• Middle East and North Africa
    The New York Times and Israel (Again)
    The New York Times, whose hostility to Israel is visible in both its news and its editorial pages, was at it again yesterday. In an editorial (about the symbolic vote in the UK parliament backing Palestinian statehood) entitled "A British Message to Israel," the Times’s editorial board unloaded yet again with a barrage of advice, opinion--and untruths. Here are some of the key words: The vote is one more sign of the frustration many people in Europe feel about the failure to achieve an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement despite years of promises. The most recent American-mediated talks collapsed in April. Meanwhile, Israel continues to build new settlements or expand existing ones, thus shrinking the territory available for a Palestinian state and ignoring an international community that considers such construction illegal. The recent war in Gaza between Israel and Hamas, which killed more than 2,000 Palestinians and 73 Israelis, has increased the sense that violence will keep recurring while peace remains elusive. There are a couple of points worth making in reaction to this.  First, on settlements, note that the Times makes two claims: that "Israel continues to build new settlements" and that expansion of existing ones is "shrinking the territory available for a Palestinian state." Neither assertion is true. In the last decade the Israelis removed all the settlements in Gaza and four very small ones in the West Bank. The days of building new settlements all over the West Bank are long gone. And "settlement expansion" has meant expansion of population, not territory, so their footprint in the West Bank has not changed. The so-called "peace map" is the same. Second, note the way the Times refers to the recent Gaza war: It seems that "violence will keep recurring." How nasty of Violence to do that. The Times does not consider that Hamas deliberately started this conflict, and by burying this sentence in an editorial censuring Israel makes it clear that Israel is really to blame. This is ludicrous, considering the barrages of rockets and missiles and mortars Hamas shot into Israel, but it is of a piece with the Times’s general view: Israel is the problem. It is this bias that, last summer, led one of America’s leading Reform rabbis to cancel his subscription. He is Richard Block, president for 2013-2015 of of the association of Reform rabbis (the CCAR). Here is how Block began: I am a lifelong Democrat, a political liberal, a Reform rabbi, and for four decades, until last week, a New York Times subscriber. What drove me away was the paper’s incessant denigration of Israel, a torrent of articles, photographs, and op-ed columns that consistently present the Jewish State in the worst possible light. This phenomenon is not new. Knowledgeable observers have long assailed the Times lack of objectivity and absence of journalistic integrity in reporting on Israel. My chronic irritation finally morphed into alienation and then to visceral disgust this summer, after Hamas renewed its terrorist assaults upon Israel and the Times launched what can only be described as a campaign to delegitimize the Jewish State. That campaign continues, most recently in the editorial about the British move.
  • Yemen
    Weekend Reading: Houthi Rebels, Orthodox Intelligence, and Combative Kurdish Women
    Abdul-Ghani Al-Iryani finds that Yemen is becoming polarized between the Shia Houthi rebels and the Sunni Islah Islamist party. J. J. Goldberg looks at the rising influence of the right in Israel’s security and intelligence agencies. Bilal Ahmed explores the media’s fascination with the female soldiers of the Kurdish Peshmerga.
  • Middle East and North Africa
    Rebuilding Gaza Starts Slowly--Very Slowly
    The Hamas claim of victory in last summer’s conflict with Israel was based largely on the associated claim that life in Gaza would now change to the great benefit of the people living there. A vast reconstruction program would commence almost immediately. But now it’s October, and there has been no reconstruction. An Associated Press story tells the tale: More than five weeks after the Israel-Hamas war in the Gaza Strip, tens of thousands of people whose homes were destroyed or badly damaged in the fighting still live in classrooms, storefronts and other crowded shelters. In some of the hardest-hit areas, the displaced have pitched tents next to the debris that once was their homes....reconstruction efforts appear stymied by a continued Israeli-Egyptian border blockade of Gaza and an unresolved power struggle between the Islamic militant group Hamas and Western-backed Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas....Skepticism about rebuilding efforts is widespread in Gaza. The recent 50-day war was the third in the territory in just over five years. Many homes destroyed in previous fighting still haven’t been rebuilt. There are at least two main issues. First, Egypt and Israel want to be sure that construction materials do not go to Hamas for its construction of tunnels, arms depots, and other means of making war rather than for building homes, schools, and the like. They also want to be sure that Hamas does not smuggle in arms and ammunition. This means the establishment of a border control regime and some way of identifying end users inside Gaza. Second, the power struggle between Hamas and Fatah (or the Palestinian Authority--same thing) continues. On October 12 in Cairo, at an international conference on rebuilding Gaza, PA president Mahmoud Abbas will ask for $4 billion in pledges. He may get some pledges; cash is a different story. Many donors are wary of corruption in the PA and in Hamas, and fear Hamas efforts to divert funds and materials to illicit terrorist uses. Donors from the EU have made some foolish statements about how tired they are of paying for reconstruction of buildings that Israel then bombs, and appear to be seeking some Israeli promise never to strike Gaza again. This is impossible, because Hamas remains in charge in Gaza and may well decide to launch fusillades of mortars and rockets into Israel again, hiding as it usually does within, behind, and under civilian facilities such as houses, mosques, and hospitals. If this happens Israel will respond, so the kind of pledge some European donors have been seeking is impossible to give. Hamas has chosen war several times before and may well choose it again. The central problem is that Hamas is still running Gaza. The new Palestinian "technocratic" government is not yet functioning, at least in the sense that it, and the PA, are actually in charge. No doubt Hamas would be happy to see lots of money coming into Gaza, and a deal has apparently been struck under which the PA will pay the salaries of Hamas civil servants in Gaza with new Qatari money, as well as continuing to pay its own. This deal is supposed to exclude terrorists, ie the so-called Hamas "armed wing," but who will really keep track? No doubt Hamas would be happy to see and take credit for a vast reconstruction program, and to allow PA agents to sit in border posts. But will it disband its own police and military forces? Will anyone in Gaza really believe the PA is in control, including the PA’s own agents? Will any Palestinian really raise a challenge when he or she sees diversion of material by Hamas, knowing that death could be the price to pay? Misery in Gaza is not in Israel’s interest nor that of Egypt, nor nowadays that of Hamas. There is a very widespread desire to alleviate the suffering in Gaza and begin reconstruction. But the practical problems are great, and reflect justifiable convictions that Hamas will take any opportunity to rebuild its own strength as its top priority, much more important to it than the mere reconstruction of houses and apartments. The skepticism on the part of Gazans reflects reality. As long as Hamas is in power in Gaza, reconstruction will be slow--and another round of conflict with Israel is quite possible.        
