strategically secure in Israel wins.” ….” Unabated, disruptive Palestinian civil disobedience in the West Bank, coupled with a map delineating a deal most Israelis would buy, is precisely what would make Israelis feel morally insecure but strategically secure and revive the Israeli peace camp. It is the only Palestinian strategy Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu fears, but it is one that he is sure Palestinians would never adopt. He thinks it’s not in their culture. Will they surprise him?” Tom Friedman has said something similar in other articles he wrote. However, in last week’s column he didn’t mention the Palestinian demand for the repatriation of the Palestinian refugees. Abbas, Fayyad or even Barghouti would never be able to pen an agreement that states the refugees won’t be coming home. The vague chance of that happening has been compounded by the efforts for a rapprochement between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas.

I could claim that we have every reason to be smug. The world, especially the Arab World has forgotten the Palestinians. We can continue building in east Jerusalem and the West Bank with impunity. Soon it will be impossible to draw the borders of a contiguous Palestinian state.

Israel is unquestionably the strongest state in the Middle East. We have learnt how to deal with the threat of asymmetric warfare. We build smart fences and walls, we devise defence systems that counter anti-tank and anti-personnel carrier projectiles. We have our Iron Dome, David’s Sling and the Arrow anti-ballistic missile system. Perhaps we’re not impregnable but we are damn hard to hit. Furthermore we are getting better at hitting our would be assailants before they can hit us. Pre-empting is our forte.

I think most Israelis are not too concerned that the Palestinians haven’t got a state. Nonetheless, they would probably accept Tom Friedman’s Iron Law, partly because they don’t expect it to happen soon.

However, we are concerned by boycotts and blacklisting exercised against Israelis and Israeli products. Once we were the darlings of the Western world. Now we are closer to being a Pariah state. That worries me, especially knowing that we won’t wake up one morning and discover that all the Palestinians have packed their goods and chattels and emigrated to the Yukon or Northern Territory. They are here to stay. We can’t push them over the border to Jordan or Egypt.

At this juncture I simply have to mention Günter Grass. The Nobel prize winning author published a nine stanza poem recently.

An article in the New York Times explained why Grass chose now to publish his diatribe “Why do I say only now, aged and with my last drop of ink, that the nuclear power Israel endangers an already fragile world peace? Because that must be said which may already be too late to say tomorrow.”

In an interview with Süddeutsche Zeitung the paper that published his poem Grass said he did not mean to attack Israel, but Mr. Netanyahu’s policies. “I should have also brought that into the poem,” he said.

In an interview with Der Spiegel, the Israeli historian Tom Segev said that the poem seems to be more about Grass's long silence about his own Nazi past than about German silence about Israel's nuclear programme.

However, what makes the publication of the poem significant is that it expresses a sense of anger against Israel that – justified or not – many Germans seem increasingly to share. This anger is partly a response to Israel's rightward shift during the past decade. But it seems also to be a product of developments in Germany and in particular the way that the Holocaust has receded in significance during the last decade. Increasingly, Germans seem to see themselves as victims rather than perpetrators.

Columnist Anshel Pfeffer who writes for Haaretz, entitled his column "The Moral Blindness of Günter Grass."

“Logic and reason are useless when a highly intelligent man, a Nobel laureate no less, does not understand that his membership in an organization that planned and carried out the wholesale genocide of millions of Jews disqualified him from criticizing the descendants of those Jews for developing a weapon of last resort that is the insurance policy against someone finishing the job his organization began,” … “Having served in the organization that tried, with a fair amount of success, to wipe the Jews off the face of the earth he should keep his views to himself when it comes to the Jews’ doomsday weapon.”

Our interior minister Eli Yishai declared Günter Grass persona non grata. I doubt if the author is perturbed by Yishai’s peevish knee-jerk reaction. Well maybe that was the last drop of ink from Günter Grass.

My closing comments this week reflect back to Pesach/Passover

This year too old and new doubts concerning the authenticity of the exodus narrative have been aired. Archaeologist Professor Israel Finkelstein’s book "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts" raised quite a storm when it was published almost a decade ago. Finkelstein and others claim the exodus never occurred. Just the same he sees no contradiction between holding a proper Pesach Seder and telling the story of the exodus from Egypt, and his personal opinion.

