ISIS, Hamas and Israel: Putting it All in Context

Caroline Glick's latest article is an excellent overview for those or pretty much everyone who is losing track of the players here in the Middle East. Actually, I touched on some of this last night when I wrote about Obama's hypocrisy bombing to destroy/punish ISIS while he insists that Israel negotiate with Hamas.

Dumb Question: Why Hasn't Obama Sent Kerry to Negotiate With ISIS?

It's part of my "dumb question" series aka "the king is in his altogether." I'm a grandmother of the generation that laundered cloth diapers, so you can't fool me with euphemisms and costumes.

According to Glick:

Hamas’s war with Israel is not a stand-alone event. It is happening in the context of the vast changes that are casting asunder old patterns of behavior and strategic understandings as actors in the region begin to reassess the threats they face.

Hamas was once funded by Saudi Arabia and enabled by Egypt. Now the regimes of these countries view it as part of a larger axis of Sunni jihad that threatens not only Israel, but them.

The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, and its state sponsors Qatar and Turkey, are the key members of this alliance structure. Without their support Hamas would have gone down with the Muslim Brotherhood regime in Egypt last summer. As it stands, all view Hamas’s war with Israel as a means of reinstating the Brotherhood to power in that country.

To achieve a Hamas victory, Turkey, Qatar and the Muslim Brotherhood are using Western support for Hamas against Israel. If the US and the EU are able to coerce Egypt and Israel to open their borders with Gaza, then the Western powers will hand the jihadist axis a strategic victory.

The implications of such a victory would be dire.

Hamas is ideologically indistinguishable from Islamic State. Like Islamic State, Hamas has developed mass slaughter and psychological terrorization as the primary tools in its military doctrine. If the US and the EU force Israel and Egypt to open Gaza’s borders, they will enable Hamas to achieve strategic and political stability in Gaza. As a consequence, a post-war Gaza will quickly become a local version of Islamic State-controlled Mosul. continue...

Today, and not for the first time, Dry Bones got it on target:

Stop Israel

According to the Times of Israel:
The horrifying beheading by ISIS is spreading to include soldiers, children, and more and more innocent victims.

"The Jihadist group Islamic State on Tuesday claimed to have executed American journalist James Foley in revenge for US air strikes against its fighters in Iraq" -more

One thing for sure is that Israel is very alone. And the Israeli public is getting more and more frustrated trusting Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu less and less. IMRA published a poll which shows how Bibi is losing support. Earlier in the summer when it looked like Netanyahu would lead the IDF to victory against Hamas Arab Gazan terrorists he had overwhelming support, but after stopping the defensive attack and threatening popular ministers with sacking, his support ratings have plummeted.

Panels Poll: Netanyahu rating today 55% Good down from 82% on 23 July
Dr. Aaron Lerner 21 August 2014
Internet based polling of Panels Politics for Israel Television Channel 2
carried out today (after successful targeted killing of key Hamas military
leaders announced) and broadcast on the evening news.
How would you term the performance of PM Netanyahu in the last week?
Good 55% Bad 33% Don't know/refuse reply 12%
Percent good by polling date:
Today 55%
5 August 63%
23 July 82%
What do you think of Netanyahu's criticism yesterday of cabinet members?
Justified 56% Not justified 19% Don't know/refuse reply 2%
Should Netanyahu fire the ministers Naftali Bennett and Avigdor Liberman?
Bennett 2% Liberman 5% Both 17% Neither 51% No position 24%

When a large part of the State of Israel has been finding itself running to shelters day and night, he can't expect the country to fall for his empty words.

May our government leaders obey G-d's wisdom and destroy the Hamas Gazan Arab terrorists.