  • United States
    This Week: Turkey’s Dilemma and Egypt’s Beheadings
    Significant Developments Turkey-Syria. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Tuesday called on the U.S.-led coalition to supply arms and training to opposition ground troops in Syria, arguing that “Kobani [was] about to fall” to ISIS. Erdogan nonetheless refused to commit Turkish ground forces. The Turkish leader’s decision to withhold ground troops, stemming primarily from a refusal to engage with affiliates of the PKK, sparked clashes between Kurdish protesters and security forces throughout Turkey. More than 19 people were killed and 36 injured in the confrontations Tuesday night and Turkish authorities imposed curfews in six provinces. Meanwhile, ISIS is poised to take the town of Kobani, where over 12,000 Kurdish civilians are currently trapped. The U.S.-led coalition has conducted 11 airstrikes against ISIS troops around Kobani this week, but Pentagon spokesperson Rear Admiral John Kirby said today that, “airstrikes alone are not ... going to save the town of Kobani.” Egypt. The Sinai-based extremist Islamist group, Ansar Beit al-Maqdis, released a video on Monday showing members of the group beheading three Egyptian nationals and shooting to death a fourth. The group accused the three Egyptians who were beheaded of collaborating with Israeli Intelligence. The Egyptian who was shot dead reportedly confessed to serving as an informant for the Egyptian military. The video also included clips of recent speeches by ISIS leaders, implying that Ansar Beit al-Maqdis may be forging closer ties with the group. Egyptian military officials yesterday claimed the army killed 16 members of the group in operations targeting the militia’s hideouts. U.S. Foreign Policy UAE-Turkey-Saudi Arabia. Vice President Joseph Biden called Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed al Nahyan of Abu Dhabi on Sunday to apologize for comments made during a foreign policy speech at Harvard last Thursday. Biden had told a questioner that the United States’ biggest issue in its fight against ISIS and Syria was “America’s allies in the region.” He further accused the UAE of “funneling” weapons to Syrian rebels, enabling them to fall into the hands of extremists. It was the second apology of the weekend for Biden, who called Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Saturday to make amends for comments made during the same speech about Turkey allowing foreign fighters to cross its borders. A senior White House official confirmed on Monday that Biden was also reaching out to apologize to Saudi Arabia. Iraq-Syria. U.S. Central Command released figures on Monday indicating that the Pentagon has spent over $1.1 billion on U.S. army and navy operations in Iraq and Syria since the middle of June. Officials speculate that daily costs have totaled between $7 and $10 million dollars since then. Costs increased noticeably once U.S. airstrikes began over Iraq in August and continued to rise when military operations were extended to Syria in September. Israel. The White House responded strongly on Monday to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s suggestion the day before on CBS’ “Face the Nation” that criticism of Israel’s settlement activity was contrary to “American values.” White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest retorted that “American values” were responsible for providing “unwavering support to Israel” and that U.S. funding for the Iron Dome had ensured the safety of Israeli citizens from Hamas rockets in the Gaza conflict this summer. President Barack Obama had warned that the building of new settlements risked “poison[ing] the atmosphere” with Palestinians and the Arab World. While We Were Looking Elsewhere Yemen. Houthi rebels rejected the nomination of Ahmed Awad bin Mubarak as new prime minister on Tuesday. The Houthis did not consider him sufficiently independent since he is a top aide of President Abdu Rabbu Mansour Hadi. In other news, security officials in Yemen reported today the occurrence of six simultaneous attacks on security bases and government offices in the south of the capital, Sana’a. The blasts, which killed twenty-nine people, have been attributed to alleged al-Qaeda militants. Iraq. Dutch F-16 fighter planes carried out their first strikes against ISIS targets in Iraq on Tuesday in support of the U.S.-led coalition. The strikes allegedly destroyed several vehicles, and may also have succeeding in killing ISIS fighters. Meanwhile, the Canadian parliament voted to join the international coalition in airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq. Israel-ISIS. Police in Nazareth retrieved around two dozen flags bearing the ISIS logo from the city’s industrial area. Police have begun investigating potential uses and owners. Israel officially banned forging relationships with anyone affiliated with ISIS in September. Israeli police recently apprehended two ISIS supporters: a 24 year old teacher, who confessed to smuggling ISIS and jihad-related material from Jordan; and a Palestinian woman prisoner who praised ISIS to other prisoners. Israeli officials complained to the Swedish ambassador to Jerusalem on Monday to object to Sweden’s new prime minister’s decision to recognize a state of Palestine. The new center-right government, led by Prime Minister Stefan Lofven, would be the first member of the EU to recognize a Palestinian state. Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called the decision “counter-productive,” while officials in Washington called the announcement “premature.” Lebanon. Hezbollah claimed responsibility yesterday for planting a bomb on Lebanon’s southern border that injured two Israeli soldiers. The explosion came two days after Israeli soldiers fired at a Lebanese Army post. In retaliation, the Israeli army fired artillery close to residential areas along the border. Today the U.S. embassy in Beirut in Lebanon called on Hezbollah and the Lebanese army to support the United Nations peacekeeping efforts to maintain quiet on the ground.
  • United States
    Voices From the UN General Assembly
    International efforts to combat ISIS dominated the recent debate in New York when world leaders converged for the UN General Assembly’s sixty-ninth session. Middle East Matters has excerpted passages from regional leaders, all of whom spoke about the ISIS challenge, though in markedly different ways. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict and this summer’s fighting also featured heavily, with most speeches specifically calling for the Gaza strip to be rebuilt. Also noteworthy was what wasn’t mentioned. Niether Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi nor Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Al-Moualem said a word about Gaza. Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani chose not to name ISIS explicitly, though he implied that the Assad regime was to blame for the region’s ills. Here’s what some of them had to say:   President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, Egypt On ISIS-Terrorism “The formation of a new government approved by the Parliament in the brotherly country of Iraq is a significant development that restores hope in the possibility of an improvement in the situation there, and in the success of the internal and external attempts to achieve stability, restore the areas that fell under the control ofthe terrorist organization ‘ISIS’, maintain the territorial integrity of Iraq, end the bloodshed, and realize the aspirations and hopes of the Iraqis, as well as their efforts to bring back security and stability in their country.” On Israel/Palestine/Gaza “Despite the multitude of crises threatening our region, some of which I alluded to, the Palestinian issue remains a top priority for Egypt. Palestinians still aspire to establish their independent state on the occupied territories in 1967, with East Jerusalem as its capital, on the basis of the principles upon which the peace process was established since the nineteen seventies following an Egyptian initiative. These principles are not up for negotiation, otherwise the basis of a comprehensive peace in the region would erode, and the values of justice and humanity would vanish. The continued deprivation of the Palestinian people of their rights is undoubtedly exploited by some to inflame other crises, achieve hidden goals, fragment Arab unity, and impose control on Palestinians under the guise of realizing their aspirations.” On Egypt’s internal situation “The world is starting to grasp the reality of what happened in Egypt, and to understand the circumstances that drove Egyptians to intuitively take to the streets to rebel against the forces of extremism and darkness, which once in power, undermined the foundations of the democratic process and national institutions, and sought to impose a state of polarization to break the unity ofthe people.” President Hassan Rouhani, Iran On ISIS-Terrorism “I deeply regret to say that terrorism has become globalized: "From New York to Mosul, from Damascus to Baghdad, from the Easternmost to the Westernmost parts of the world, from Al-Qaeda to Daesh". The extremists of the world have found each other and have put out the call: "extremists of the world unite". But are we united against the extremists?!” “The strategic blunders of the West in the Middle-East, Central Asia, and the Caucuses have turned these parts of the world into a haven for terrorists and extremists.” On Israel/Palestine//Gaza “Had we had greater cooperation and coordination in the Middle East, thousands of innocent Palestinians in Gaza would not have been fallen victim to Zionist regime’s aggression.” