Tag: Donald Trump

Posted on

WHITE HOUSE READIES FOR WAR: Assad Preparing Another Chemical Weapons Attack

Sean Spicer Tweeted the following late last night concerning advance preparations for Syrian regime massacre with chemical weapons.

Then Nikki Haley followed Spicer up with the following Tweet:

Whether the assertions here concerning Assad’s preparations for a chemical attack are true or just a false flag in order to provide a reason for the USA to enter the Syrian war doesn’t quite matter.  At the end of the day if the US is trying to make the case that Russia and Iran are also culpable then the Syrian crisis is moving beyond the scope of anything we have seen.

Assertions of the kind made above have real world consequences.  This is not to say that Assad should be backed or Russia’s Putin is really a friend like so many others push on their blogs, but entering into the Syrian foray would radically change the Middle East and probably the world as a direct war between Russia and the USA would become a real possibility.

It is true that Trump has no interest in starting pointless wars, but there are those in the White House that are. As we have seen Trump is highly suceptible to advice given by those he deems loyal even if it is partially skewed and misguided.

The ominous situation that Syria and those countries near it now find themseves in is about to get a lot more crazy. There are those in the Kremlin who are very susicious of US intentions. Bellicose statements, even if they are not backed can have the potential to spark a wider conflict.

Posted on

Israel, American Jewry and Trump’s GOP

To understand what can and ought to be done, it is first important to understand the nature of the BDS movement.

Earlier this month Norway, Denmark and Switzerland did something surprising.

Norway announced that it was demanding the return of its money from the Palestinian Human Rights and Humanitarian Law Secretariat, for the latter’s funding of a Palestinian women’s group that built a youth center near Nablus named for PLO mass murderer Dalal Mughrabi.

Denmark followed, announcing it was cutting off all funding to the group.

And last week, the Swiss parliament passed a resolution directing the government to amend Swiss law to block funding of NGOs “involved in racist, antisemitic or hate incitement actions.”

For years, the Israeli government has been urging these and other European governments to stop funding such groups, to no avail. What explains their abrupt change of heart? In two words: Donald Trump.

For years, the Obama administration quietly encouraged the Europeans to fund these groups and to ratchet up their anti-Israel positions. Doing so, the former administration believed, would coerce Israel to make concessions to the PLO.

But now, Trump and his advisers are delivering the opposite message. And, as the actions by Denmark, Norway and Switzerland show, the new message is beginning to be received.

If the US administration keeps moving forward on this trajectory, it can do far more than suspend funding for one terrorism-supporting Palestinian NGO. It can shut down the entire BDS industry before Trump finishes his current term in office.

To understand what can and ought to be done, it is first important to understand the nature of the BDS movement. Under the catchphrase BDS, two separate campaigns against Israel and against Jews are being carried out.

The first BDS campaign is a campaign of economic warfare. The focal point of that campaign is Europe. The purpose of the campaign is to harm Israel’s economy by enacting discriminatory, anti-Israel trade policies and encouraging unofficial consumer and business boycotts of Israeli firms and products.

The US Congress can end this economic war against Israel by passing laws penalizing European states for engaging in trade practices that breach the World Trade Organization treaties. The US Treasury Department can also push strongly and effectively for such an end in its trade negotiations with the EU. The Treasury Department can also investigate whether and how EU trade practices toward Israel constitute unlawful barriers to trade.

Unlike the situation in Europe, where the BDS economic war against Israel is fairly advanced, efforts in the US to mount economic boycotts of Israel hit an iceberg early on due to the swift preemptive actions taken by state legislatures.

In 2015, then-South Carolina governor Nikki Haley became the first governor to sign a law barring her state government from doing business or investing in companies that boycott Israel. Last week Kansas became the 21st US state to pass an anti-BDS law along the same lines. Last month, all 50 state governors declared opposition to BDS.

The second BDS campaign being carried out against Israel is a form of political and social warfare.

Its epicenter is US academia. Its purpose is to erode US support for Israel, by making it politically unacceptable and socially devastating to publicly voice support for Israel on college campuses and more generally in leftist circles.

As is the case with the economic BDS campaign, the best way to defeat political BDS is through state and federal government action. If state and federal governments withheld funding to universities and colleges that permit BDS groups to operate on their campuses, campus administrators, who to date have refused to lift a finger against these hate groups, would be forced into action.

If the US Education and Justice departments opened civil rights investigations against major BDS groups for antisemitic bigotry, campus administrators would finally begin banning them from their campuses.

For many Israelis, the notion that defeating BDS is a job for the US government rather than for grassroots, American Jewish activists, will come as a surprise.

When Israelis think about the BDS movement, they tend to think that the American Jewish community is the place to turn for assistance.

This is not merely incorrect.