Shabbat Shalom u'MevorachMay you have a peaceful and blessed Shabbat

If The USA was a Good Friend of Israel, It Would Make Our Needs THE PRIORITY

IMRA has made an interesting comparison of American versus European statements about Hamas.
Compare and contrast:

"1....The EU calls on Hamas to immediately put an end to these acts and to renounce violence. All terrorist groups in Gaza must disarm. The EU strongly condemns calls on the civilian population of Gaza to provide themselves as human shields." EU Council conclusions on the Middle East Peace Process Summary: 22 July 2014, Brussels - Council of the European Union Foreign Affairs
"The President stressed the U.S. view that, ultimately, any lasting solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict must ensure the disarmament of terrorist groups and the demilitarization of Gaza."
That's right: The European Union insists that "All terrorist groups in Gaza must disarm". Period. But President "we have Israel's back" Obama see disarming of the terrorists as something that will happen "ultimately" and within the context of a "lasting solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict ."
Put in plain English: if those damn Israelis don't sit down and sign a final status agreement with the Palestinians then as far as President Obama is concerned Hamas can keep its entire armory intact.
Take note also that while the EU condemns Hamas for its role in causing Palestinian civilians deaths Mr. Obama is silent on the matter.

Before you claim that America supports Israel financially, I'd like to remind you that you're wrong. The so-called aid is just a way for the USA to prop up its military industries and dispose of all sorts of surplus supplies. American aid isn't money. It's shop in the USA gift certificates. That is good for the ailing American economy, but it's awful for Israel. It means that instead of being more self-sufficient there are products we don't produce, which we are capable of producing. And when, which happens frequently, Israeli engineers suggest improvements on the military products, it's the United States, and not Israel that benefits from those improved items.

Another important fact to note is that the Israeli public is overwhelmingly in favor of finally destroying the Hamas terrorist capabilities. The army's morale is high, and the public is sick and tired of these ceasefires that just give the terrorists an opportunity to rearm and improve their position. Once and for all, Israelis want a change in basic policy and refuse to be pacified by fancy words and ceremonies. IMRA published a poll showing the numbers.

Sunday, July 27, 2014

Poll: 87%:7% Continue operation, 69%17% Destroy Hamas

Poll: 87%:7% Continue operation, 69%17% Destroy Hamas Dr. Aaron Lerner - IMRA 27 July 2014 Poll commissioned by Channel 10 news carried out by the Sarid Institute and reported today: Do you support continuing the operation or a complete ceasefire? Continue 87% Ceasefire 7% Don't know 6% Should the operation in the Gaza Strip conclude with bringing down the Hamas regime? Yes 69% No 17% Don't know 14%

This cartoon is old but hasn't changed its relevance. Thanks, Hadassa.

"How do you say ceasefire in Arabic?"
"Reload"

Catching Our Collective Breath After Surviving the Obama/Kerry Negotiations Attack

IMRA's Dr. Aaron Lerner seems pretty confident that Prime Binyamin Netanyahu steered us well during the nine month American driven faux peace negotiations.

Saturday, May 3, 2014

Observation: American gift to Netanyahu in Barnea piece shows they clueless

Observation: American gift to Netanyahu in Barnea piece shows they clueless Dr. Aaron Lerner Date: 4 May 2014 The Americans from Kerry's team who complained to Nachum Barnea about Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu unwittingly gave the prime minister an early Israel Independence Day gift. Here is what they told Barnea, as reported in his 2 May Yediot Ahronot article "How We Failed." #1. The Palestinians refused to compromise during the course of negotiations and insisted that any Israeli security presence (including in the Jordan Valley) vanish within no more than 5 years. #2. Netanyahu insists on absolute Israeli security control for an unlimited period of time. #3. Netanyahu refused to agree to a map dividing Jerusalem. #4. Netanyahu's attorney, Molcho, stood guard to thwart efforts by Livni to compromise Israel's position. For almost all Israelis reading the above there is a simple reaction: Three cheers for Netanyahu! Once again, the Americans are pathetically clueless, relying on the words of encouragement from their lefty Israeli friends rather than actually appreciating what the country really thinks. They thought they would hurt Netanyahu with this piece when the opposite is the case. And now to the real puzzle: If they actually believe that the Palestinians "will get a State for themselves in the end" then why all the fuss? After all, according to the narrative these folks subscribe to, once the Palestinians have a state of their own we will enjoy Utopian Peace. [Only someone who thought there would be Utopian Peace would think that a deal that completely removes the IDF from the scene within 60 months is a deal that promises Israel security]. Let me suggest an alternative explanation for the hysterics. The concern isn't that in the absence of a deal that a Palestinian state will come into existence without a signing ceremony on the White House lawn. The concern is that at the end of the day Israel succeeds in moving on. We make it past all the "tsunamis". The large Palestinian population centers thrive under some form of autonomy. The demographic trends continue with each year more Israeli Jews born. And the dream of withdrawal and division that was the focus of leftist Israelis and their leftist American Jewish friends will be no more serious a possibility than that we all start speaking Esperanto.