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel On ISIS-Terrorism "Last week, many of the countries represented here rightly applauded President Obama for leading the effort to confront ISIS. And yet weeks before, some of the same countries, the same countries that now support confront ISIS, opposed Israel for confronting Hamas. They evidently don’t understand that ISIS and Hamas are branches of the same poisonous tree." “So, when it comes to their ultimate goals, Hamas is ISIS and ISIS is Hamas”. “But they all share a fanatic ideology. They all seek to create ever expanding enclaves of militant Islam where there is no freedom and no tolerance- where women are treated as chattel, Christians are decimated, and minorities are subjugated, sometimes given the stark choice: convert or die.” On Israeli-Palestinian peace “Many have long assumed that an Israeli-Palestinian peace can help facilitate a broader rapprochement between Israel and the Arab World. But these days I think it may work the other way around: Namely that a broader rapprochement between Israel and the Arab world may help facilitate an Israeli-Palestinian peace. And therefore, to achieve that peace, we must look not only to Jerusalem and Ramallah, but also to Cairo, to Amman, Abu Dhabi, Riyadh and elsewhere […]” On Iran "The Nazis believed in a master race. The militant Islamists believe in a master faith. They just disagree about who among them will be the master...of the master faith. That’s what they truly disagree about. Therefore, the question before us is whether militant Islam will have the power to realize its unbridled ambitions. There is one place where that could soon happen: The Islamic State of Iran." "Imagine how much more dangerous the Islamic State, ISIS, would be if it possessed chemical weapons. Now imagine how much more dangerous the Islamic state of Iran would be if it possessed nuclear weapons." His Majesty King Abdullah II, Jordan On ISIS-Terrorism “The teachings of true Islam are clear: sectarian conflict and strife are utterly condemned. Islam prohibits violence against Christians and other communities that make up each country. Let me say once again: Arab Christians are an integral part of my region’s past, present, and future.” On Israel/Palestine/Gaza “We cannot address the future of my region without addressing its central conflict: the denial of Palestinian rights and statehood.” “A first, imperative step is to mobilise international efforts to rebuild Gaza. As we do so, we must also marshal the united, global response needed to achieve a once-and-for-all, lasting settlement.” On Refugees “The heavy flow of Syrian refugees continues. My country is sheltering nearly 1.4 million Syrians. We are now the world’s third largest host of refugees. This is placing an overwhelming burden on Jordan’s people, infrastructure and already limited resources.” President Mahmoud Abbas, Palestine On ISIS-Terrorism “Confronting the terrorism that plagues our region by groups - such as "ISIL" and others that have no basis whatsoever in the tolerant Islamic religion or with humanity and are committing brutal and heinous atrocities - requires much morethan military confrontation. […] It requires, in this context and as a priority, bringing an end to the Israeli occupation of our country, which constitutes in its practices and perpetuation, an abhorrent form of state terrorism anda breeding ground for incitement, tension and hatred.” On Israel/Palestine/Gaza "This last war against Gaza was a series of absolute war crimes carried out before the eyes and ears of the entire world, moment by moment, in a manner that makes it inconceivable that anyone today can claim that they did not realize the magnitude and horror of the crime." “We reaffirm here that the primary prerequisite for the success of all these plans and efforts is an end to the ongoing Israeli blockade that has for years suffocated the Gaza Strip and turned it into the largest prison in the world for nearly two million Palestinian citizens. At the same time, we affirm our commitment and the necessity to consolidate the cease-fire through negotiations under the auspices of Egypt.” Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani, Qatar On ISIS-Terrorism “It has been proven beyond doubt, that terrorism can only be defeated in its social environment. If societies are to stand with us in the fight against terrorism, we need to be fair with them and not push them to choose between terrorism and tyranny, or between terrorism and sectarian discrimination.” “This is what the majority of the Syrian people must be persuaded of after being soaked in blood spilled by the Syrian regime for daring to demand freedom and dignity.” On Israel/Palestine/Gaza “The damages caused by the repeated Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip over the past years, the unjust siege imposed on it, and the destruction it caused in its infrastructure, make it imperative for the international community to compel Israel to implement the resolutions of the international legitimacy, fulfill its obligations and expedite the removal of obstacles in order to lift the blocade and achieve the reconstruction process.” “The international community’s response to the aspirations of the Palestinian people to freedom and national independence is a prerequisite to confirm the justice of international legitimacy, especially since the question of Palestine is the last remaining issue on the decolonization agenda.” Minister of Foreign Affairs Walid Al-Moualem, Syria On ISIS-Terrorism “You are witnessing today what the ISIS, the most dangerous terrorist organization in the world at all in terms of funding and brutality is doing to Syrians and Iraqis of all spectra and religions. This terrorist organization is enslaving women, raping them and selling them in slave markets; it is cutting heads and limbs, and it is teaching children slaughter and murder, besides destroying historical and cultural monuments, as well as Islamic and Christian Symbols.” “Has not the moment of truth arrived for us all to admit that ISIS, Al-Nusrah Front and the rest of Al-Qaeda affiliates, will not be limited within the borders of Syria and Iraq, but will spread to every spot it can reach, starting with Europe and America?” “Let us together stop this ideology and its exporters, let us, simultaneously, exert pressure on the countries that joined the coalition led by the United States to stop their support of armed terrorist groups”. On Israel/Palestine/Gaza “Syria confirms, also, that the Palestinian issue is the central issue of the Syrian people, which supports the inalienable and legitimate rights of the brotherly Palestinian people, particularly, the right to return and self-determination, and to establish its independent state on its land, with Jerusalem as its capital.” On the internal political situation in Syria “Now, after the presidential elections, we would like to tell everyone that who wants and looks forward to a political solution in Syria that they must firstly respect the Syrian people’s will, which was manifested explicitly, clearly, strongly and most loudly. They chose their President, for the first time in Syria’s modern history, in multi-party elections, with international monitors from several countries that witnessed the integrity, transparency and the enthusiasm of the people to participate in these elections.” Minister of Foreign Affairs Sheikh Abdullah Bin Zayed Al Nahyan, United Arab Emirates On ISIS-Terrorism “With the increased incidence of terrorism and extremism in our region, most notably perpetrated by ISIS, the international community must be aware that the threats posed by these terrorist and extremist groups are expanding beyond our region to threaten the rest of the civilized world.” On Israel/Palestine/Gaza “The UAE strongly condemns Israel’s aggression against Gaza, especially the destruction inflicted upon its population and civilian facilities, including the United Nations’ facilities, and we demand a thorough, transparent and independent investigation be conducted, in order to determine the legal responsibility for these damages.” On Egypt “This hope is driven by the remarkable progress achieved by the new government in Egypt and its good governance in implementing its political roadmap. Despite the challenges facing Egypt, the signs of normalcy in public life and the revived economy and culture are promising.” “Therefore, the UAE regrets the statements of some countries and their unacceptable questioning of the legitimacy of the Egyptian government. The present Egyptian government was freely elected by its people, who believe in their ability to fulfill their aspirations. Questioning the Egyptian people’s will and their right to choose their representatives is an interference in the internal affairs of Egypt and undermines its stability. Accordingly, I would like to emphasize that the stability of our region depends on the stability of Egypt.”  