As two studies published in the last few weeks show, the notion that Israel can look to the American Jewish community for help with anything is becoming increasingly dubious.

To be sure, there are several American Jewish groups that devote massive resources to combating BDS on campuses. But their actions are tactical.

They fight specific BDS resolutions coming to votes before student councils. They train pro-Israel students to defend Israel to their peers.

While helpful, none of these actions constitutes a serious challenge to the movement.

On a strategic level, the effective moves made to date against BDS have been initiated by Republicans.

Alan Clemmons, the South Carolina lawmaker who initiated the anti-BDS bill in his statehouse and has since gone on to spearhead the state government anti-BDS drive nationally, is a Christian Zionist.

Clemmons didn’t act out of concern for South Carolinian Jews. The Jewish community of South Carolina numbers a mere 20,000 members. The state-by-state anti-economic BDS campaign is neither the brainchild of any major Jewish group nor the product of their efforts.

So, too, to the extent that the Trump administration and the Republican-controlled Congress take action to defeat BDS on campuses and in Europe, they won’t be answering the call of their Jewish constituents. American Jews vote overwhelmingly for the increasingly anti-Israel Democratic Party. And while making up a mere 2% of the US population, American Jews contributed 50% of the donations to the Democratic Party in the 2016 elections.

This then brings us to the two studies of the American Jewish community and its future trajectory.

The first study was published by the Jewish Agency’s Jewish People Policy Institute. It analyzes the data from the 2013 Pew survey of American Jewish attitudes. The Pew survey demonstrated that the Jewish identity of American Jews is growing increasingly attenuated and superficial.

Famously, while 19% of American Jews said that they view observance of Jewish law as an essential part of their Jewish identity, 42% said they viewed having a good sense of humor as an essential part of their Jewish identity.

The JPPI study analyzed the Pew data regarding rates of marriage and childbearing among American Jews aged 24-54. The study started with the data on intermarriage. Sixty percent of non-haredi American Jews are married to non-Jews. A mere 32% of married American Jews are raising their children as Jewish to some degree.

From there, the JPPI study considered marriage and childbirth rates in general. It works out that a mere 50% of American Jews between 24 and 54 are married. And a mere 40% of American Jews between those ages have children living with them.

The JPPI study tells us two important things.

First, in the coming years there will be far fewer American Jews. Second, among those who are Jewish, their Jewish identity will continue to weaken.

Clearly, it would be unwise for Israel to believe that it can depend on such a community to secure its interests in the US for the long haul.

The second study shows that not only can Israel not expect the American Jewish community to help it maintain its alliance with the US, the number of American Jews willing to spearhead anti-Israel campaigns is likely to grow in the coming years.

The second study was produced by Brand Israel, a group of public relations experts that for the past decade has been trying to change the way young Americans think about Israel. The idea was to discuss aspects of Israel that have nothing to do with the Palestinians, with an emphasis on Israel as a hi-tech power. The hope was that by branding Israel as the Start-Up Nation, leftists, who support the Palestinians, would still support Israel.

Fern Oppenheim, one of the leaders of Brand Israel, presented the conclusions of an analysis of the group’s work at the Herzliya Conference this week and discussed them with The Times of Israel. It works out that the PR campaign backfired.

Far from inspiring increased support for Israel, Oppenheim argued that the hi-tech-centric branding campaign made leftist American Jews even more anti-Israel. She related that over the past decade, there has been an 18-point drop in support for Israel among US Jewish students.

To remedy the situation, which she referred to as “devastating,” Oppenheim recommended changing the conversation from hi-tech to “shared values.”

The problem with Oppenheim’s recommendation is that it ignores the problem.

Young American Jews aren’t turning against Israel because their values are different from Israeli values. By and large, they have the same values as Israeli society. And if they know anything about Israel, they know that their values aren’t in conflict with Israeli values.

Young American Jews are turning on Israel for two reasons. First, they don’t care that they are Jewish and as a consequence, see no reason to stick their necks out on Israel’s behalf.

And second, due in large part to the political BDS campaign on college campuses, supporting Israel requires them to endanger or relinquish their ideological home on the Left. Since their leftist identities are far stronger than their Jewish identities, young American Jews are joining the BDS mob in increasing numbers.

This then brings us back to BDS.

The only way to diminish the groundswell of American Jews who are becoming hostile toward Israel is to defeat the forces of political BDS on campuses. To do this, Israel should turn not to the Jewish community but to evangelical Christians, the Trump administration and the Republican- controlled Congress.

As for the American Jews, Israel needs to stop viewing the community as a resource and begin to view it as a community in crisis. To this end, the most significant contribution Israel can make to the American Jewish community – particularly to non-Orthodox American Jews – is to encourage them to make aliya. Assuming that current trends will continue, the only way non-Orthodox American Jews can have faith their grandchildren will be Jewish is to make aliya.