I'm not at all as optimistic as Lerner. The fact that Obama/Kerry admitted their attempt at a "deal" between Israel and the Palestinians sic a failure has just brought us a break, time to catch our collective breath, but this was not the effective execution such as when Pinchas killed Zimri and Cozbi stopping the plague that had already killed 24,000 Jews.

While pacifists might decry the taking of a life, in this case a moral outrage was spreading in the camp - wanton, orgiastic debauches and idolatry. Zimri, a leader of the tribe of Shimon, publicly takes Kozbi, a willing participant from the daughters of Midian. The transgression is flagrant and unmistakable, brazen and unabashed. Pinchas steps in to end the disgrace, to halt the epidemic by means of the sword. The reward he is given leaves little room for doubt: Pinchas is good, Zimri is bad. Pinchas is right, Zimri is wrong. In fact, Jewish tradition sees these two as archetypes of good and evil; the Talmud's expression for the epitome of hypocrisy is "one who acts like Zimri and expects the reward of Pinchas." (aish)

While Moshe and the rest of the people who hadn't been overtly sinning with the Midian women stood by silently, Pinchas took action, and G-d gave him a great reward, Priesthood.

Unfortunately, successive Israeli Governments have been making the same basic mistake over and over. They keep on relying on the Arabs to foul up, rather than taking a real stand and ending the pressure on us. This is very much a continuation of the pre-state debates and ideological disputes which Netanyahu's late father Benzion wrote about so clearly in his book  The Founding Fathers of Zionism. He contrasted so-called Zionist leaders like Chaim Weizman, who would have had been overjoyed if the "Jewish state" was to be no more than a British protectorate, part of the Commonwealth, with those who wanted real independence. There was also the debates over whether small Zionist Jewish communities were the key or was it necessary to establish a national framework.

Our enemies are clever and very wealthy. We shouldn't be overconfident that we'll be victorious just by sitting out the pressure on us. I think that that George Soros and his J Street hasn't yet finished their attempt to turn American Jewry. to the extreme Left when it comes to Israel. Soros has backed Obama, and he created J Street to support Obama's pressure on Israel to destroy itself. Now that J Street had been handily rejected by the Presidents Conference, his next step is to destroy that organization.

Israeli Democracy? "90% Oppose the Release of Terrorists"

IMRA has posted results of the latest Smith Poll.  I'm not very interested in the faux Knesset Election results, but I do consider the public's opinion about Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's "gestures" to the Arab terrorists to bribe them to negotiate with us.

Survey by the Smith Institute for "Globes" published on 1 August 2013
(sample size and actual survey date not indicated in either English or
Hebrew write up]
14% Netanyahu wants a deal and can make a deal
40% Netanyahu wants a deal but can't make a deal because of the Palestinians
46% Other replies not published in the article.
90% Oppose the release of terrorists

Nathalie Bardou/AP

The Likud didn't campaign with this sort of platform.  It was Tsipi Livni's.  Tsipi promised to do anything and everything in her power to make some sort of "peace deal," and she only got six out of the one hundred and twenty 120 Knesset seats.  The Likud Beitenu got thirty-one 31, which is more than five times as many.  So why is the State of Israel being ruled by Tsipi Livni?