  • Middle East and North Africa
    The President and the New Housing in Jerusalem
    In December 2012, the Jerusalem District Planning and Building Committee announced a major new housing project. In an area of east Jerusalem called Givat Hamatos, 2600 units would be built. Of some significance, half would be set aside for Jewish residents and half for Arab Jerusalemites.  Last week, just before the New Year’s holiday, the deputy mayor of Jerusalem signed an order described as "symbolic," continuing official approvals of the work. (Background: Givat Hamatos means "Airplane Hill" in Hebrew, and was named that after an Israeli jet crash landed there in the 1967 war. It is mostly barren land, and has been used in the past to house poor Ethiopian and Russian immigrant families. More details here.) This became an international incident thanks to the clever folks at the Israeli group called "Peace Now." The fact of the deputy mayor’s action had been in the press but attracted little notice until Peace Now gave it great publicity--which played right into the Obama-Netanyahu meeting. This is what led the President to order his spokesman to say the following: This development will only draw condemnation from the international community. It also would call into question Israel’s ultimate commitment to a peaceful negotiated settlement with the Palestinians. Jerusalem’s mayor Nir Barkat responded: I will not freeze construction for anyone in Israel’s capital. Discrimination based on religion, race or gender is illegal in the United States and in any other civilized country. 2,600 apartments in Givat HaMatos that we approved two years ago will enable more young people from all sectors and religions to live in Jerusalem and build their future here, thereby strengthening the capital of Israel. We will not apologize for that. The administration reaction is curious given that this is not new news, given that Arabs and Jews will live in this housing, and given the remarkably negative speech that Palestinian president Abbas gave to the UN last week. The State Department rejected that speech as "offensive" and "deeply disappointing." I suppose it’s possible that the President thought this had been too tough, and now wanted to "balance" things by tough words for Israel. But if this was a victory of sorts for Peace Now, it was no victory for the Obama administration or for those who seek peace negotiations. Building new housing for Arabs and Jews in Jerusalem does not in fact "call into question Israel’s ultimate commitment to a peaceful negotiated settlement with the Palestinians," the foolish and extreme phrase of both the White House spokesman and the State Department. Mr. Obama asked Netanyahu to "think outside the box" during their meeting. But calling upon Israel to stop housing construction in its capital city is not realistic. And what’s worse is that Washington apparently thinks housing construction for Arabs is fine and only condemns new housing for Jews; and by singling out neighborhoods appears to be saying that certain neighborhoods must not be allowed to become mixed ones and must remain free of Jewish residents. If that’s "out of the box" thinking, let’s get back in the box.    
  • Middle East and North Africa
    Abbas’s UNGA Speech
    Last week Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas gave a controversial speech to the United Nations General Assembly. Reactions have been strong. The U.S. State Department said "President Abbas’ speech today included offensive characterizations that were deeply disappointing and which we reject. Such provocative statements are counterproductive and undermine efforts to create a positive atmosphere and restore trust between the parties." The Palestinians replied by saying the American comments are “irresponsible, indecent and rejected.” What did Abbas say? Some highlights: Israel has chosen to make it a year of a new war of genocide perpetrated against the Palestinian people....the occupying Power has chosen to defy the entire world by launching its war on Gaza....the third war waged by the racist occupying State in five years against Gaza....This last war against Gaza was a series of absolute war crimes....In the name of Palestine and its people, I affirm here today: we will not forget and we will not forgive, and we will not allow war criminals to escape punishment....Israel refuses to end its occupation of the State of Palestine since 1967, but rather seeks its continuation and entrenchment, and rejects the Palestinian state and refuses to find a just solution to the plight of the Palestine refugees....Israel has confirmed during the negotiations that it rejects making peace with its victims, the Palestinian people....It is impossible, and I repeat – it is impossible – to return to the cycle of negotiations that failed to deal with the substance of the matter and the fundamental question. In that speech, Abbas said not one word of criticism of Hamas, nor did he acknowledge what is obvious: that Hamas started this war by its ceaseless bombardment of Israel with mortars and rockets. Presumably he decided that Palestinian domestic politics required him to avoid that truth and blame Israel for the conflict. Nevertheless, he always pays a price when making assertions that his listeners in the General Assembly hall know are not accurate. The accusation of genocide is particularly vile when thrown at Israel. The word has a meaning, and it is obviously absurd to claim that Israel’s actions in the Gaza war last summer were aimed at killing every Palestinian or a very large number of them or at eliminating the Palestinian people. As to the negotiations, it’s worth recalling what U.S. negotiator Martin Indyk has recently said. Here is one account: "We gave it everything we had, and we got nowhere," Indyk said, laying the blame "50-50" between Netanyahu and Abbas. Negotiations officially ended in April when Abbas opted to press for statehood through the United Nations rather than continue, a move that Israel had long said would be a deal-breaker. In recounting a nearly yearlong series of negotiations, Indyk said that both sides identified the agreement gaps early on and that Netanyahu eventually moved into "the zone of a possible agreement" on such thorny issues as the status of territories, Jerusalem, and mutual recognition of Israel’s and Palestine’s rights to exist. But during Abbas’s visit to Washington in March, he effectively "checked out" from the talks and stopped responding to proposals from the Obama administration on how to close a deal, Indyk said. Abbas "shut down," Indyk stated. Indyk spreads the blame to the Israelis and Palestinians both, but that of course was not what Abbas was doing. Every head of government or head of state who addresses the General Assembly presents his own case, not that of critics or opponents, but when the speeches lose touch with facts and reality they do more harm than good. So it is with Abbas’s words, which have been firmly denounced and rejected not only by the U.S. Government and the Israeli government but perhaps more significantly by the Israeli left as well. This kind of language by Abbas weakens Israel’s "peace camp," but Abbas does not seem to care. He is playing to a different set of audiences, including the many governments in the United Nations that would not recognize a serious, truthful speech if smacked in the face with it. Perhaps his main audience is at home, but I wonder how much good it does him, and his Fatah Party, to give Hamas a pass. It is true that Hamas’s popularity rose during and after the war, but that was predictable and the question is where it’s heading now. Hamas promised that this war, and the destruction and death it caused, would be compensated by new and vastly better conditions after the war. But soon it will be getting colder and rainy in Gaza as winter arrives. Will there be a reconstruction bonanza? Will Israel and Egypt open the passages? Will construction begin on a seaport, much less on an airport? And when Gazans see that the answer is no, where will Hamas’s popularity then be? Abbas’s frustrations must be great, especially after he heard President Obama say very little about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict other than to remark that it is simply not central. In his own address Obama said: The situation in Iraq, Syria and Libya should cure anyone of the illusion that this conflict is the main source of problems in the region; for far too long, it has been used in part as a way to distract people from problems at home. A speech that merely expresses anger and frustration is unlikely to help Abbas personally, his party, the Palestinian Authority, or Palestinians more generally. It was a lost opportunity--or perhaps more accurately, another lost opportunity. Perhaps the best description is the via the words his own spokesman used in attacking what the United States said: the Abbas speech was “irresponsible, indecent and rejected.”  