No, this won’t appeal to all American Jews. But nothing Israel does will. Israel’s job isn’t to reach the unreachable. It is to protect its alliance with the US and to help the Jews that remain in the room.

Originally Published in Jerusalem Post

Posted on

North Korea, Donald Trump, and Obama’s Controlled Chaos

With news coming out of North Korea that the regime has in fact tested another engine for an ICBM capable of reaching the USA, observers are begining to wonder if the only real solution to North Korea is war. Russia and China have alredy moved troops to the border as early as May when tensions began to increase, but now any pressure the international community might have had (especially China) on the North Korean regime has melted.

President Trump himself acknowledged this in a tweet.

The world like the Syria crisis moves ever closer to the point of no return. If the Kim regime would get an ICBM, it’s nuclear ambitions would be fully realized.  This means the Trump administration has little time to avert a fully nuclear capable North Korea, which would destablize Asia and upend America’s dominance in the Pacific, not to mention being held “captive” by a mad man who could decide to nuke America whenever he got angry.

So how did we get here?  Afterall, even the most ardent Trump critics do not blame the crisis on him. The North Korean nuclear program flourished under Obama after it achieved break out under Bush.

The Obama administration could  have stopped it early on, but allowed it to develop and grow. Why?

Everything the Obama administration did when it came to foreign policy should be seen through the prism of chaos creation.  This can be applied to funding ISIS ( in its early days), Black Lives Matter, not preventing Russia from entering Syria, and of course North Korea.

This attempt at creating controlled chaos serves both the Deep State and the Globalists, because chaos breeds the need for placing a new order so as to provide a solution where there was none within the chaos. This allows the Deep State and Globalists to take more control.

The problem is, chaos cannot be controlled.  It goes the way it wants and almost never where the party who creates intends it to. The world is at the precipice because the Deep State and Globalist elite network of rulers has put us there.

Donald Trump will have no choice but to take down the North Korean regime. It is clear he does not wnat to go to war, but an ICBM in the hands of a madman is not an option. In the ensuing chaos, the Deep State and Globalists will attempt to assert control, but the chaos may very well be too much even for them.

Posted on

Iranian Made Drone Downed By American Forces, Does the US Have a Coherent Policy in Syria?

Late yesterday, US Coalition forces shot down an Iranian made UAV comandeered by the Syrian military.

“The armed pro-regime Shaheed-129 [unmanned aerial vehicle] was shot down by a U.S. F-15E Strike Eagle at approximately 12:30 a.m. after it displayed hostile intent and advanced on Coalition forces,” the coalition command said in a press release.

“The Coalition has made it clear to all parties publically [sic] and through the de-confliction line with Russian forces that the demonstrated hostile intent and actions of pro-regime forces toward Coalition and partner forces in Syria conducting legitimate counter-ISIS operations will not be tolerated,” it said.

The US and their allied partners in Syria still assume the deconfliction zones layed out with Russia have remained in affect.  This stands in contrast with Russia’s own statement after the downing of the Syrian jet. Russia has made it clear that all foreign warplanes in Syrian airspace will be shot down.

Is There an Actual US Policy in Syria

With each passing day an incident it has become apparent that the US policy in Syria is non-existant.  This is not to say they have nothing in the works, but they have been caught of-guard by the lightening speed movement of Russian backed pro-regime forces and Iranian Shiite Militias and are trying to push back.

With Daraa falling and regime forces using the Raqqa battle to push Eastward, the US and their coalition forces need find a fast way to push the regime back without causing the war to turn into something much larger.  So far no remedy has been found.

David Gardner from the Financial Times said the following in an opinion piece about the situation:

“The limited initiatives to somewhat attenuate the Syrian disaster are almost all coming from Russia: a tripartite (and ineffective) ceasefire with Iran and Turkey; the “de-escalation zones” Moscow proposed in May, albeit in the four areas where the Assads still face strong challenges from rebels; even a constitutional blueprint to decentralise power in Syria. The US has come up with next to nothing. The common denominator in these three Russian initiatives may be — some western diplomats involved in Syria suggest — that President Vladimir Putin is groping towards an exit strategy from Syria. If so, nothing Mr Trump is engaged in looks likely to help him find one.”

One counter to Gardner’s assertion about Russia’s involvement is that Putin ever the chess player has been playing both sides in the war in order to create an underlying need to entrap the Americans in a quagmire not easily extricated.

While it is clear what happened over the weekend and late yesterday are ominous, they are more examples of an administration being handed a hot potato by its precedessor and not getting up to speed fast enough to handle it.

While Trump may not have moved fast enough to counter Syrian and Iranian advancement in Syria this is more of a product of clear indecisiveness in being ready to push back against the Russians in their desire to control the Levant.