Biblical scholar Israel Knohl’s latest book “Ha-Shem: The Secret Numbers of the Hebrew Bible and the Mystery of the Exodus from Egypt” also promotes the no exodus opinion. Knohl states there was no need for an exodus because Canaan was one of Egypt’s vassal states The Egyptians were here.. The sea crossed by the Israelites in the Exodus narrative was not the Red Sea. The original text refers to it as the Sea of Reeds. Knohl identifies it as Lake Hula in the north of Israel. There are no reeds in the Red Sea, however the Egyptians planted reeds in Lake Hula. According to Professor Knohl the Israelites were a Canaanite tribe that gained independence from their Egyptian overlords.

I’m waiting for interior minister Eli Yishai ( Shas religious party) to declare Israel Knohl persona non grata.

Last week I included a link to video of our Cutting of the Omer ceremony.

I am including here a hyperlink to this year’s ceremony:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GxAGA0vefM&feature=youtu.be

Chag Sameach

Beni 12^th of April, 2012.

"The voice of the turtledove is heard in our land."

“The flowers appear on the earth; the time of the singing of birds is come, and the voice of the turtledove is heard in our land.” Song of Solomon 2:12

Our spring festival, Pesach has arrived.

On Friday Millions of Jews all over the world will celebrate Pesach/Passover, the oldest festival in the Hebrew calendar. Whenever Pesach is mentioned the topic of “Chametz” arises. The accepted Orthodox definition of Chametz is a food product that is made from one of five types of grain, and has been combined with water and left to stand for longer than eighteen minutes. As we know observant Jews meticulously remove and burn every trace of leavened food products found in their homes. On a household scale this isn’t really a problem, however when it comes to public and national institutions where huge quantities are involved, a waste not want not policy is adopted. The problem of obviating the possession of Chametz during the week of Pesach was solved by symbolically selling the nation’s chametz to a non Jew. For the past fifteen years Jabber Hussein, a Muslim Arab who lives in Abu Gosh signs an agreement with Israel’s chief rabbis whereby he buys all the public chametz in the country. He writes a cheque for $27,000, a deposit for the purchase. His money is returned after the holiday. This national self-deception brings to mind the bluff I mentioned last week. Jeffrey Goldberg’s opinion that Prime Minister Netanyahu is bluffing: “He has never had any intention of launching air and missile strikes against Iran’s nuclear program, and is working behind the scenes with Obama to stop Iran through sanctions.” Jeffrey Goldberg, Roger Cohen, Mark Perry and others quote many anonymous former high ranking persons in support of their claims. Perry in particular has an axe to grind. He served as an unofficial advisor to PLO Chairman and Palestinian President Yasser Arafat from 1989 to 2004. With reference to the article in Foreign Policy on the "Azerbaijan Connection" journalist Rafael Frankel complained that Perry wrote the piece without one single on-the-record source. Israeli Arab affairs analyst Ehud Yaari also took Perry to task. Yaari pointed out that the former Soviet era airfields in Azerbaijan mentioned by Perry are in the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh region inaccessible to Azerbaijan. Furthermore Israeli fighter bombers refuelling in Azerbaijan would have to fly over Turkey on the return journey to Israel, an extremely unlikely flight route.

Reputable media outlets insist on named sources because of accountability. Anonymous sources are accountable to no one. There is no consequence to unnamed sources getting facts wrong, telling half-truths, or outright lying. Anonymous sources can use the media for their own purposes as well. Perhaps one of the people quoted in Perry’s story has a personal axe to grind with the Mossad. Perhaps he or she is an opponent of going to war with Iran and feels that placing such a story in a prominent magazine will diminish those chances. There is no way to know his or her motivation for talking to the author of this article and therefore no way to confirm the veracity of the claims.

By contrast Jane’s Defence Weekly, a source I often quote from in my letters, is a very reputable publication. It’s a weekly magazine reporting on military and corporate affairs, one of a number of military-related publications named after John F.T. Jane, an Englishman who first published Jane's All the World's Fighting Ships in 1898.

Last week Jeremy Binnie, the magazine’s Middle East and Africa editor posted an article entitled ”Radar affray: Israeli-Azeri contract threatens Iran.” Binnie says Israel has outmanoeuvred Iran by signing a major deal to sell equipment to Azerbaijan. Despite that country’s attempts to convince Tehran that its growing defence cooperation with Israel is not a threat to its southern neighbour, Iran must be seriously concerned. Earlier this year Israel signed a $1.6 billion deal to supply anti-missile systems, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), intelligence equipment and other systems to Azerbaijan.