  • United States
    This Week: ISIS struck in Syria and Iraq as the Middle East takes center stage at the UN
    Significant Developments Syria. The United States conducted its first ever military strikes against ISIS in Syria this week, targeting primarily oil refineries and infrastructure used for command and control in Raqqa. U. S. military and intelligence officials said on Tuesday that the airstrikes had also targeted an al-Qaeda affiliate called Khorasan. The group had reportedly been organizing an “imminent” attack from Syria against the United States or Europe. According to press reports, U.S. ambassador to the UN Samantha Power informed her Syrian counterpart in advance of the airstrikes in Syria. Iraq’s new Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi claimed U.S. officials passed a message to the Assad government via Baghdad that the United States was not targeting his regime. A Syrian diplomat was quoted yesterday in a pro-regime newspaper saying, “the U.S. military leadership is now fighting in the same trenches with the Syrian generals.” Iraq. Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi expressed tentative support for U.S. airstrikes in Syria after being reassured that ISIS is the target. Abadi noted that, “as a neighbor, I don’t want to be party to the disintegration of Syria or to have diminished sovereignty of Syria.” France conducted its first airstrikes in Iraq as part of the U.S.-led coalition against ISIS on Monday. In retaliation to France’s attacks, a militant group affiliated with ISIS, Jund al-Khilafa, kidnapped and beheaded French national Hervé Gourdel in Algeria. President Francois Hollande declared at the United Nations that France will continue to provide military support to the coalition against ISIS. Meanwhile, the British parliament voted today to approve the United Kingdom’s participation in U.S.-led airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq. Iran. President Hassan Rouhani blamed the West and Arab regimes for creating ISIS at the UN General Assembly yesterday. Rouhani also suggested that Iran would not cooperate in U.S.-led efforts to combat ISIS until a deal is reached on Iran’s nuclear program. British Prime Minister David Cameron and Rouhani met in New York on Wednesday morning in the first summit meeting of the two countries since the Iranian Revolution in 1979. Meanwhile, a P5+1 meeting with Iranian officials scheduled for today in New York was cancelled at the last minute. French Foreign Minister Fabius told reporters, “We were due to have a meeting this morning of the P5+1 on one side and the Iranians on the other but because of a lack of progress, this meeting (had) to be called off.” U.S. Foreign Policy ISIS. President Barack Obama, speaking before the United Nations General Assembly on Wednesday, focused primarily on the threat posed by ISIS and Islamist radicals. Obama reaffirmed the need to establish a strong coalition against ISIS stating that “the United States of America will work with a broad coalition to dismantle this network of death, [as] the only language understood by killers like this [ISIS] is the language of force.” Later that day, Obama led a session of the United Nations Security Council which unanimously passed a resolution to calling upon states to adopt legislation to stop their citizens from travelling to join terrorist groups and from providing financial aid to them. While We Were Looking Elsewhere Arab Bank. On Monday, a federal jury in Brooklyn found the Amman-based Arab Bank, the largest financial institution in Jordan, liable for facilitating twenty-four terrorist attacks by Hamas between 2001 and 2004. It was the first jury verdict of a U.S. anti-terrorism statute passed in 1990. The lawyers of the plaintiffs, family members of victims of Hamas’ attacks, argued that the Arab Bank knowingly handled transfers and payments for members of the terrorist organization. The decision is being watched closely by banks throughout the Middle East. Turkey. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan suggested on Tuesday that the forty-nine hostages who were captured in Iraq and held for over three months by ISIS were released as a result of the Turkish government agreeing to a non-monetary deal with the group. Speaking at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, Erdogan refuted claims that a ransom was paid, but did not explicitly deny the possibility of a prisoner swap with ISIS, stating that “such a thing is possible.” Meanwhile, over 140,000 Syrian Kurds have sought refuge in Turkey since the ISIS attack on Kurdish town of Ayn al-Arab late last week. Turkey is currently hosting an estimated 1.6 million Syrian refugees. The United Nations has further warned that the numbers of Syrian Kurdish refugees could exceed 400,000 in the near future. Palestine. President Mahmoud Abbas, accusing Israel of conducting a “war of genocide” in Gaza, refrained from saying he will pursue war crimes against the Jewish state at the International Criminal Court. Abbas also said he would seek a UN resolution setting a deadline for Israel’s withdrawal from territories it captured in 1967, though he did not include a three-year target as other Palestinian officials said he would. Meanwhile, Hamas and Fatah officials reportedly made progress in talks yesterday about implementing the national reconciliation agreement that was first agreed upon last April. Moussa Abu Marzouk, a senior Hamas official, declared that the national unity government, which was sworn in on June 2, would take over government institutions and border crossings in Gaza. However, PLO officials cautioned that Thursday’s progress lacked substance and many of the areas of dispute, including payment of public employees in Gaza, have yet to be resolved. Yemen. Houthi rebels and the Yemeni transitional government agreed Sunday night to an immediately effective ceasefire and to form a new “technocratic national government” following the rebels’ successful assault on Sana’a. On Wednesday, the Yemeni state oil company announced a cut in fuel prices, which was one of the key demands of Houthi rebels, while Yemeni authorities freed two Hezbollah members with ties to the Houthis on Wednesday. Houthi fighters have thus far ignored the part of Sunday’s peace deal that called for them to withdraw from Sana’a. EU. Belgian authorities tightened security around the European Commission buildings on Monday following reports of a planned terrorist attack related to ISIS. Belgian authorities also confirmed that they had detained a couple on their return to Brussels from Syria under the country’s anti-terrorism laws. They were suspected of plotting an attack on the Commission buildings. Israel-Palestine. Two suspects in the June killing of the three Yeshiva students, which sparked the latest round of fighting in Gaza, were shot dead by the Israeli military on Tuesday. According to IDF spokesperson Lt. Col. Peter Lerner, the suspects were shot by the IDF after they “came out shooting” from the building they had been hiding in for a week. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu informed his cabinet on Tuesday that “there [has been] accounting of justice” despite the ongoing suffering of the boys’ parents. Conversely, several Palestinians have denounced the killing as extrajudicial. Hamas, who had previously confirmed the suspects were affiliated with the group, praised them as heroes and led a large-scale funeral procession in their honor. Israel-Syria. The Israeli military shot down a Syrian fighter plane on Tuesday when it crossed into Israeli-controlled air space over the Golan Heights. A spokesperson for the Israeli Air Force said that the pilots had ejected from the aircraft safely into Syrian controlled territory. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu confirmed the downing of the aircraft, expressing security concerns over the potential for Islamist militants to strike Israel.