 

Posted on

CRAFTED BY TRUMP? Saudi King Names his 31 Year Old Son as Successor, Upending Political Order

As the battle lines between the Sunni Alliance being crafted by the Trump White House and the Iranian-Russian coalition harden, the Saudi King Salman has done the unbelievable named his 31 year old son as his successor.  In doing so he stripped 56 year old Crown Prince Nayaf his nephew of the potential to become monarch.

Al Arabiya television reported that the promotion of the prince was approved by the kingdom’s Allegiance Council with 31 of 34 members approving, and that the king had called for a public pledging of loyalty to Mohammed bin Salman on Wednesday evening in Mecca. The surprise announcement follows 2-1/2 years of already major changes in Saudi Arabia, which stunned allies in 2015 by launching a war in Yemen, cutting old energy subsidies and in 2016 proposing partly privatizing state oil company Aramco.

Mohammed bin Salman the King’s son is largely credited with the successful outreach to the Trump administration as well as the strategy behind the Qatar blockade. He is extremely ani-Iran and although young commands a vast portfolio in the government.

The current King is the last of the three sons of the original King Saud.  It has been clear for a while that the next generation would not follow the same royal ascension process.

What Does this Mean for Israel?

As Trump’s masterplan for the region begins to take shape, the major pillar of it is not peace between Israel and the Palestinians, but rather peace between Saudi Arabia and Israel. This is something big and can in time reshape the entire Middle East. To do this, Trump needs someone young, innovative, and easy to work with. The King’s son seems to be that guy.

As the Kingdom shifts from an overt backer of Islamist ideology (what it does covertly is something else) its relationship to Israel as the region’s leading technology hub and economic anchor is crucial.

Posted on

CAGE MATCH: Conservative Leadership vs. Alex Jones

Originally Published Under the Title: The Secret Reason Why Many Conservative Media Figures Won’t Denounce Alex Jones

Currently under fire for her controversial interview with Alex Jones, Megyn Kelly tweeted the following a few days back:
“…How does Jones, who traffics in these outrageous conspiracy theories, have the respect of the president of the United States and a growing audience of millions? President Trump, by praising him, appearing on his show, and giving him White House press credentials, has helped elevate Jones, to the alarm of many. Our goal in sitting down with him was to shine a light – as journalists are supposed to do – on this influential figure, and yes – to discuss the considerable falsehoods he has promoted with near impunity.”

Legitimate question – why does Alex Jones have the respect of President Trump? As a presidential candidate, President Trump in fact said that Alex Jones has an ‘amazing reputation’. To date, he has not revoked his statement about Mr. Jones thereby making him conspirator-in-chief. So, in light of this, how can anyone take President Trump seriously? But curiously, as the NY Times states, many conservatives have never publicly denounced Alex Jones.

I have constructed a hypothetical conversation between Rush Limbaugh and President Trump which will provide the answer to why conservatives won’t denounce Alex Jones:

PT: Rush, great to see you.

RL: Mr. President, great to see you. You know, I’ve been meaning to ask you, and I say this with all due respect, but why are you so fond of this Alex Jones guy? I remember calling him a Democrat kook years ago. He is just nuts.

PT: Uh, huh. Well, Rush..

RL: No really, Mr. President. I don’t think you are helping yourself by associating with him.

PT: Rush, you and I know all about fake news.

RL: Sure, drive-by media, but..

PT: Let’s start with the Kennedy assassination, you don’t actually believe the official Warren Commission report, do you?

RL: No, of course not. Wait, you’re not going go all National Enquirer and implicate Ted Cruz’s dad for this?

PT: Well..

RL: Sir, this is crazy. My theory is it had to be the mob or Castro but..

PT: Rush, you know the CIA admitted that it covered up the assassination and there are still missing documents.

RL: Ok, fine, but that was over 50 years ago and we all know about that.

PT: Well, you know what my buddy, Bruce Willis, said to Vanity Fair in 2007 – he was afraid of getting killed:

 

“They still haven’t caught the guy that killed Kennedy. I’ll get killed for saying this, but I’m pretty sure those guys are still in power, in some form. The entire government of the United States was co-opted. One guy did it? I don’t think so.”

RL: Ok, what does this have to do with anything? Look – I get all the Clinton conspiracies. We all know about the Clinton body count. I covered the Seth Rich murder conspiracy on my show. Sean [Hannity] laid out how he felt last October. You brought up Vince Foster during the campaign. But 9/11 being an inside job? Do you know how crazy that is?

PT: You know about the $2.3 trillion missing from the Pentagon.

RL: Yeah, whatever, that kind of stuff happens.

PT: Rush, you know there was no way those buildings were brought down by fire.