If Bibi was a truly democratic leader, he's be ruling according to the policies people voted for.  And here's an important clarification by David Bedein.

victims of Arab terror

Israelis do want peace, but we also want to be rich, have large homes etc, and we know we can't always get what we want.  We also know, from vast painful experience that these gestures and "treaties" always make our lives less secure than they had been previously.  Even Netanyahu himself has said it over and over.  But he avoids admitting it when he's in the helm as Prime Minister.  He'll admit it to get votes, but as Prime Minister he out-Lefts the Left in trying to show that he's the epitome of the political "Center."

Just some simple logic:

If the Arabs must be bribed in order to even negotiate, how can they enforce a peace agreement?

In Theory, According to Israeli Law, We May Be Without A Coalition a Long Time

Thanks to IMRA for posting the details of the Government Coalition Law in English.

At present, a period which has lasted months already, the State of Israel has had a version of a "lame duck government."  It's not the same sort of "lame duck" that exists in the United States.  In the Israeli version:

• the ministers are of the previous government coalition
• the new MKs have been sworn in and are working as MKs
• the MK who has been given the responsibility/opportunity to form a new coalition hasn't yet done it

Political pundits are floating all sorts of scenarios about possible coalition deals and even possible new elections.  As I had posted last night, Binyamin Netanyahu has requested and was granted a 14 day extension to form a new coalition government by President Shimon Peres.

If Netanyahu fails to create/negotiate a new coalition, that doesn't mean that we're going directly into elections.  There are a few more stages, and if a majority of this Knessest, the 120 MKs never manage to agree/compromise enough to work together as a coalition, we won't have elections for a few months.

Here's the time table according to IMRA:

Elections
Publications of results
Max 7 days President assigns task of forming government after consultations
28 days first attempt to form government
14 days extension
3 days maximum before assign task to a second MK
28 days to form government by second MK
21 days for a majority of MKs to nominate third MK to form a government
2 days for President to announce appointment of the third MK
14 days for third MK to form government
President announces government cannot be formed.
Last Tuesday before the end of 90 days elections held
Basic Law: The Government (2001)...Assignment of task of forming Government.
7. (a) When a new Government has to be constituted, the President of the
State shall, after consultation with representatives of party groups in the
Knesset, assign the task of forming a Government to a Knesset Member who has
notified him that he is prepared to accept the task; the President shall do
so within seven days of the publication of the election results, or should
the need arise to form a new government; and in the case of the death of the
Prime Minister, within 14 days of his death.
(b) Should these consultation take place before the new Knesset is convened,
the President will consult the representatives of the lists of candidates to
be represented in the new Knesset.
(c) This section shall not apply to the formation of a Government following
a no confidence vote according to section 28; in the event of an application
to the President under section 29(b), the provisions specified in those
sections shall apply.
Periods for formation of Government.
8. The Knesset Member to whom the President has assigned the task of forming
a Government under section 7 shall have a period of 28 days for the
fulfillment of such task. The President of the State may extend the period
by additional periods not exceeding in the aggregate 14 days.
Re-assignment of task.
9. (a) Where the periods referred to in section 8 have passed and the
Knesset Member has not notified the President of the State that he has
formed a Government, or where he has notified him before then that he is
unable to form a Government, or where he presented a Government and the
Knesset rejected his request for confidence under section 13(d), the
President may assign the task of forming a Government to another Knesset
Member who has notified him that he is prepared to accept the task, or may
inform the Speaker of the Knesset that he sees no possibility of forming a
Government - all within three days from the end of the period, or from the
day of the Knesset member's statement that he cannot form a government, or
from the rejection of confidence in the Government, as applicable.
(b) Before assigning the task of forming a Government under this section, or
before he informs the Speaker of the Knesset that he sees no possibility of
forming a Government, the President may again consult with representatives
of factions in the Knesset.
(c) A Knesset Member to whom the task of forming a Government has been
assigned under this section shall have 28 days in which to do so.
Assignment of task at the request of party groups.
10. (a) Where the President of the State has informed the Speaker of the
Knesset, under section 9(a) that he sees no possibility of forming a
Government, or where he has assigned the task of forming a Government to a
Knesset Member under the same section and the Knesset Member has not
notified him within 28 days that he has formed a Government, or has notified
him before then that he is unable to form a Government, or presented a
Government and the Knesset rejected his request for confidence under section
13(d), a majority of the members of the Knesset may request, in writing,
that the President of the State assign the task to a particular member of
the Knesset, who so agreed in writing, all within 21 days of the President's
announcement, or from the end of the period designated in section 9(c), or
from the statement by the Knesset Member that he cannot form a Government,
or from the rejection of confidence in the Government, as relevant.
(b) Where a request as aforesaid has been submitted to the President, the
President shall assign the task of forming a Government to that Knesset
Member within two days.
(c) A Knesset Member to whom the task of forming a Government has been
assigned under this section shall have a period of fourteen days for its
fulfillment.
Early elections in the event of failure to form a government.
11. (a) Should no request be submitted under section 10(a), or should a
Knesset Member fail to form a Government within the period defined in
section 10(c), or if he should prior to that time inform the President that
he cannot form a Government, the President shall so inform the Knesset
Speaker.
(b) Should the President so inform the Knesset Speaker, or should a Knesset
Member charged with forming a Government under section 10(a) present a
Government and fail to win the confidence of the Knesset under section
13(d), then the Knesset shall be deemed to have decided to disperse prior to
the completion of its period of service, and elections for the Knesset will
be held on the last Tuesday before the end of 90 days of the President's
announcement, or of the rejection of the request for confidence in the
Government, as relevant.