  • United States
    This Week: Mobilizing to Counter ISIS
    Significant Developments Syria. French President Francois Hollande announced today that France would provide military support, including airstrikes, against ISIS in Iraq. On Monday, Australia, Germany, and the United Kingdom pledged support for the fight against ISIS following the conclusion of the Paris conference. Wrapping up his tour of the Middle East to recruit Arab support, Secretary of State John Kerry received assurances of good intentions from Egypt and Iraq, while Saudi Arabia pledged to provide the training of Syrian rebel forces at its bases. Less clear was what, if any, would be their military contributions. Germany is set to host a conference for Iraq and Syria in Berlin on October 28 to discuss security concerns in the region. Meanwhile, the United States carried out its first airstrikes in support of the Iraqi army on Monday, destroying six ISIS vehicles and a combat post. With the support of U.S. aircraft, Kurdish peshmerga forces recaptured seven Christian villages west of Irbil this week. Since President Barack Obama’s address to the nation last week pledging U.S. airstrikes again ISIS, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights has reported that 162 new recruits have joined ISIS training camps in Aleppo. On Tuesday, ISIS released a new propaganda video entitled “Flames of War,” showing wounded American soldiers and ending with “the fighting has just begun.” An unidentified surveillance drone, the first of its kind, was seen over Aleppo today, where ISIS militants reportedly began evacuating in anticipation of a U.S. airstrike. Meanwhile, ISIS seized twenty-one Kurdish villages in northern Syria close to the Turkish border, spurring the Kurdish Workers’ Party (PKK) to call on Turkish Kurds to come to the aid of the Syrian Kurdish population. Saudi Arabia.Saudi Arabia’s state appointed Council of Senior Scholars, led by Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdul Aziz Al al-Sheikh, declared terrorism a “heinous crime” yesterday. The Council, the sole body in Saudi Arabia empowered to issue fatwas (Islamic legal opinions), called for adherents to be publicly executed as a deterrent to future recruits and banned militant financing. The move follows previous public statements by the Saudi grand mufti in recent weeks in which he labelled al-Qaeda and ISIS militants “Islam’s foremost enemy.” U.S. Foreign Policy ISIS. President Barack Obama insisted yesterday, in a speech at MacDill Air Force Base, that the United States would not send troops to fight “another ground war in Iraq.” His assurances came a day after U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Martin Dempsey told the Senate Armed Services Committee that he could foresee the possibility of U.S. ground troops in Iraq. Aides subsequently said that Dempsey was merely “describing contingency plans” as part of his role as military advisor to the president. The U.S. House of Representatives yesterday authorized President Barack Obama to train and arm Syrian rebels as part of the U.S. led effort to defeat ISIS. The president, vice president and high-raking White House officials personally lobbied for the bill to be passed. The authorization, which was attached as an amendment to a bill to keep the government funded until December 11, was approved with a vote of 273 to 156. This will guarantee that the issue will be revisited in the near future when the routine funding legislation expires. While We Were Looking Elsewhere Qatar. Senior Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood leader Amr Darrag said that Qatar last Saturday asked several influential members of the Islamist group to leave the Gulf country last Saturday. The Qatari request suggests that Doha, a traditional Brotherhood ally, may be seeking to ease tensions with neighboring Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, both of which view the Brotherhood as a threat to their regimes. Turkey. Turkey’s military has reportedly initiated logistical planning for a buffer zone to be imposed on its southern border as protection against spillovers from the Syria and Iraqi conflicts. Turkish plans include possibly implementing a no-fly zone and providing humanitarian assistance to civilian refugees. The move follows reports last week that Turkey has ruled out participating in the U.S.-led coalition against ISIS. Meanwhile, President Tayyep Recep Erdogan hinted on Monday that members of the Muslim Brotherhood recently exiled from Qatar could be granted asylum in Turkey. Libya. Libya’s internationally recognized parliament rejected acting Prime Minister Abdullah al-Thinni’s proposed cabinet today amidst the country’s escalating security crisis. Members of Parliament had requested a streamlined ten person “crisis” cabinet, but al-Thinni submitted eighteen nominations. Both the parliament and al-Thinni are currently based in the eastern town of Tobruk, essentially in domestic exile after Islamists seized Tripoli and set up a rival government there. Al-Thinni has accused Qatar of contributing to the instability; on Monday, he claimed that Qatar sent three planes loaded with weapons to the opposition-controlled capital. Meanwhile, Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Garcia-Margallo warned yesterday that Libya could devolve into a civil war and become another Syria at an international conference on Libya. Sixteen foreign ministers attended the conference along with representatives from the UN and the Arab League. Egypt. In an unusual ruling, an Egyptian court released Alaa Abd El Fattah , a prominent political activist and blogger from prison on bail last Monday. Abd al Fattah has been imprisoned under four different administrations in Egypt, from President Mubarak to President Sisi. Abd El Fattah, who was released due to procedural irregularities during his earlier trial, still faces retrial in another court. Gaza. Palestinian Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah announced today that Saudi Arabia has pledged $500 million to help rebuild Gaza. Reconstruction in the coastal strip is estimated to cost $4 billion and take up to three years. Meanwhile, an agreement was brokered by the UN between the Israelis and Palestinians on Tuesday to allow up to 800 truckloads of construction supplies to enter Gaza daily. This figure is four times the amount currently in transit. The materials will enable the reconstruction of the eighteen thousand homes destroyed or severely damaged during Operation Protective Edge this summer. The UN agreed to track the progress of the goods from purchase to arrival in Gaza in order to address Israeli concerns that the materials may be diverted by Hamas to build more tunnels. Golan Heights. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon announced this week the withdrawal of UNDOF (UN Disengagement Observer Force) troops from their bases in the Golan Heights. The peacekeepers were moved to the Israeli-controlled side of the buffer zone after unidentified Syrian fighters moved too close to their former base. The move comes after forty-five Fijian members of the peacekeeping force were captured by the Al-Nusra Front over two weeks ago. Those forces were released earlier this week. Yemen. Houthi fighters pushed into a suburb of Yemen’s capital today in an escalation of weeks of fighting. Over forty people have been killed in the past two days of clashes between the Shiite rebel group and the Yemeni security forces. Houthi protestors in Sana’a have been calling for the resignation of the government and the reinstatement of fuel subsidies for weeks.  