RL: Here we go.

PT: Look, I am a builder and know everything there is to know about building structures. I even said so on 9/11 during an interview that there were bombs in those buildings.

RL: Ok…

PT: Rush, you read the 28 pages right?

RL: Yeah, basically faulted elements of the Saudi government. And, why are we still friends with the Saudis anyway?

PT: Don’t you find it curious how close the Bush family is to the Saudis?

RL: Yeah, but they didn’t have anything to do with it. Why, George W. Bush is a fine man. You are not going with this Bush did 9/11 theory are you?

PT: Let’s just say the Bushes are not so innocent in all this. Just view this.

RL: Is this stuff true?

PT: Of course, these are official government documents and there is lots of circumstantial evidence. Its also plain common sense.

RL: Huh.

PT: Make sense?

RL: Yeah, I guess I finally understand why the Bushes and Clintons are such good friends. And all the new world order stuff..

PT: Yeah.

RL: I also get why you were so tough on Jeb. Wait, so why are we fighting all these wars – Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya. For goodness sake, I was selling Club Gitmo t-shirts!!

PT: Rush, you’re not the only one. Talk to Congressman Walter Jones. He went from calling out France, you know, the whole freedom friesthing to deeply regretting his support for the Iraq war. He even said a few years back that Dick Cheney is probably going to hell.

RL: Wait, so Ron Paul has been right all along?

PT: Ron Paul, good guy – can never be president – but very honest man.

RL: So, Sandy Hook? Pizzagate? Are they all true?

PT: Look, not all conspiracies are true. There are some crazy ones going around. I even heard of one that Jared is a Mossad agent. All the truth will come out eventually.

RL: So, what do we do?

PT: Well, don’t worry, there are plenty of us who know. Alex is one of the leaders. Until we reach a critical mass, we can’t go public yet. Information will come out in pieces. Look, we have gotten the concept of the deep state out there. Before my inauguration, barely anyone had even heard of it. So, we are making tremendous progress, tremendous. Still a lot of hate, a lot of division. We need to come together. In the future, expect more revelations. Like what my buddy Vladimir said. He just accused the CIA of planning the JFK assassination. And you remember how I hinted about not having any columns when I spoke to the CIA?

RL: Ok, I get it. So, what I am going to do?

PT: Rush, the choice is yours, I understand the risks and won’t ask you to do anything you aren’t comfortable with doing. The truth will get out, regardless of what happens to me. It’s up to you to choose which side of history you want to be on.

RL: Thank you sir. This conversation never happened.

Originally Published on News With Chai

Posted on

CRISIS IN SYRIA: US Forces Shoot Down Syrian Warplane for the First Time

The Syrian conflict moved one step closer to all out war between the US and Syria/Iran/Russia as the US led coalition shot down a Syrian government Su-22 fighter near the town of Tabqa as it was caught bombing Syrian Democratic Forces, an umbrella group of Syrian Kurdish and Arab rebel forces. The SDF was fighting ISIS in the area in preparation for its upcoming battle to take Raqqa.

 

 

What’s Next?

The mission creep pushed by the American government is clear to everyone at this point.  What is not clear is whether the Trump administration is willing to put more than special forces on the ground.

The following three points should be looked out for in the coming week in reaction to the Coalition’s downing of the Syrian warplane:

  1. Retaliation against the US and Jordanian forces now in the South-East of Syria
  2. Hezbollah Attack on Israel
  3. Russian aiding Syria against the SDF and YPG in the North

The Trump administration’s policy is to use local forces to fight its ground wars while providing logistics and air support.  In the expanded Syrian war the world is now entering, this may not be an option anymore. For example, Israel has been slowly creating a buffer zone East of the Golan, but as Southern Syria falls to government troops, Israel may not be able to hold off from entering the war in a more direct manner.

Trump’s plan seems to have one foot in and one foot out of Syria.  That works when towing the line between the semi-isolationist stance he took when running and the need to have an effect on the outcome of the war.  However, Russia and Iran are not holding back and it is not clear for how long the YPG/SDF as well as Israel’s allies close to the Golan can hold them back.

The downing of the Syrian jet maybe the first response to the growing Russian/Syrian/Iranian juggernaut.

 

Posted on

Burying Obama’s legacy

The fact is that Trump has given Netanyahu support as he has walked away from the failed policy paradigm of the Obama years.

It may very well be that this week was the week that Israel and the US put to rest former president Barack Obama’s policies and positions on Israel and the Palestinians.

If so, the move was made despite the best efforts of Obama’s team to convince the Trump administration to maintain them.

The details of Obama’s policies and positions have been revealed in recent weeks in a series of articles published in Haaretz regarding Obama’s secretary of state John Kerry’s failed peacemaking efforts, which ended in 2014.