The sale included two Green Pine radar systems. For some time now Azerbaijan and Armenia have been at loggerheads over the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh region. Russia is eager to freeze the situation and prevent an outbreak of ethnic feuds in neighbouring states. In a masterly move the Russians supplied both Armenia and Azerbaijan with S-300 radar defence systems, thereby stalemating aggressive intentions by either or both sides in the dispute. In this situation it would seem that the Green Pine radar system is superfluous.

However, from Israel’s point of view the advantage in having the Green Pine positioned in Azerbaijan is that it could provide advance warning of long-range missiles being fired from northwestern Iran. In addition the Green Pine could be moved to another location for the purpose of tracking Iranian missile test launches. The Green Pine system is an integral part of the Arrow ballistic missile defence system. An additional possibility is that the Green Pine system could be integrated with Azerbaijan’s S-300 radar systems. Binnie says, ”Israeli technicians would relish the opportunity to examine the most advanced air-defence system Russia offers for export. Understandably the Russians would try to prevent this happening. If the S-300 is compromised by the Israelis it would be less attractive to potential customers.” Last but certainly not least, the Iranians may also be alarmed by reports that the Green Pine system could be used as a directed energy weapon. It could be used to jam Iranian air-defence radars, thereby opening a door for an Israeli air strike on Iran’s strategic weapons facilities. The Green Pine system is an indigenous Israeli development that is jointly funded and produced with the United States.

The cover of the same issue of Jane’s carried the title “Hard target – Israeli options for striking Iran’s nuclear sites.” The lead article in the magazine was headed, “Studies in pre-emption.” The six-page article presented a well argued analysis of Israel’s attack options. Admittedly this isn’t the first time these options have been presented by the Israeli and foreign new media. However, the article in Jane’s was thoroughly researched and supported by reliable sources.

Jane’s analyses the various attack avenues, their advantages and disadvantages as well as the crucial need to refuel en route to the targets or on the return journey. The authors conclude their assessment with the following remarks. “The significant distances involved and the hardened features of Iran’s nuclear facilities make any ‘massive surprise’ aerial attack a very high-risk operation for Israel to undertake on its own. As a result Israel will be keen to secure US support for any military actions against Iran.” This is unlikely in an election year. Nevertheless, the authors hinge their reasoning on the existential threat element. “The belief that Iran might be on the cusp of weaponising its nuclear ambitions could nevertheless spur the Israelis into military action.”

Most of the subtle Azerbaijan strategy concerns Israeli and foreign think tanks, Middle East analysts, but I don’t think rank and file Israelis are overly concerned about it this week. We are overburdened with the logistics of Pesach. Commuting to and from the Seder (Passover meal), or alternatively how to accommodate all the guests coming to your Seder. Some of them might prefer to stay the night, so you need to provide a place for them to stay. This year too I am in charge of the seating arrangements for Ein Harod’s communal Seder. Not an easy task, however, with the help of computer aids we manage to satisfy everyone. Ein Harod like the majority of kibbutz communities is a decidedly secular kibbutz.

The Haggadah, recounts the narrative of the exodus from Egypt. The extant text has evolved since it was first transmitted from the oral traditional narrative to a written text in the thirteenth century. The kibbutz Haggadah draws heavily on the traditional texts combining them with modern themes. One researcher described it as follows, “It was written by people who left their families and birth lands, and moved to the Land of Israel to re-create themselves. They sat around the Seder table during the 1920s and 30s, close to the sites where the historical events took place but far removed from their families and traditional Seder nights, and tried to reconnect, in an honest and direct way, to their Jewish roots.
In practice, they were searching for themselves and their personal-kibbutz-national stories among the holiday stories. In doing so, they created a new tradition.
A kibbutz Pessah is the creation of dedicated secularists, who believed they were taking part in something much larger. They did not see their modern lives as disconnected from thousands of years of Jewish history, but rather as a link in the chain. “

Click on the hyperlink below to open a video I made of our Cutting of the Omer ceremony in 2010.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQ6rpuCdkHo

Chag Pesach Sameach

Beni 6^th of April, 2012