Like it or not, coalition or not, Netanyahu may continue as Prime Minister for quite a while.  Who wants to add up the days to see how many months he may last without needing a coalition?

According to the Polls, Israeli Public Likes Lapid's Silence

IMRA has posted two polls, not exactly identical but showing a similar trend.  The Israeli public is disgusted with the Likud, though it still wants Binyamin Netanyahu as Prime Minister, and it would vote in even larger numbers for Yair Lapid.

• Knesset Chanel Poll:
  Panels Poll: Yesh Atid 30 Likud-Beiteinu 22 Habayit Hayehudi 15 Labor 13 Shas 9
• Maagar Poll (Maariv/Makor Rishon): Likud Beiteinu 28 Yesh Atid 24 Bayit Yehudi 13 Shas 12 Labor 11

What's most interesting is that being part of the coalition, having made a deal with Bibi, is not a turn-on for the Israeli voter.  The poll shows Tsippi Livni losing support, most probably because the main item on her platform was that she would never make a deal with Netanyahu.

The Maagar Poll shows:

28 [31] Likud Beiteinu (Likud & Yisrael Beiteinu)
24 [19] Lapid "Yesh Atid" Party
13 [12] Bayit Yehudi
12 [11] Shas
11 [15] Labor
07 [07] Yahadut Hatorah
07 [06] Meretz
05 [06] Livni party "Hatnua" Party
01 [02] Kadima *
12 [11] Arab parties
* does receive the minimum 2%

And the Knesset Channel Poll information I found does not give the same sort of complete listing.

Considering that there is a big difference between the two polls' results, we just have to look for general trends and not details.

Yesterday on the TV news I heard one of the commentators mention that unlike NRP aka Bayit Yehudi's Naftali Bennett, Yesh Atid's Yair Lapid has been pretty quiet.  Apparently, the public prefers the quiet.  His MKs have also kept their mouths well zipped.  It certainly heps that the Yesh Atid MKs are all new to Knesset politics and are probably so busy concentrating on learning the ropes, that they may even be grateful for the order.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that Bennett's NRP has kept its support, even though some of the poll votes may be former Otzma LeYisrael voters who weren't given any other option or are happy that Bennett is now talking opposition, at least some of the time.  It's getting harder and harder to know exactly what Bennett and his team want, because conflicting statements have been heard from them.  I must admit that I've never understood the attraction to the NRP that many of my peers exhibit (and vote.)

As I've written many times before, this coalition negotiation game is very much like Poker and chess, too.  Players must be silent and give absolutely no indications of their hands or plans/tactics.