The articles reported segments of two drafts of a US framework for a final peace treaty between the PLO and Israel. The drafts were created in February and March 2014.

The article series is predicated on the assumption that Kerry and his team were on the precipice of a historic breakthrough between PLO chief Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. But a close reading of the documents shows that the opposite was the case.

There are two reasons that Kerry had no prospects for reaching a deal.

First, he, Obama and their advisers were too hostile to Israel and its citizens to ever convince Netanyahu that Israel’s interests would be secured.

A February 2014 draft framework agreement, which was based on conversations Kerry and his team held with Netanyahu and his advisers, makes this clear. The draft includes Netanyahu’s demand that Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria not annexed to Israel would remain “in place” after the implementation of a peace deal, and presumably, become towns in the future Palestinian state.

In other words, Netanyahu demanded that the Israelis in Judea and Samaria whose towns would be located in the territory of “Palestine” would enjoy the same rights and protections as Israel’s Arab citizens enjoy.

Kerry and his team would have none of it. The February draft agreement notes, “[US] negotiators need to check with PM [Netanyahu] on whether he wants to [maintain this position]… They believe that if so, he will push strongly for ‘in place.’ ‘In place’ is inconsistent with US policy and therefore unacceptable to us as well as the Palestinians.”

In other words, the position of the Obama administration was that all Israelis living in areas that would become part of the Palestinian state must be forcibly removed from their homes and communities.

Haaretz reporters Barak Ravid and Amir Tibon recalled that in previous rounds of negotiations, the Palestinians – unlike the Obama administration – had not rejected this Israeli position out of hand. That is, in demanding the mass expulsion of Israeli Jews from their homes, the administration adopted a policy more extreme than the PLO.

Then there is the problem with the PLO.

Abbas rejected Kerry’s February 2014 draft framework agreement, which was based on conversations with Netanyahu and his advisors. But he also rejected Kerry’s March 2014 agreement, which was based on the US’s conversation with him and his advisors.

The March 2014 draft was presented to Abbas by Obama himself during a meeting between the two in the White House. Not only did Abbas not accept Obama’s offer, he refused to respond to it.

This should have surprised no one. Abbas did the same thing in 2008 after then-prime minister Ehud Olmert presented Abbas with his peace proposal. Abbas’s predecessor, Yasser Arafat, responded in the same way in July 2000 to then-prime minister Ehud Barak’s peace offer, and in December 2000, to then-president Bill Clinton’s peace offer.

Given the consistent track record, it is beyond foolish to believe that anyone – even Trump – will fare differently from his American and Israeli predecessors.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the Haaretz series is what they tell us about Netanyahu.

Like him or hate him, the Netanyahu revealed in the articles is a brilliant statesman. In difficult diplomatic conditions, with the US openly siding with the PLO against him, Netanyahu managed to parry and duck. Although Haaretz tries to present Netanyahu as weak and compliant, the text shows that the opposite was the case.

In the face of massive pressure from Obama, Netanyahu refused to commit to anything. His only recorded position was that all Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria remain in place in perpetuity.

Rather than confront Kerry directly, Netanyahu stood aside and watched as the Americans drafted their anti-Israel proposals. He nodded. He smiled. He refused to commit to anything.

And he waited patiently for Abbas to walk away from the table.

Until this week, much to the dismay of many of his supporters, Netanyahu appeared unwilling to move beyond the defensive position he maintained throughout the Obama presidency. This week he took three great big steps forward.

First, Netanyahu announced that he supports amending Israel’s NGO law to ban foreign governments from funding political nonprofits registered in Israel.

For the past 20 years, Israel has been subjected to ever-escalating subversive campaigns funded and often directed by foreign governments and carried out by Israeli-registered NGOs. The purpose of these campaigns is to legitimize political and economic warfare against the Jewish state by European and other Western governments. The campaigns legitimize political and economic warfare against Israel by demonizing the Jewish state, its citizens and its soldiers.

In recent years, lawmakers have tried repeatedly to block the funding. But due to US pressure, Netanyahu scuttled all their attempts. Proposed reform bills were watered down until they were limited to instituting weak reporting requirements. Foreign government funds continue streaming into the coffers of NGOs whose positions are supported by no significant domestic constituencies.

By announcing that he now supports passing legislation that will bar foreign government funding of nonprofits, Netanyahu is striking a strategic blow at the political and economic war being waged against Israel by the EU and by the international Left.

This war, waged in the name of the Palestinians, has harmed Israel’s relations with the Palestinians by discouraging them from living peacefully with their Israeli neighbors.

Then there is UNRWA. The UN’s refugee agency dedicated to the Palestinians is arguably one of the central reasons for the perpetuation of the Palestinian conflict with Israel. Indeed, UNRWA was formed by the Arab governments to specifically block all prospect of peace between Israel and its neighbors.