  • Middle East and North Africa
    UNDOF Flees
    After forty years, UN forces meant to separate Israel and Syria have fled their posts--fled into Israel, for safety. Here is the account from The Tower web site: The United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF), which was established in 1974 to “[m]aintain the ceasefire between Israel and Syria” and … “[s]upervise the areas of separation and limitation, as provided in the May 1974 Agreement on Disengagement,” withdrew its peacekeepers from Syrian territory today because “the situation has deteriorated severely over the last several days.” Reuters quoted United Nations spokesman Stephane Dujarric: “Armed groups have made advances in the area of UNDOF positions, posing a direct threat to the safety and security of the U.N. peacekeepers along the ‘Bravo’ (Syrian) line and in Camp Faouar,” he said, adding that all U.N. personnel in those positions have been moved to the Israeli side. The failure of this force in the face of a deteriorating situation raises a question, and Yossi Klein Halevi put it squarely to his fellow Israelis: During the recent failed peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians, Secretary of State John F. Kerry suggested that Israel yield control over the West Bank border with Jordan to an international peacekeeping force. Yet last week hundreds of U.N. peacekeeping troops on the Israeli-Syrian border barely escaped into Israel after Al Qaeda forces overran their position. Who should we rely on to protect us if not ourselves? International forces in the West Bank are an old nostrum, but the failure of UNDOF is a reminder that it won’t work. Until the region is at peace and all terrorist groups defeated, or the Palestinian Authority is clearly able to defeat terrorism and assure law and order, the only thing that prevents a powerful terrorist presence in the West Bank is the Israeli military. What ought to be better appreciated is that not only Israelis, but also Palestinians and Jordanians, depend on the IDF to prevent groups like Hamas, al Qaeda, and even ISIS from gaining ground in the West Bank. UN forces in southern Lebanon (UNIFIL) have been unable to control Hezbollah and unwilling to challenge it, and UNDOF has fled in the face of terrorists; the same outcome is entirely predictable in the West Bank today and tomorrow should Israeli forces leave.  To admit this is not to hope for permanent Israeli occupation of the West Bank, but surely any hopes or plans for peace must be based in reality. As Yossi Klein Halevi said in the article quoted above, Israelis’ views of these questions are based in a tough assessment of their situation:  "Israelis watch the fate of the Yazidi and Christian minorities in the Middle East and tell each other: Imagine what would happen to us if we ever lowered our guard." That guard, essential for their safety and for that of Palestinians and Jordanians, cannot be replaced by an amorphous international or UN force that, judging by experience, will shrink from confrontations and flee in the face of real danger.  
  • Israel
    Palestine in the Sinai?
    Several days ago news reports "revealed" a proposal by Egyptian President Sisi to extend the territory of Gaza south into the Sinai. According to the story as Israel Army radio carried it, the area to be added to Gaza is five times the size of the current Gaza. The idea is that this area would accommodate all the Palestinian "refugees," thus satisfying the demand for a "right of return." Palestine would consist of this new area and the current Gaza, giving the Palestinians more territory than if the 1967 "borders" were restored. The idea of expanding Gaza is not crazy, given how overcrowded the place is. In 2004 Israeli Major General Giora Eiland, then serving as national Security Advisor under Prime Minister Sharon, proposed that Gaza be enlarged. This would require taking land from Egypt, and Israel (under the Eiland plan) would have compensated Egypt with lands further east that would have permitted an automobile tunnel linking Egypt and Jordan. The Eiland plan never went anywhere in part because the Egyptians would not consider parting with one square inch of sovereign territory. Why would they now consider it? I can’t see why, and therefore believe the news stories carrying Sisi’s denial of the whole thing. The logic of enlarging Gaza is obvious, but the rest of the proposal is bizarre: Millions of Palestinian refugees coming to live in the Sinai desert? The PLO abandoning its claims to the 1967 lines in order to get land in Sinai?  Eiland’s more modest proposal was a way to deal with overcrowding in Gaza and nothing more, for which reason it was more sensible. If this new idea was genuinely floated by the government of Egypt, that must be seen as a nasty shot at the Palestinians and another reflection of how little they and their ambitions count in Cairo these days.    
  • Iran
    "Who Won the Gaza War," and "What Now for Israel?"
    In the past week I have written a long article and even longer essay on the Middle East situation today. "‘The Fog of Cease-fire: Who Won the Gaza War" is the cover story in this week’s edition of The Weekly Standard and can be found here. In brief, it seems to me Israel was the winner by most measures, but as we saw with the Lebanon war of 2006 (where most Israelis thought they had "lost" but now believe that conflict has deterred Hezbollah from making further trouble on the border) judgments may change over time. Meanwhile, there is no sense of triumph in Israel, which is already creating political difficulties for Prime Minister Netanyahu. "What Now for Israel?" is published today at the Mosaic website, and is found here. This essay discusses the challenges Israel faces, in the region and in the world, 66 years after the founding of the state and 47 years after the Six-Day War of 1967.  
  • Middle East and North Africa
    Which Side Is UNRWA On?
    The war in Gaza has brought UNRWA, the UN agency dealing with Palestinian "refugees," back into the news-- mostly because UNRWA schools were used to shoot rockets at Israel. The failings of UNRWA were examined here ("Ending UNRWA and Advancing Peace")  in December, 2011, although today they seem even worse. The UNRWA employees union is under Hamas control, and it’s clear that the staff is riddled with Hamas "activists." The Israeli commentator and former Knesset member Einat Wilf wrote yesterday that now, with the fighting over, it is time for Israel to do what it should have done decades ago -- remove the layer of protection and legitimacy it grants to UNRWA. Israel should recognize UNRWA for what it is -- a hostile Palestinian organization that perpetuates the dream of the return of Palestinian refugees to Israel -- and treat it accordingly. So now there are two compelling reasons to end UNRWA. Its cooperation with Hamas, and the way in which it has been permeated by Hamas, constitute one reason. The second is that UNRWA is engaged in the perpetuation and expansion of the "Palestinian refugee problem" rather than its solution. Here is the explanation I gave in 2011: Since the end of the Second World War, millions of refugees have left refugee camps, and refugee status, and moved to countries that accepted them–quickly or slowly–as citizens. Post-World War II Europe was an archipelago of displaced persons and refugee camps, housing 850,000 people in 1947–Czechs, Poles, Lithuanians, Germans, Latvians, Greeks, and many more nationalities. By 1952, all but one of the camps had closed. Hundred of thousands of Jewish refugees from Europe went to Israel after 1948, and then hundreds of thousands more arrived from Arab lands when they were forced to flee after 1956 and 1967. The children and grandchildren of these refugees, born after their arrival, were never refugees themselves; they were from birth citizens of the new land, as their parents had become immediately upon their own arrival. In this process many nations and agencies have played wonderful roles, not least the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). The exception to this refugee story is the Palestinians. In most of the Arab lands to which they fled or travelled after 1948 they were often treated badly, and refused citizenship (with Jordan the major exception) or even the right to work legally. And instead of coming under the protection of UNHCR, they had a special agency of their own, UNRWA, the UN Relief and Works Agency. In the decades of its existence, it has not solved or even diminished the Palesinian refugee problem; instead it has presided over a massive increase in its size, for all the descendants of Palestinian refugees are considered to be refugees as well. Once there were 750,000; now there are five million people considered by UNRWA to be “Palestinian refugees.” And UNRWA is now the largest UN agency, with a staff of 30,000. UNHCR cares for the rest of the world with about 7,500 personnel. Which side is UNRWA on? Its supporters would say "on the side of Palestinian refugees," but instead the agency appears to be on two other sides: its own, always expanding its own empire and responsibilities, and on the side of Hamas. Any transition to UNHCR would need to be slow and careful, but it should begin. One good way to start is to demand independent studies and planning for such a step (independent because you obviously can’t leave this work to UNRWA itself, nor should all of it be conducted within the UN system). For example, a plan might start in one country (such as Jordan or Lebanon) rather than in Gaza. Or it might start by redefining "refugee" the normal way. The United States should begin, after a set future date, to move funding from UNRWA to UNHCR. If UNRWA or the UN refuse, so be it: let those who insist on retaining UNRWA, its pernicious definition of "refugee," and its ties with Hamas pay the freight. Such a transition will be extremely difficult and take years. That’s clear--but it’s time to begin. The Gaza war has illuminated once again the ways in which Hamas has been acting as a parasite feeding on this UN agency--to which the United States is the largest donor. Time for a change.