Unfortunately for the State of Israel, Netanyahu has been under pressure to form a government quickly because of United States President Barack Hussein Obama's upcoming visit.  He doesn't not want to be caught with an empty pantry.  Maybe that's why Obama was so quick to announce a visit even before Bibi could negotiate a new coalition.

We shouldn't forget that we're about to celebrate Purim, the holiday which reminds us that G-d works behind the scenes.

Chag Purim Same'ach!

Have a Joyful Purim!

"Peace Negotitations," An Oxymoron?

Hat tip:IMRA for the survey that I'll be quoting from

One of the main dividing lines between Israel's Left and Right is the belief in "Peace Negotiations." 

Can a true peace be negotiated between Israel and the enemy Arab terrorists?

Last night's "The Tsippi Livni Movement's" TV election broadcast theme was that we can make peace by negotiating with the Arabs if she is elected Prime Minister.  Sorry, but it's in Hebrew only, but you can get the gist of it just from the pictures and sound.



Of course, her campaign ignores history and the fact that in Israel you vote for party lists, not Prime Minister candidates. To be Prime Minister, one must be able to put together a coalition of parties with a total number of Knesset Members over sixty, since the Knesset has one hundred and twenty 120.  After the previous elections, when Livni's Kadima won the most seats, she still couldn't get enough MK's to support her. So this time, when she's publicly fighting with the other Left, and Left-Center parties, she hasn't a chance in hell, to put it mildly. But obviously, she has some wealthy backers, and that's why she has returned to politics.  I suspect her backers are based abroad, meaning that she is fronting foreign interests, which isn't very patriotic or good for the State of Israel.

IMRA posts the monthly Peace Index, which polls Israelis about their/our opinions. I have a problem with them and many other polls, since they ignore Otzma LeYisrael while listing the various Leftist parties.

Negotiations Index: General sample 49.0; Jewish sample 47.2.

Graph of the month: Support for a two-state solution by voting intentions
(% of Jewish sample)

---

The Peace Index is a project of the Evens Program in Mediation and Conflict Resolution at Tel Aviv University and the Israel Democracy Institute. This month's survey was conducted by telephone from December 31, 2012 to January 2, 2013, by the Dahaf Institute. The survey included 601 respondents, who constitute a representative sample of the adult population of Israel. The measurement error for a sample of this size is 4.5%; statistical processing was done by Ms. Yasmin Alkalay.

G-d willing, Otzma LeYisrael will surprise the pundits and get in comfortably.

According to a poll IMRA has posted, two-thirds 2/3 of Israelis don't consider Israel at fault for failed negotiations with the Arabs, which means that they think that Tsippi hasn't a clue and shouldn't be entrusted with any responsibilities re:"peace negotiations."

7. Some claim that no matter which of the large parties wins in the
upcoming elections, the peace process with the Palestinians is at a
standstill for reasons that have nothing to do with Israel and there is no
chance of progress in the foreseeable future. Do you agree or disagree with
this claim?
Jews
1. Strongly agree 33.4
2. Moderately agree 33.3
3. Moderately disagree 18.2
4. Strongly disagree? 12.2
5. Don’t know / Refuse to answer 2.9

Emphasis mine in that quoted section.  Add up the numbers and you get an easy two-thirds of the population having no faith in the "peace process," which means negotiations with the Arab terrorists.   IMHO, the term "peace negotiations" is an oxymoron, and I think most Israelis agree with me.

There's a brutal truth in the Arab Press

The media and international diplomats, politicians, charlatans etc keep brainwashing the world to believe in the ultimately peaceful intentions of the Arabs.

They keep coming up with "solutions" and brainstorms on how to "solve" the "conflict."

It's all a "con," a trick.

They don't read or listen to what the Arabs are actually saying. There a couple of excellent organizations which try to publicize the truth, straight from the "horse's" (no offense to horses) mouth.

The Arab Internet media has become very professional and slick. I suggest reading Ma'an News Agency to find out what they really think and want.

Thanks to IMRA and PMW for all of their excellent work!