UNRWA prevents the permanent resettlement of the Arabs who left Israel in 1948 and 1949 as well as their descendants. It has doomed five generations of “refugees” to live in the squalor of its camps, blocked from receiving citizenship in the countries of their birth and prevented from being resettled in other countries.

After Hamas took over Gaza in 2007, then-secretary of state Condoleezza Rice and then-foreign minister Tzipi Livni decided that the best way to respond to the move was by massively increasing UNRWA’s budget. They were unmoved by the fact that UNRWA employs Hamas terrorists. They ignored the fact that UNRWA schools in Gaza and elsewhere indoctrinate their students to embrace jihad and the cause of Israel’s annihilation.

Under Obama, the US increased its payments to UNRWA even as UNRWA schools, clinics and other facilities have been used as missile launching pads and storage depots in Hamas’s war against Israel.

This week, Netanyahu finally put to rest the dangerous folly that UNRWA is a foil to Hamas and a positive force in the region. He called for UNRWA to be dismantled and for the Palestinians and their descendants to be treated like every other refugee group in the world and be resettled by the UN’s high commissioner for refugees.

If Netanyahu’s move against UNRWA is translated into actual Israeli and US policy, it will mark the beginning of the end of one of the primary causes of the Palestinian conflict with Israel.

Finally, there is incitement. Palestinian terrorism would vastly diminish were it not for constant incitement that encourages terrorism and rewards and celebrates terrorists.

Since it was established by the Qatari regime in 1996, Al Jazeera has been a central engine of antisemitic and jihadist indoctrination of the Palestinians. And yet, Israel has never moved to close Al Jazeera’s bureau in Israel.

Israel has given the terrorist network a pass largely because it hasn’t wanted to deal with the Western outcry that such a move would provoke.

This week, for the first time, Netanyahu, along with Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman, announced they support Al Jazeera’s closure and have directed their staff to consider the best way to do so.

In so doing, Netanyahu and Liberman are making the most of the opportunity afforded Israel by the Arab states’ open cleavage with Qatar. Last week, Saudi Arabia and Jordan closed Al Jazeera’s bureaus in Riyadh and Amman. Egypt, which closed Al Jazeera’s offices in 2013, blocked its website.

Taken both separately and together, Netanyahu’s moves this week strike strategic blows at three central components of the Palestinian conflict with Israel. Incitement, political warfare and the eternalization of Palestinian refugee status all render the conflict intractable and prevent peaceful Palestinian leaders from emerging.

Notably, whereas the Obama administration would have subjected Israel to hysterical condemnations if Netanyahu had dared to take the steps he took this week, the Trump administration has taken no position on Netanyahu’s announcements.

The real reason that Trump appears to be burying Obama’s legacy is because unlike the ideologically- driven Obama, Trump is willing to consider evidence and facts when determining his opinions.

In May, Abbas came to the White House and told Trump that he abjured terrorism. Israel then presented Trump with evidence that Abbas publicly incites terrorism and uses the Palestinian Authority budget to support terrorists and their families.

Trump took in the information and upbraided Abbas for lying to him.

True, this week Secretary of State Rex Tillerson falsely told Congress that Abbas had cut off the payments. And true, Tillerson doubled down on his assertion after both the Palestinians and Israel said the payments have not been cut off.

True as well that Trump continues to believe that he can make “the deal” that his predecessors failed to secure.

But the fact is that Trump has given Netanyahu support as he has walked away from the failed policy paradigm of the Obama years.

In other words, Netanyahu’s moves this week, and the fact that the Trump administration has left him alone to make them without being second-guessed or condemned by Washington, indicates that we have finally moved past Obama’s legacy.

Where we are going is still unknown. But what is certain is that by going after the sources of the continued malignancy of the conflict and pushing back against the lies that informed Obama’s policies, both Israel and the US have abandoned them.

Originally published in Jerusalem Post

Posted on

Why Did Bibi Netanyahu Agree to Build 14,000 New Homes for PA Arabs on Israeli Land?

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_btn title=”FOR $5/MONTH YOU CAN SUPPORT ORIT’S WRITING” color=”primary” size=”lg” align=”center” button_block=”true” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.paypal.com%2Fcgi-bin%2Fwebscr%3Fcmd%3D_s-xclick%26hosted_button_id%3DPBTQ2JVPQ3WJ2|||”][vc_column_text]Last night it was announced that Netanyahu approved 14,000 new housing units for 50,000 Arab residents of Qalqiliya for construction in Area C, which is under full Israeli responsibility.

News reports add that the construction would double the size of the city, located in Area A at the expense of land in Area C which was intended for Israeli development. Doubling the size of Qalqiliya, which sits on the green line 9 km from the Mediterranean is a dangerous development.