  • Middle East and North Africa
    The Cease Fire That Broke Itself, Part II
    In a recent post, found here, I noted the widespread failure of news media sites to say straightforwardly that Hamas has broken several cease fires. This just happened again, so herewith a couple of the most remarkable examples. Foreign Policy wrote this: Efforts to end six weeks of fighting in Gaza collapsed as rocket fire from the strip broke a cease-fire and Israel carried out renewed strikes in the area. Interesting formulation: Israel carried out strikes, but on the other side was "rocket fire." It would seem that in Gaza rocket fire makes its own decisions about shooting: no terrorists, no Hamas, no Islamic Jihad. Then there is this rather fantastic example from the Daily Telegraph in London: Israel has confirmed that it tried to assassinate the most senior Hamas leader in the Gaza Strip. Mohammad Deif, head of Hamas’s military wing, the al-Qassam Brigades, was targeted in a strike on a house which killed his wife and seven-month-old son in the early hours of Wednesday morning. A third dead body was identified, but it is not clear whether it was Mr Deif. The strike followed the resumption of violence between Israel and Gaza since rocket fire from the Strip on Tuesday afternoon violated the six-day ceasefire between the two parties. Subsequently Israel launched air strikes at Gaza and abandoned the ceasefire negotiations in Cairo, mediated by the Egyptians. Now, it’s an obvious fact that Hamas broke the cease fire, and Israel then responded with air strikes--including the one aimed at Deif. But in the Telegraph, there was a "resumption of violence." Like cease fires that break themselves, violence "resumes:" no human agency. But Israel is responsible because it launched air strikes and then abandoned negotiations in Egypt. That the Israeli negotiators withdrew after Hamas broke the cease fire is not mentioned, of course, because the predicate is never mentioned: that Hamas broke the cease fire. Sadly, each day provides more and more examples of this unwillingness to state clearly that Hamas breaks cease fires. I will not offer a theory as to why, but it is certainly bad journalism.  
  • United States
    Guest Post: Implications of Declining Israeli Sympathy
    Elena Vann is an interdepartmental intern at the Council on Foreign Relations. Once a small, noble state heralded for its democratic values and established after the horrors of the Holocaust, Israel’s popularity is declining as global public opinion trends further away from the David and Goliath narrative once commonly attached to the Jewish state. After a fierce, month-long offensive against Hamas that is estimated to have taken the lives of over one thousand civilians in Gaza and decimated the country’s infrastructure, Israel’s public image joins the list of damages. As the Egyptian-brokered ceasefire tenuously holds between Israeli and Palestinian officials representing Hamas, the Gaza Strip is smoldering in ruins and Israel looks more bully than victim. Should these negative sentiments toward Israel continue to fester, U.S.-Israel relations could be substantially weakened. The fraying public opinion of Israel has the potential to arouse a number of damaging responses through civil and state action. The Campaign for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS)—a global movement with numerous Israeli members—attempts to increase economic and political pressure on the Israeli government to meet their three goals: end the Israeli occupation of Palestine, grant full equality for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, and fulfill the right of return Palestinian refugees displaced persons, as stipulated in the 1948 UN Resolution 194. Since its founding in 2005, and particularly since the launch of Operation Protective Edge, the BDS movement has expanded in reach and popularity, even inciting increased Jewish support. The fact that Jews are protesting the actions of their own state should be an indicator that something is terribly wrong with Israeli policy—a sentiment noted in a recent Globescan/Pipa report (Figure 1). With the state of public outcry, Israel has the potential to be perceived as an Pariah state, which could force it to submit to international calls for drastic policy changes in Palestine. While the BDS movement will not end the Palestinian occupation in Israel, public opinion could—sooner or later—influence shifts in state policy toward Israel. The United States, among other countries and international bodies, could distance themselves from Israel or even implement sanctions against it. For decades, the United States has shown unwavering support and ignored or obscured the dark side of Israel’s policy toward Palestine. The time to hold Israel accountable for its human rights abuses and to international law has come. Five years ago it would have been unthinkable to refer to Israel in such negative terms. However, the surge in social media as an alternative to major news outlets has blown the long-established portrayal of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to bits. Since the start of the conflict on June 6, social media has been dominated by footage of dead and injured Palestinians, including women, children and the elderly. These horrific images have ignited global outrage toward Israel and the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) that has manifested itself in the hashtags #GazaUnderAttack and #FreePalestine, as well as massive protests across Europe and the United States, Israel’s biggest ally.  As it stands, the Palestinian death toll has reached 1,938, which Gaza hospital officials have said is comprised of mainly civilians. This has shocked many in comparison to the sixty-seven Israeli casualties—sixty-four soldiers, two civilians, and one foreign national. As the world becomes increasingly receptive to the Palestinian plight, it is likely that mounting tensions could grow large enough to delegitimize Israeli policy in Gaza and the West Bank. While Europe, outside of Germany, is historically less aligned with Israel, the typically strong U.S.-Israeli relations are becoming more complicated as the Obama administration’s ties to the Netanyahu government sour. The frustrations between the two heads of states are old news, however, since Netanyahu’s 2010 defiance of U.S. demands to freeze new settlements in the West Bank, and Obama’s nuclear negotiations with Iran. Operation Protective Edge, however, has intensified the strain after anonymous Israeli attacks against U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and the July 30 IDF strike of a UN school in Gaza were met with fierce backlash from the State Department, referring to the events as “offensive” and “disgraceful.”  In response, the White House and State Department have tightened the reins on weapons transfers and are blocking certain missile shipments to Israel. As the conversation about injustices of the Palestinian occupation has become more mainstream and American youth increasingly support Palestine, it is clear that Israel—outside of Congress—is no longer the consensus issue it once was. Today, protests against Israel’s discriminatory laws and policies, and the intrinsic humanitarian issues tied to Zionism, are a regular occurrence. After stating their desire to become a party to the International Criminal Court (ICC), Palestinian political leaders from Hamas and the Fatah party, now have an unprecedented chance to demand an investigation into possible war crimes perpetrated by the IDF in Gaza since 2012. “Israel,” stated Riad Malki, the Palestinian foreign minister, “has left us with no other option.” Since their recognition in 2012 by the UN as a sovereign state with nonmember observer status, Palestine now has a greater chance of being accepted to the ICC provided it signs and ratifies the Rome Statute. The Palestinian Authority has asked Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) to sign the document as well, and both organizations are expected to do so. Should this happen and public opinion continues to wane, Israel may find itself feeling the added pressure of the global shift in sympathies to make real changes to its policies and actions in Gaza and the West Bank. Responding to the same pressure, the United States may eventually concede to distancing itself politically and economically from its old ally.