The announcement drew immediate criticism from Netanyahu’s right leaning ministers, Naftali Bennett and Ayelet Shaked:

“We objected to the plan called ‘carrot and stick,’ which was and remains a program of reward for terror and the promotion of the Palestinian takeover of Area C. There is no doubt that the plan’s meaning is stringent against the very limited scope of construction approved by the prime minister for Israeli settlements.”

“The Israeli government must promote Israeli interests in Judea and Samaria, not those of the Palestinians. In light of these implications, we will demand a freeze on the plan until the cabinet can discuss it or marketing of 14,000 housing units for Israelis in Area C [is carried out to balance the Arab building plan],” the two said.

 

Today reaction was just a serious from Bibi Netanyahu’s own party.  Tourism Minister Yariv Levin said the following:

“The PA continues to incite to terror and harm the security of Israeli civilians. The PA systematically disregards all of its obligations, therefore it is right that the decision to expand Qalqilya be reassessed, as the damage inherent in the plan is great.”

 

With all of the push back from vital members of the Prime Minister coalition and essentially those that have their ears to the base of the right, why did Netanyahu approve the building, which would radically change the balance between Arab and Jewish areas in Judea and Samaria?

The Trump Peace Initiative Takes Shape

All the moves we are seeing whether they are the Saudis freezing out Qatar, to the PA coordinating with Israel to shut down Hamas are intending to create the atmosphere where Israelis would feel comfortable enough to sit down with the Arab world to negotiate. Trump’s team does not want to repeat the same mistakes as the past. A regional initiative where Israelis and Arabs learn to rely on each other against Iran’s drive for regional control is there to provide a back drop for the next phase, the contours of a Palestinian state.

So what are the contours of this future Palestine under the Trump initiative?

Let’s assume both sides begin talking and agree to the following:

  • Demilitarized Palestine
  • Jewish communities stay even outside the blocks
  • Israel annexes settlement blocks

With these three elements agreed upon the complicated questions of security control, Jerusalem, and refugees will then come into play.  By this time the Sunni Arab States and Israel will have some sort of normalized relationships.  Direct flights, trade relations, and what not.  Trump’s plan rests on the fact that Israel craving this normalization will make the requisite concessions for the Arabs to sign on to making peace or the Arabs needing Israel’s help against Iran, will concede elements to Israel.  There is a logic to all of this except that neither side views this as a real estate deal and so unless one of the sides capitulates completely the process will break down.  Unfortunately, by then Israel will have lost Area C and perhaps more.

The real question is why the Trump administration has not entertained another plan altogether? Why has it insisted on the same old Arabist approach with just different semantics associated with it?

Why has the Prime Minister agreed to build so many houses rather than just telling President Trump, no?

There are a number of possibilities:

  1. He believes the process will break down and so he can freeze them.
  2. He needs a new foil and will allow his right flank to stop the plan, which is a strategy he employed numerous times with Obama.
  3. He really wants to build more Arab homes.

Any of the above could be the answer. With Bibi you never know and that is the challenge.  We are being led down a path where no one except the Prime Minister knows the end game.

The problem with the “peace process” itself is that it is being built by people with little or no understanding of the complex issues Israel and its neighbors deal with. It’s true, the Arabs are being herded towards making peace, but it is Israel that will end up sacrificing the most whether or not Trump lands the ultimate deal or it fails along the way.

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Posted on

Will America Move CENTCOM from Qatar?

As the Qatar crisis heads into its second week another shoe is evidently about to drop.  The AP reported that the U.A.E.’s ambassador in Washington, Yousef Al Otaiba, urged the Trump administration to consider moving its air base out of Qatar.

“Maybe someone in Congress should have a hearing and just say, you know, ‘Should we consider moving it?’” the ambassador said in Washington on Tuesday. “And maybe not moving the entire base. Maybe just distribute to various countries so you don’t have all your eggs in one basket.”

The airbase is home to CENTCOM the hub for the US military in the region.  If the US would move the enormaous base Qatar would lose the last piece of leverage it has with the West.

Although behind the scenes the US has been supporting the Saudi led maneuvers against Qatar, it was not until recently that President Trump iterated his support for the Saudi blockade.

“One of the big things that we did, and you are seeing it now in Qatar and all of the things that are actually going on in a very positive fashion, we are stopping the funding of terrorism,” Trump said. “We are going to stop the funding of terrorism. It’s not an easy fight but that is a fight that we are going to win. We are going to starve the beast.”

Although moving CENTCOM is highly unlikely at this point, nothing should be ruled out. With Saudi Arabia moving fast agianst radical Jihad, the time for action is clearly now. If the US does indeed move CENTCOM, it may be the trigger that will start the next round of war in the region.